Discussion on the Rulings and Regulations of Hajj

The Shaykh : A man performed Hajj while standing and brought the sacrificial animal. What do you say about his Hajj?

The questioner : ... I mean, Shaykh, I see that the Lawgiver, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, commanded people to relax and to remove their state of consecration. And when he came to Fatimah and rebuked her, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, [said something]. So the person returns on the Day of Sacrifice and that happens. That is my intention, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. Is this not the method of the people of opinion (Ahl al-Ra'y)?

The questioner : Yes, the intention is to refute evidence with evidence. I do not make this permissible, Shaykh. I take comfort in it, but I say, “Do it, and there is no harm.”

The Shaykh : My brother, I answered you: Is it permissible to throw the pebbles before the time? I said no. So apply “Do it, and there is no harm.” This means the matter is according to our desires and appetites.

The questioner : No, my intention is not the setting of the sun, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : My brother, your intention is to remove the hardship. Do you understand? The removal of hardship is for you, not according to our whims.

The questioner : I am not speaking about throwing the pebbles after the setting of the sun.

The Shaykh : I am not speaking about the throwing. I am just bringing you closer to what you find difficult by what you do not find difficult. That is, Now, if a man wants to delay the circumambulation (tawaf) for two or three days, what does he do? Is it permissible for him to have relations with his wives?

The questioner : It is not permissible for him to have relations with his wives.

The Shaykh : Well, remove the hardship from him.

The questioner : But the first removal of consecration (tahallul) has an independent text in the hadith regarding the Jamarat (pebble-stoning).

The Shaykh : The removal of consecration is not our point of disagreement. The first removal of consecration, the lesser removal of consecration. Now I tell you: if he delays the circumambulation, is it permissible for him?

The questioner : But will he fall into hardship if he does not... [have relations with] the women.

The Shaykh : Or how would that not happen? Perhaps a man is lustful and has strong desires.

The questioner : The rulings, but I think... that he remains in his state of consecration and does not touch [perfume]. Well.

The Shaykh : And what is there, my brother? I mean, touching perfume now is more dangerous, or touching the women?

The questioner : No, I intend only to clarify.

The Shaykh : No, it is fine. You must submit yourself to the text and not treat the text with opinion.

The questioner : No, no, that is not my intention. I intend that you mentioned...

The Shaykh : I am not speaking about your intention, may Allah bless you. I am speaking about your wording.

The questioner : ... that it is more fitting for the scholars and muftis to make things easy and facilitate for people. And now you say... but I was saying, are not those hadiths, with their strength and clarity and capacity... “Do it, and there is no harm”?

The Shaykh : My brother, may Allah be pleased with you. This is mentioned in specific places. Do you extend it to others? You say no.

The questioner : No, I do not extend it to others, Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Well, now you are extending it.

The questioner: ....

The Shaykh : I am speaking to you about the throwing now. I am more lenient than you regarding the throwing, but I tell you: the issue of returning to his state of consecration as it was before, we do not have a dispensation (rukhsah) for that. We have a Prophetic command. So either it is authentic in your view, and then it must be followed, or it is not authentic, and then you are free from it.

The questioner : If he does not do it, Shaykh, the one in a state of consecration and the pilgrim.

The Shaykh : If he does not do it, it is like any other thing, and he is in a state of consecration, like any other thing... [it is] resolved.
But you and I are equal here. The one who declares a disbeliever (kafir) the one who leaves prayer does not differentiate, and I, who rule that he is a Muslim and not a disbeliever, do not differentiate. So why use the language of emotions, saying “even if he did not pray in his life even once”? This is the language of emotions.

The questioner : The one who does not pray in his life at all, perhaps... in his state, he lies about the Shari'ah of Allah.

The Shaykh : His case is left to Allah. But look now how the action differs. This one who has not prayed in his life at all, or who missed a prayer in his life only, this one or that one. If he is presented to the judge and his head is struck and he is told, “Either you pray or you are killed,” and he prefers death over prayer, he dies as an apostate because the material proof has been established. But between him and his Lord, whether he did not pray at all, or prayed a little, or a lot, etc., why do we take him out of the religion? And it is assumed that he testifies that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. But I am amazed by the scholars, especially in your country here, who teach you that the one who leaves prayer is a disbeliever, and by negligence, not denial. There is no disagreement regarding denial. Why do they not see the hadith of intercession (shafa'ah) reported in the two Sahihs (al-Bukhari and Muslim) that when the believers enter Paradise, they say, “Our Lord, we have brothers who used to pray with us, perform Hajj with us, fast with us, and strive in the path of Allah with us. We do not see them. They entered the Fire.” Allah says, “Look for anyone you find among them in the Fire and bring them out.” They bring out a great number. Then they say, “Our Lord, we have brought out a great number.” He says, “Look for anyone who had the weight of a dinar of faith in his heart and bring him out of the Fire.” These would be those who prayed.

The questioner : They entered the Fire for another reason...

The Shaykh : I did not notice... the first group used to pray, etc... bring them out of the Fire... this is another group.

The questioner : Perhaps they pray in their homes and do not pray in congregation. The first group, apparently, pray in the mosques, and the second group, the one in the Fire, remained. Perhaps they prayed, but in their homes. This is a possible probability.

The Shaykh : No, it is not a probability. Listen to the rest of the hadith. “Bring out anyone who had the weight of a dinar in his heart.” They bring out a great number. They say, “Our Lord, we have brought out from the Fire those You permitted us to.” He says, “Look for anyone who had the weight of half a dinar or the weight of half a dinar in his heart.” They bring out a great number, until they bring out anyone who had the weight of an atom of faith in his heart. Then Allah says, “The intercession of the prophets and messengers, the angels, and the righteous has been exhausted, and only My intercession remains.” He says, “Bring out of the Fire anyone who did not do any good at all.”

The questioner : Meaning, they did not say “There is no god but Allah,” then?

The Shaykh : No, regarding faith. You are rushing now. Either you reject the hadith or you believe in it. I do not think you will reject it. But it remains: the second option, you do not reject the hadith, because the hadith is agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim. So why do you interpret the hadith with an interpretation that no Muslim accepts, meaning they did not say “There is no god but Allah”? “Bring out of the Fire anyone who did not do any good at all” means from the righteous deeds. As for faith, it is necessary because it is the foundation. So this hadith is not mentioned at all in this context. Even Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, who collected the evidence of both parties, did not mention the hadith in detail, but only came to the last sentence. So what do we do with this? As for the hadith between the man and disbelief, and the one who leaves prayer, and “whoever leaves prayer has committed disbelief,” this is a known answer, because not everyone who is said to be a disbeliever for having committed apostasy is...