Pilgrimage is not obligatory on any person who has not attained adulthood, even if they were approaching it. A pilgrimage, performed by a child will, most evidently, not be counted as Hajjatul Islam, even if it was performed properly.
Rule 4: If a boy, who has the means to make the journey, leaves for pilgrimage and attains puberty before assuming ihram at the appropriate Meqat, his pilgrimage is valid as Hajjatul Islam. However, if he attains adulthood after wearing ihram and before the stay at Muzdalifah, he should complete the pilgrimage; it would be valid as Hajjatul Islam.
Rule 5: A person may perform an optional pilgrimage in the belief that they have not attained puberty. Yet, they discover, during pilgrimage time or after its completion, that they had already attained puberty. Such pilgrimage will counted as an obligatory one.
Rule 6: It is recommended for a discerning child to perform pilgrimage but, as is widely believed, it is conditional on the consent of his guardian.
Rule 7: The consent of parents is not a prerequisite for the validity of a pilgrimage of an adult. However, if the journey to perform a recommended pilgrimage displeases either or both of them, for fear, for example, of the dangers arising from the journey, it is not permitted to embark on it.
Rule 8: It is recommended that the guardian of a child, male or female, who is not capable of rational action, should help him or her assume ihram. That is, help them wear ihram and coach them in the recitation of the talbiyyah, if they are capable of comprehension.
Conversely, he should recite it for them. He must also restrain him from all matters which a pilgrim in a state of ihram must avoid. It is permissible to delay removing the clothes of a child till reaching Fakh if that route is taken. The child must then be instructed to perform all such acts of pilgrimage that he can.
The guardian should perform on his behalf that which he is unable to do. The guardian should make the child perform tawaf, sa'y, between Safa and Marwah, wuquf at Arafat and Mash'ar; rami of jamarat, if they are able; otherwise, the guardian should throw them on his behalf. This is also true of tawaf prayer, taqseer, especially get their head shaved, and the remaining acts.
Rule 9: There is no objection to a guardian assisting a child to wear ihram, although the guardian is not in a state of ihram himself.
Rule 10: It is recommended that the person who takes a child, who is not capable of rational action, on a pilgrimage as his guardian must be the person who has the right of custody of the child as detailed in the law of marriages.
Rule 11: If the expenses of pilgrimage of the child exceed the usual amount, the excess amount should be borne by the guardian and not the child. However. And if the protection of the child was contingent on making the journey for Hajj, or if the journey was in the child's interest, it is permissible to meet the expenses of the child from his own money.
Rule 12: The cost of the sacrifice for the undiscerning child should be borne by the guardian and so should the expiation (kaffarah) for hunting. As for kaffarahs which are attracted as a result of deliberate acts, they would naturally not fall on the child, even if he is a discerning one, or the guardian, nor would they be payable from the child's money.
There is no obligation on an insane person to perform pilgrimage, even if their insanity is periodic. However, if they recover during the pilgrimage period, are of means and able to perform the rituals thereof, it is obligatory on them to perform pilgrimage, even if they remain insane during the other periods. However, should they know that bouts of insanity coincide with pilgrimage days, they should deputies a person as soon as they recover.
There are few rules that need considering under this heading.
There must be enough time for making the journey to Makkah and staying throughout the obligatory periods. In other words, it is not obligatory to perform pilgrimage, even if you can afford it, if you do not have ample time for the journey, stay, and performing the obligatory rituals. This should also be the case, even if there was time, yet it entails enduring great difficulties.
In such circumstances, it is obligatory to set aside the funds for the journey in the ensuing year, and doing one's best not to dispense with them until the following year. However, matters relating to dispensing with the funds set aside for performing pilgrimage is outlined in Rule 39 below.
If a person is unable to travel to the holy places due to ill health, old age, or they are unable to stay there for the required periods because of extreme heat, it is not obligatory on them to set out for pilgrimage personally. However, they must send an agent to perform it for him.
The route must be open and safe, i.e. there must be no barrier to reaching the Meqat and no danger to the pilgrim's life, his property or honour. Otherwise, pilgrimage is not obligatory. That is the rule regarding the outbound journey. As for the ruling on the return journey, it is discussed in Rule 22 below.
