skills/sistani-guidance/references/books/hajj/pages-013-024.md

# Hajj Rituals

PDF pages 13 to 24. Physical PDF numbering, not inferred printed labels.

Mechanical text extraction, not a verified transcription. Read the full rule or dialogue across page boundaries and retain its footnotes.

Source characters are preserved except corrupt control glyphs, which are marked. Blank layout lines are removed. Do not silently repair other wording.

Previous block: [pages 1 to 12](pages-001-012.md).

Next block: [pages 25 to 36](pages-025-036.md).

## PDF PAGE 13

```text
13
obligatory.
Rule 32: A person could undertake to perform pilgrimage
for another person for a remuneration. Thus, they acquire
sufficient means for themselves to perform pilgrimage.
However, it was made conditional that they performed
pilgrimage for the other person in that year. In such a
case, they must do so in that year. If, at the time of
pilgrimage in the following year, they still have enough
funds to make the journey, it becomes obligatory on them
to perform it in the ensuing year. However, if there was no
condition that they perform pilgrimage for their mandator
in the same year, it becomes obligatory on them to
perform it for themselves in that year, unless they are
confident that they can do so for themselves in the
following year.
Rule 33: If a person borrows money sufficient to cover the
expenses of pilgrimage, it does not become obligatory on
them even though they would have the means to repay it
on return from the journey. However, if the loan is for a
very long period for which debtors do not usually provide,
it becomes obligatory.
Rule 34: If a person has incurred debts to the value of his
entire property, it is not obligatory on them to perform
pilgrimage. There is no difference in this respect between
prompt and deferred debts, or whether it was incurred
prior or subsequent to the acquisition of the means. The
exception, though, is when the debt is not repayable for a
very long period, for example of fifty years, for which
debtors do not usually provide.
Rule 35: If khums or zakah was due on a person and they
have funds which would not be sufficient for pilgrimage,
and if they settled such dues, it becomes obligatory on
them to settle those liabilities. Thus pilgrimage is not
obligatory on them. It is immaterial whether the liability is
on the funds intended for pilgrimage or on arrears.
Rule 36: If pilgrimage has become obligatory on a person
and there is a liability on them of khums or zakah or other
obligatory dues, they must first settle those liabilities; it is
not permissible for them to embark on pilgrimage without
having settled them. If the clothes of ihram and what is
```

## PDF PAGE 14

```text
14
paid for the sacrifice are from money bearing such liability,
the ruling thereof has been discussed in Rule 30.
Rule 37: If a person has some means, yet they are
uncertain whether such will be sufficient to meet the
expenses of pilgrimage, they must make ascertain that it
will be sufficient, as a matter of precaution
Rule 38: If a person has property sufficient to meet the
expenses of the pilgrimage but is not available in cash or
would be sufficient if it supplemented the available cash
but there is no possibility of spending from the property or
to sell it through an agent, then it is not obligatory to
proceed on pilgrimage, or else the pilgrimage becomes
obligatory.
Rule 39: If a person has sufficient funds to cater for
pilgrimage, it is obligatory on them to perform it if they
are able to travel. If they dispose of the funds in such a
way that they can no longer be described as having
adequate means, and thus unable to accomplish
pilgrimage, it remains an obligation on him, provided they
are certain that they could embark on the journey in good
time. However, in the case of disposing of a property for a
low price, or by way of gift, without due consideration,
the transaction itself is sound, but they in error for missing
the opportunity of having the means that would have
enabled them to perform pilgrimage.
Rule 40: It is apparent that it is not necessary for the
pilgrim to own the means of the expenditure. If he has
funds at his disposal, performing pilgrimage becomes
obligatory on him, provided that such funds are adequate
for the journey, and that the other conditions for
pilgrimage are satisfied. However, he should not set out
on the journey, unless he was certain that the right of
disposing with the funds is binding, or that he was certain
that such right is not going to be withdrawn from him.
Rule 41: Just as it is necessary that there should be
sufficient means to make the journey, so is it that there
should be funds available for the completion of pilgrimage
rituals. If the property of a person is destroyed in his
country or during the journey, pilgrimage is not obligatory
on them, as it is a manifestation that they are not
```

