Library The Guide to Hajj Rites Miscellaneous issues
Miscellaneous issues
- Details
- Hits: 2699
Miscellaneous issues
41. If one performed the Hajj as a rambler, or with someone else?s money, his Hajj qualifies. If he performed the Hajj with usurped money, his Hajj would be void, and he has committed a sin. However, if he obtained the two garments of ihraam, his clothing during the Tawaaf and Sa?y, and the cost of the Had?y from legal money, his Hajj would be correct, although he has sinned in dealing with the usurped money and this Hajj would not be accepted from him.
42. It is not obligatory to attain the ability [i.e. become mostatee?] to go to Hajj by means of trading and saving. Also it is not obligatory to accept a gift [of a sum of money] from a donor to go to Hajj with, nor is it obligatory to accept to do a service or a job for a wage sufficient to go to Hajj, even if that service or job was befitting to his status. Of course, if he did one of those things and obtained a sum sufficient for the Hajj, the Hajj would be obligatory for him.
43. If one accepted to work in a group travelling to the Hajj, for a wage that would be sufficient for the Hajj such that he would be considered as able ? mostatee? ? if his work does not contravene the execution of the rites of Hajj, it would be obligatory for him to perform the Hajj that year. However, if his work would contravene carrying out the rites of his Hajj, and for example he would not be able to observe the woquf in Arafaat and Mash?ar, say, the Hajj would not be obligatory for him that year. Furthermore, it would not be obligatory for him to save the money to perform the Hajj next year. If the money remained in his possession until the following year, and it was sufficient for the Hajj, the Hajj would be obligatory for him.
44. If one agreed to do the Hajj by proxy [on behalf of someone else] for a fee, and with that fee he too was considered mostatee? ? able and liable to perform the Hajj, for example, the fee was sufficient for performing two rounds of Hajj, if the assignor does not specify the Hajj to be performed in the current year, then it would be obligatory for him to perform the Hajj on behalf of himself first, and perform the Hajj by proxy in the following year. If the Hajj by proxy was specified or dedicated to be for the current year, it would be obligatory for him to perform the Hajj by proxy first, and the obligation of the Hajj for him ceases to be valid, unless the fee [he earned] remained in his possession until the following year and was sufficient for the Hajj.
45. If one had some money but was not sure as to whether it was sufficient for the Hajj, because he was not sure of the cost of the Hajj, or he knew the cost of the Hajj but not sure of the amount he has, it would be obligatory for him to find out in each case.
46. If one had sufficient money for the Hajj, but the money was not within his access, if he was able to obtain the money ? without unusual difficulty or harm ? even by seeking others? help etc. the Hajj would be obligatory for him. If however, he was not able to obtain his money in any way, the Hajj would not be obligatory for him so long as his access [to the money] was excused.
47. If one obtained a sum of money that was sufficient for the Hajj, but it was not in time for the Hajj, it is not obligatory for him to save for the following Hajj season, and it is permissible for him to use that money for his need, or give it to others, or give it as a gift to whoever he wished. If it remained in his possession until the next Hajj season, the Hajj would be obligatory for him.
48. If the money that was sufficient for the Hajj was lost, whether before the trip to Hajj, during it, or after it, this renders him not mostatee?, i.e. unable to perform the Hajj, and the Hajj is not obligatory upon him. If he regains that ability afterwards, he would then be liable to the Hajj.
49. If due to an oversight, one forgot that he had sufficient sum to go to Hajj, or due to an oversight one did not realise that he was liable to Hajj, and he did not notice his oversight until after the loss of the money or after the Hajj season, he would not be considered liable to Hajj if he was not negligent ? moqassir ? in his oversight. Of course if the sum remained in his possession until the following year, the Hajj would then be obligatory upon him.
50. If one performed the Hajj while he is not mostatee? ? i.e. not meeting all the preconditions required before being liable to perform the Hajj ? this Hajj would not qualify for Hajjat-al-Islam. If at a later date he became mostatee?, he would still be liable to the Hajj. The same is applicable, if he was assigned to perform the Hajj on behalf of someone else.
51. If one did not believe that he meets the preconditions of the Hajj, i.e. he is mostatee?, and performed a mostahab Hajj with the intention of complying with his duties he is liable to, and then he discovered that he was actually mostatee?, this Hajj would be qualified as Hajjat-al-Islam. However, if the intention was specified to be mostahab only such that if the Hajj turned out to be obligatory to him he would not have performed it, then this Hajj would not qualify for Hajjat-al-Islam, and he would be obliged to the Hajj if he became mostatee?.
52. It is desirable ? mostahab ?for an individual who has performed the Hajjat-al-Islam to perform Hajj for the second, third, fourth time, and so on. It is also desirable for one to perform the Hajj on behalf of others voluntarily, or perform the tawaaf and its prayer on their behalf, whether they are alive or dead. Furthermore it is also desirable to perform the Hajj on behalf of the Ma?soomeen alayhum-as-salam, an act that is very emphasised and extremely mostahab.
53. If a non-Shi?a embraced and followed the teachings of Ahl-ul-Bayt alayhum-as-salam and became a ?Shi?a?, if he had performed the Hajj according to his madhhab (the teachings of his sect), even though it may not be correct according to ours, or if he had performed the Hajj according to our madhhab, even though it may not be according to his, that Hajj qualifies and he is not obliged to repeat the Hajj again. However, if he had performed the Hajj incorrectly; both according to his madhhab or according to ours, that Hajj would not qualify and he remains obliged to repeat.