However, if after wearing ihram an eventuality, such as illness, arises, or a danger posed by an enemy, the special rules relating to such circumstances will be discussed.
Rule 13: If there are two routes available for the journey to pilgrimage, one safe and the other not, the obligation to perform pilgrimage remains; that is, the safe route must be taken, even if it is longer. However, if taking the longer route involves travelling through many countries, such a situation would constitute an obstruction on the same lines of the preceding rule, i.e. pilgrimage ceases to become obligatory.
Rule 14: If a person has property in his country which could perish or be lost if they went on pilgrimage, it is not obligatory on them to do so. Similarly, it is not obligatory to make the journey of pilgrimage, if it was in response to a more urgent and more important act, called for by religious dictate, such as rescuing a person from drowning, or fire; or if the journey is dependant on committing a sin, the avoidance of which is more important than performing pilgrimage, or of equal importance.
Rule 15: If performing pilgrimage will result in a sin, either by an omission to do what is obligatory in religion, or the commission of a forbidden act, a sin will have been committed which will have to be answered. Such will remain unconnected with the pilgrimage which will be valid as a Hajjatul Islam, provided that all the other conditions for its validity are observed. There is no difference in this regard whether the pilgrim was already duty-bound to perform pilgrimage or it became obligatory on them in that particular year.
Rule 16: If there is an enemy on the way to pilgrimage and there is no defence against them except by paying of one's property as to be unfair to the pilgrim, it is not necessary to lose the property. Accordingly, the obligation to perform pilgrimage ceases. Otherwise, the obligation remains. Even so, it is not necessary to bribe the enemy to facilitate the opening of the road.
Rule 17: If the route to the pilgrimage sites was by sea alone, the obligation does not cease, except if there was a reasonable risk of drowning, illness, or the like. If, however, pilgrimage was performed despite the risk, it should be deemed valid.
There must be sufficient funds to meet the expenses, arising from the journey, such as those for eating, drinking and other necessities. The provision must be adequate for the return journey including transportation. The amount necessary would depend on the financial position of the pilgrim.
Rule 18: Provision of expenses and transport is not merely to meet the necessities. They are an unqualified condition for the pilgrimage, even if the provision is not required by the pilgrim who, for instance, is capable of making the journey walking without any difficulty, and doing so would not be derogatory to his dignity.
Rule 19: The measure of the expenses for the journey is what the pilgrim physically has with him. It is not obligatory for a person to raise funds to meet the expenses through his business or other sources. There is no difference in this regard between a close and a distant journey.
Rule 20: The starting point of incurring expenses for the journey is the residence of the pilgrim and not his country of origin. For example, if the person had moved to another town for business or other purposes and when they were there, they acquired the means for the journey, it is obligatory on them to perform pilgrimage, even though they would not be in a position to make it from their country.
Rule 21: If a person has property for which they are unable to find a buyer at its real value and, as a result, they have to postpone pilgrimage in order to sell it for its real worth, they are not obliged to sell it immediately.
However, if , for example, in the year they acquired the means to perform pilgrimage, the expenses have already risen, and that they could even be higher the following year, it is not permissible to postpone pilgrimage.
Rule 22: The provision of the expenses for the return journey is a condition for pilgrimage, only if there had intend to return home. If this was not the case and the person had plans to reside in another country, it is enough to have provisions sufficient to get them there.
However, if the country to which they intend to go is more distant than theirs, it is not necessary to have sufficient provisions to get them there, and make the pilgrimage obligatory; they only need to have sufficient funds to enable them to return home, unless they have no alternative but to proceed to the more distant country.
The person must be in a position to maintain themselves and their family on returning home. It is necessary that, on their return, they should be solvent enough as to insulate themselves and their family against poverty. In other words, the expenditure that arose from the journey to pilgrimage should not encroach on their maintenance money..
It is not obligatory on a person to embark on pilgrimage if in so doing they would need to bear the cost of the journey from their property which could be the source of maintenance for themselves and their family. If they do not have alternative means of livelihood on a par with their social status, clearly it is not obligatory on them to sell their property which they would need as a necessity of life, nor is it obligatory to sell their home, personal and household effects, tools of trade needed for livelihood, such as books required by a scholar for study. Generally, disposal of necessities is not necessary, if doing so would cause distress and hardship. However, if there were surplus items at the person's disposal, it is obligatory to sell same in order to provide the expenses for pilgrimage.