## PDF PAGE 15

```text
15
financially able from the beginning. The same applies to
the payment of a debt that becomes due, such as for,
inadvertently, destroying the property of another person,
and that it would not be possible to compensate the
victim if the available funds were to be used for
performing pilgrimage. However, if a person deliberately
destroys the property of another, the obligation to
perform pilgrimage is not annulled. It remains a duty on
their shoulders to be discharged. If they had a property
which rendered them of those who have the means, and it
was destroyed in their country, this will not be considered
as a manifestation that they are not of means from the out
set. The pilgrimage they performed will, therefore, count
as an obligatory one..
Rule 42: A person who has enough means was unaware
of such fact; they may not be aware that it was obligatory
on them to perform. Yet they realized that after the money
had been disposed of, in that they were no longer able to
perform pilgrimage. If they had a reasonable excuse for
their ignorance or unawareness, pilgrimage is not
obligatory on them. Otherwise, it is apparent that it is,
provided that the other conditions of pilgrimage are met.
Rule 43: Means sufficient for pilgrimage are established
not only by their acquisition, but also if a sufficient
amount is given away by way of gift to a person. It matters
not in this regard whether the gift is from one person or a
group of people, provided that it is adequate in total for
the expenses of pilgrimage and maintaining the family.
There is no difference in this respect between the donor
making the property lawful for use, or settling it for the
pilgrimage, and between making an outright gift of
property or a provision to meet the expenses.
Rule 44: If a person inherits property, designated to be
spent for obligatory pilgrimage, it is mandatory on them
to do so after the death of the testator, provided that the
bequest is sufficient for the expenses of pilgrimage and
maintaining the family, as explained in the preceding
Rule. Similarly, if a person creates a waqf, makes a nadhr
(vow), or a bequest for performing pilgrimage and the
trustee, the person fulfilling the nadhr, or the executor
```

## PDF PAGE 16

```text
16
makes the funds available to the beneficiary to perform an
obligatory pilgrimage, it is mandatory on them to do so.
Rule 45: It is not obligatory, for a person who acquires the
means to perform pilgrimage by way of a gift, to be able
to return from the journey still enjoying a healthy financial
situation. However, if they worked during pilgrimage time
and the earnings made thereof provide for their expenses
for the entire year or part thereof, to the extent that they
would not be able to meet the expenses necessary for
their livelihood - should they accept the gift and depart for
pilgrimage - they are not obliged to accept it, only if the
gift covers their expenses. If, however, the person has
some means, which was subsidized by way of gift, to
enable them to embark on pilgrimage, it is apparent that
the criterion 'of means' - according to the definition
discussed earlier - should be applied, in that performing
pilgrimage becomes obligatory.
Rule 46: If a person makes a gift to another so that the
latter makes the journey to perform an obligatory
pilgrimage, it is incumbent on the recipient to accept the
gift. However, if the donor gives the recipient the option
of performing an obligatory pilgrimage or not, or makes
the gift without mentioning the obligatory pilgrimage,
expressly or implicitly, the recipient shall not be bound to
accept the gift.
Rule 47: The existence of a debt is not incompatible with
having sufficient means acquired by way of a gift.
However, if embarking on pilgrimage was contrary to
settling the debt on time, be it prompt or on a later date, it
is not obligatory to perform pilgrimage.
Rule 48: If a person donates property to a group of people
so that one of them could perform pilgrimage and one of
them comes forward to accept the gift, the remaining
ones are absolved of the obligation. However, if all of
them shun the proposed gift with the knowledge that any
one of them could have taken possession of it, it is
apparent that the obligation to perform pilgrimage is not
binding on any one of them.
Rule 49: It is not obligatory to accept a gift to make an
obligatory pilgrimage unless it can meet the expenses of
```

## PDF PAGE 17

```text
17
the journey. If the payment is for Hajj-ut-Tamatu'' but the
gift is for Hajj-ul-Qiraan or Hajj-ul-Ifraad, it is not
incumbent on the would-be recipient to accept it and vice
versa. Similar is the position if the gift is for an obligatory
pilgrimage and the beneficiary has already performed
obligatory pilgrimage.However, if he did not perform it
when it was obligatory on him and his circumstances
changed, in that he was offered a gift to perform an
obligatory pilgrimage, he is duty-bound to accept the gift.
Likewise, if there was a liability on him to perform a
pilgrimage to fulfil a nadhr or like, but did not have the
means to do so and was offered the gift to perform an
obligatory pilgrimage, it is mandatory on him to accept it.
Rule 50: If a gift is made to a person to cover the
expenditure of performing an obligatory pilgrimage and it
gets destroyed on the way to pilgrimage, the obligation
lapses. However, if it is possible to continue with the
journey with his own sources, it is obligatory on him to
perform the pilgrimage which will be counted as part of
Hajjatul Islam. The obligation, though, is conditional on
the fulfilment of the criterion of 'being of means' right
from the out bound journey.
Rule 51: If a person authorises another to obtain a loan to
go to pilgrimage, it is not obligatory on the latter to seek
one. However, if the would-be pilgrim received such a
loan, it becomes obligatory on him to perform pilgrimage.
Rule 52: Apparently, the cost of the sacrifice should be
borne by the donor. Yet, there is ishkal (problem) in
deciding whether it is obligatory on the recipient to
perform the pilgrimage, if the donor does not pay for it,
yet bearing the remainder of the expenses. The only
exception can be if the beneficiary can afford to pay the
price of the sacrifice with his own money. However, if the
purchase of the sacrificial animal by the beneficiary would
cause him undue hardship, it is not obligatory to accept
the gift. Obviously, any kaffarah that may be incurred in
the course of pilgrimage is the exclusive responsibility of
the beneficiary.
Rule 53: An obligatory pilgrimage performed with a gift
given to the pilgrim is valid to constitute Hajjatul Islam
```

## PDF PAGE 18

```text
18
and even if he acquires the means thereafter, he is not
obliged to perform pilgrimage again.
Rule 54: It is possible for a donor to withdraw his gift
before or after the beneficiary assumes ihram. However, if
the donor withdraws it after the beneficiary enters into
the state of ihram, it is ,most evidently, obligatory on the
beneficiary to complete the pilgrimage, only without
undue hardship; that is, even though he actually did not
have the means. The donor should reimburse him with the
expenses incurred. And if the donor withdraws the gift
while the beneficiary is en route to pilgrimage, he is
responsible for bearing the expenses of the return
journey.
Rule 55: If Zakah money, out of the portion of Sabeellilah
(the way of Allah), is given to a person, that the public
interest be served, and the Mujtahid permits it, it shall, as a
matter of precaution, be mandatory on the recipient to go
to pilgrimage. If he was given the money from the share of
Sadaat (descendants of the Prophet 's.a.w.') or Zakah
money from the share of the poor, on the condition that
he should spend it on an obligatory pilgrimage, the
condition is invalid, as it does not constitute availability of
funds (istita'a) by way of gift..
Rule 56: If a person is given a gift to perform Hajjatul Islam
and it later becomes known to him that it was unlawfully
obtained by the donor, the pilgrimage is not valid and the
real owner is entitled to reclaim it from the donor or the
beneficiary. If he claims it from the beneficiary and the
latter was unaware as to the true ownership, he should
revert to the donor; otherwise, he has no right to revert to
him.
Rule 57: If a person, who does not satisfy the criterion of
"availability of funds", performs an optional pilgrimage for
himself or for another person, either gratuitously or for a
reward, it shall not count as a Hajjatul Islam; it is,
therefore, incumbent on him to perform it when he
acquires the means.
Rule 58: If a person believes that he does not have the
means for pilgrimage to be obligatory on him but
performs it in obedience to the command of Allah
```

## PDF PAGE 19

```text
19
intending it to be accepted and later learns that he was of
means, his pilgrimage shall count as a valid one, i.e. there
will be no need for a second pilgrimage.
Rule 59: If a married woman can afford the journey to
perform Hajjatul Islam, she does not need to obtain the
consent of her husband. By the same token, it is not
permissible for the husband to prevent her from
performing other types of obligatory pilgrimage.
However, he can prevent her from leaving sooner than
necessary, if there is sufficient time for pilgrimage. The
same rule applies to a lady who has been granted a
revocable divorce, if she is in iddah (waiting period).
Rule 60: It is not a condition for a lady, performing an
obligatory pilgrimage, to be accompanied by a male,
among her mahaarim, provided her safety is secured. If
not, she must be accompanied by a trusted male even for
a fee, should she afford it. Otherwise, pilgrimage is not
obligatory on her.
Rule 61: If , for example, a person makes a nadhr to visit
the shrine of Imam Hussain (a.s.) each year on the day of
Arafat and subsequently acquires the means to make the
journey to pilgrimage, the nadhr lapses and he must
perform the obligatory pilgrimage. This rule applies to
every other vow that may hinder one from performing
obligatory pilgrimage.
Rule 62: A person of means must perform obligatory
pilgrimage personally, if it is possible for him to do so.
Someone else performing it for him, gratuitously or for
payment, cannot be considered as a recompense.
Rule 63: If a person is liable to perform an obligatory
pilgrimage but is unable to do so on health grounds,
senility, infirmity, and other constraints, or performing it
would cause him undue difficulty - beside the fact that
there is no hope he would be able to perform it himself
without pain - it is obligatory on him to appoint someone
to perform it on his behalf. Such is the rule if he is wealthy,
yet unable to embark on pilgrimage personally, or that to
do so would cause him great difficulty. Once it becomes
obligatory to appoint another person to perform
pilgrimage for him, it must be done immediately, just as
```