For example, if one owns a house of the value of eighty thousand pounds and it is possible to sell it and purchase another one for a lesser price without causing any hardship, it is obligatory to do so and use the extra amount generated for performing pilgrimage and spending on family needs.
Rule 23: If a person has property which they need, it is not obligatory on them to sell it in order to embark on pilgrimage. However, if they subsequently be able to do without it, it becomes obligatory on them to sell it to perform pilgrimage.
For example, a lady who has a piece of jewellery which she needs and cannot do without. Yet if she reaches a point where she is able to dispense with it, either because of old age or otherwise, it is obligatory on her to sell it and perform pilgrimage.
Rule 24: If a person owns a house and there is another house in which it is possible to reside without undue hardship, such as a waqf property, adequate to their needs, it is obligatory to sell the property they own and perform pilgrimage, even if the sale price may need to be supplemented from their other sources of income. This rule also applies to books of learning and other means of living.
Rule 25: If a person has sufficient funds to embark on pilgrimage, but needs to marry, or purchase a house for residence, or satisfy any other need, it is not obligatory on them to perform pilgrimage, provided that bearing the expenses thereof is not going to pose undue difficulty to them.
Rule 26: A person owes some money and they need it for the expenses of pilgrimage or part thereof. Repayment of the debt has already become due. It is, therefore, obligatory on them to demand it. The debtor may forestall settling the debt and the creditor is in a position to force him to force him to pay, even by way of taking him to court. There may be a case for a possible settling the sum against other payments due to the debtor. It is, therefore, obligatory on the creditor to resort to such measures.
Similarly, even if the repayment is not due, a demand should be made, especially, if payment would be forthcoming on demand. However, the debtor may be impoverished or may defer payment; it may not be possible to enforce settling the debt, or resorting to such an action may result in distress; the debt could be premature and the debtor is unwilling to settle it before the appointed term, and it is possible to assign the debt without causing harm or distress. In such cases, one should do so and, from the proceeds, meet the expenses of pilgrimage or supplement them from other sources if need be.
Rule 27: It is obligatory on those making a living of a profession or a vocation like blacksmiths, builders, and carpenters, whose earnings are usually sufficient for maintaining themselves and their family, to perform pilgrimage, should they receive property, by way of inheritance or any other means that would be sufficient to meet the expenditure of pilgrimage and maintenance of their family during their absence.
Rule 28: A person's livelihood may be derived from religious dues like khums and zakat, and such regular income is assured without difficulty. It is obligatory on them to perform pilgrimage, should they acquire sufficient funds for the journey and maintenance of their family. The same rule applies to the person who is in receipt of lifetime help, or the person whose lifestyle is not going to change, if they undertook the journey to pilgrimage.
Rule 29: If a person receives sufficient funds to cover the expenses of pilgrimage by obtaining conditional ownership of property, it is apparent that pilgrimage becomes obligatory on them. That is, if they can prevent the withdrawal of the ownership by selling the article subject of a revocable gift, for example. Otherwise, whether pilgrimage becomes obligatory depends on the decision of the donor or the person vested with the right to exercise the condition which could result in withdrawing the ownership. If such person effects the withdrawal before the completing pilgrimage, it will, evidently, be deemed as though it was not obligatory on them.
Rule 30: It is not necessary that, in order to embark on pilgrimage, the means be acquired from the person's own property. It can be acquired by way of gift, or be provided by another person. However, if the cloths for ihram during tawaf and its prayer were acquired unlawfully, pilgrimage shall not be valid, as a matter of precaution. If the money paid for the hady (sacrifice) was acquired by unlawful means, the pilgrimage is not acceptable, unless it was bought on credit and was settled from the unlawful money.
Rule 31: It is not obligatory that the means be acquired by earning a living or other means. If a gift is made to a person which would provide them with the means for pilgrimage, they are not obliged to accept it. Similarly if a person is offered employment which is compatible with their status and the remuneration thereof would provide them with the means for pilgrimage, they are not under any obligation to accept it. However, if a person renders services during the journey to pilgrimage and thereby acquires the means, performing pilgrimage becomes 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.