## PDF PAGE 20

```text
21
performing pilgrimage itself must not be delayed.
Rule 64: If a person sets out on a pilgrimage as on behalf
of another who cannot do it himself for ill health and the
mandator dies while the agent is performing the
pilgrimage, the pilgrimage of the agent will be valid,
although the pilgrimage had become obligatory on the
mandator. If, per chance, the illness ceases before death, it
is preferable that the pilgrimage be performed personally,
as a matter of precaution. If the illness ceases after the
agent has assumed ihram, it is obligatory on the mandator
to perform the pilgrimage himself even though the agent
must complete the ceremonies, as a matter of precaution.
Rule 65: If it is not possible for a person with a valid
reason, preventing him from making the journey to
pilgrimage, to appoint an agent to perform it on his
behalf, the obligation to perform the pilgrimage lapses.
However, if the pilgrimage had become obligatory on him,
it is mandatory to have it performed after his death.
Moreover, if it was possible to appoint an agent and he
did not do so until his death, it is obligatory to have the
pilgrimage performed after his death.
Rule 66: If it becomes obligatory to appoint an agent but
one does not, the gratuitous performance, by another
person, of a pilgrimage on his behalf does not discharge
the obligation; it remains obligatory on him to send an
agent, as a matter of precaution.
Rule 67: It is sufficient to appoint an agent from the
Meqat; it is not necessary that he be sent from the home
country.
Rule 68: If the pilgrimage becomes obligatory on a person
and he dies after wearing ihram in Haram (the precinct of
the Grand Mosque, Ka'ba) he will be deemed to have
accomplished his pilgrimage. If he dies in the course of
Umrat-ut-Tamatu', he will be treated likewise i.e. there is
no obligation to have it performed after his
death.However, if he dies before entering the Haram, it is
obligatory to have the pilgrimage performed again in lieu
qadha, even if the death occurs after his having worn
ihram but before entry into the Haram, or even after the
entry, if he did so without ihram. This rule is confined to
```

## PDF PAGE 21

```text
21
Hajjatul Islam and does not apply to other types of
pilgrimage which have become obligatory, by virtue of, for
example, a vow or for deliberately invalidating an
obligatory pilgrimage (ifsad). Nor has it any application to
Umrat-ul-Mufradah. Whoever dies after wearing ihram in
the Haram, as is required for performing pilgrimage, there
is no doubt that he will be deemed to have performed
Hajjatul Islam. If, however, he dies before then, it is clear
that pilgrimage would have to be performed again for him
by way of qadha.
Rule 69: It is obligatory on a non-believer, who has the
means, to perform a pilgrimage, even though it will not be
accepted from him so long as he remains a non-believer.
However, if he loses the means before he converts to
Islam, pilgrimage is not obligatory on him.
Rule 70: Pilgrimage is obligatory on a Muslim who
becomes apostate, but its performance, in apostasy, is not
in order. However, if he repents, it becomes valid, albeit
the apostasy is innate, as a matter of preferred judgement
(alal aqwa).
Rule 71: If a non-Shia Muslim performs an obligatory
pilgrimage and then becomes a Shia, it is not obligatory
on him to perform pilgrimage afresh. This being so,
provided he had performed it in accordance with the rules
of the faith he then held, or it was performed in
accordance with our faith, and closeness to Allah in
performing pilgrimage was paramount in his mind.
Rule 72: If pilgrimage becomes obligatory on a person, but
he deliberately delayed performing it, so much so that he
can no longer afford the journey, it is obligatory on him to
perform it by any means possible. However, if he dies,
pilgrimage has to be performed by way of qadha, from his
estate. Should someone performs it for him gratuitously,
after his death, it is in order.
```

## PDF PAGE 22

```text
22
Making a will regarding pilgrimage
Rule 73: If a person on a deathbed has an obligation to
perform his first pilgrimage and has adequate means, he
must make sure that it will be performed after his death,
even by directing in his will and in the presence of
witnesses. However, if he has no adequate means but
thinks somebody will volunteer to perform pilgrimage for
him, he must stipulate that in his will. If he dies, pilgrimage
must be performed from his estate, as must also be done if
he has made a general direction about it without
qualifying that its expenses be defrayed from his
bequeathable one-third. However, if he directs that
pilgrimage be performed from his portion of one-third in
the estate and the expenses can be met therefrom, the
expenses must be paid for from that portion and must
take precedence over all other instructions in the will. If
the bequeathable one-third of the estate is insufficient to
meet the expenses, the balance must be defrayed from the
entire estate.
Rule 74: It has been said that if a person dies without
having performed obligatory pilgrimage but leaves a
deposit with a person who fears that if he gave it back to
the heirs, they will not have the obligatory pilgrimage
performed on behalf of the deceased, it is obligatory on
that person to perform pilgrimage himself, or by an agent
and pay the heirs only the balance, if any, after meeting
the expenses. However, this is not free from ishkal, i.e.
arguable or problematic.
Rule 75: A person may die without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage; they may leave debts and liability of
khums and zakah; their estate is not sufficient to discharge
all these obligations. If the funds for such religious dues
payable on the property were available, they must first be
settled. If the deceased was indebted with same,
pilgrimage will take precedence over their settlement;
however, the settlement of debts takes precedence over
pilgrimage.
Rule 76: If a person dies without having performed
```

## PDF PAGE 23

```text
23
obligatory pilgrimage, it is not permissible for the heirs to
have a free hand in his estate, without first meeting the
expenses of the pilgrimage, irrespective of whether or not
the estate is sufficient to meet the expenses. However,
there is no objection to transactions made after provision
has been made for the expenses of pilgrimage.
Rule 77: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage and his estate is not sufficient to
meet the expenses of having it performed, the available
assets must be used to repay the debts, and khums and
zakah; the balance should be distributed among the heirs.
It is not obligatory on the heirs to supplement the
expenses of pilgrimage from their personal property.
Rule 78: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage, it is not necessary to pay for the
expenses of the pilgrimage from the country of residence
of the deceased. It is sufficient to pay from the Meqat.
Indeed, it is sufficient to appoint an agent from the Meqat
with the most reasonable cost. As a matter of preferential
precaution (al ahwatil awla), if the estate is large, it is
better to pay for the expenses from the country of the
deceased. If the estate is very large and the heirs are
absolutely determined to have the pilgrimage performed,
expenditure from the estate is permissible. This is also the
rule in respect of the debts of the deceased. However, if
the cost from the country of the deceased is higher than
the cost from the Meqat, the share of the young heirs
must not be used to meet the cost.
Rule 79: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage, it, as a matter of precaution (al
ahwat), is mandatory to have it performed in the same
year the person died. If it is not possible to hire an agent
from the Meqat in that year, it is, as a matter of
precaution, obligatory to send an agent from the country
of the deceased and defray his expenses from the gross
estate. It is not permissible to delay it to the succeeding
year, even if it is known that in the following year, it will
be possible to engage an agent from the Meqat. However,
if the cost from the country of the deceased is higher than
the cost from the Meqat, the share from the young heirs
```

## PDF PAGE 24

```text
24
must not be used to meet the cost.
Rule 80: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage and it is not possible to obtain an
agent at a reasonable fee, it is, as a matter of precaution,
obligatory to appoint one, even at a higher rate and
defray the expenses from the gross estate. It is not
permissible for the heirs to postpone the pilgrimage to the
following year, even if some of them are young. However,
if the cost from the country of the deceased is higher than
the cost from the Meqat, the share of the young heirs
must not be used to meet the cost.
Rule 81: If any one among the heirs admits that there was
an obligation on the deceased to perform pilgrimage, it is
not obligatory on those who think so to have the
pilgrimage performed, except to the tune of their shares
of inheritance. However, if the shares of those who
consider so are not adequate to meet the expenses of the
pilgrimage, it is not obligatory on them to meet the
shortfall from their personal properties. If a donor comes
forward to make up the shortfall, or it is met in any other
way, deputizing someone to perform Hajj for the
deceased becomes obligatory.
Rule 82: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage, and a person volunteers to perform
it on his behalf gratuitously, the heirs will no longer be
required to have one performed themselves. The same
applies in the event of the deceased instructing that
pilgrimage be performed from his bequeathable one-third.
However, in both the cases the cost that would have been
incurred on pilgrimage should not revert to the heirs, but
be disposed of in good causes closest to the deceased's
heart.
Rule 83: If a person dies without having performed
obligatory pilgrimage but directs in his will that an agent
be appointed from his town to perform one, it is
obligatory to do so. However, the extra amount of
remuneration, over what would have been paid if the
agent was appointed from the Meqat, should be met from
the bequeathable one-third of the estate. If, in the will, he
directs that pilgrimage be performed without specifying
```