"If slavery, insanity, or childhood is removed during Hajj at 'Arafah, or during 'Umrah before its tawaf, the obligatory act is valid"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He says "If slavery, insanity, or childhood is removed during Hajj at 'Arafah, or during 'Umrah before its tawaf, the obligatory act is valid" First, he said, "If slavery is removed." The author (may Allah have mercy on him) indicated by his statement "If slavery is removed" that Hajj is valid for a slave, is that not so?
The audience : Yes.
The Shaykh : So, is freedom a condition for validity or a condition for obligation?
Presence: A condition for obligation.
The Shaykh : It is a condition for obligation. So if a slave performs Hajj, his Hajj is valid, but does it suffice for the obligatory Hajj or not? There is disagreement among the scholars on this. Those who say it does not suffice argue that a slave is not eligible for the obligation, just as a child is not; if a child performs Hajj before reaching puberty, it does not suffice for the Hajj of Islam, so likewise a slave is not eligible for the obligation, so his Hajj does not suffice, but it is valid. Some scholars held that a slave's Hajj is valid with his master's permission, because the reason for exempting a slave from Hajj is that he does not have money and because of the master's right. If his master gives him money and permits him, he is a person of legal capacity, an adult, and of sound mind, so Hajj is obligatory upon him. Many scholars held this view, but the well-known view of the majority is that it does not suffice for him, but it is valid.
When the author said, "If slavery is removed," we learned that Hajj is valid for a slave, meaning he enters the state of ihram for Hajj while he is a slave.
The questioner : What is the stronger position?
The Shaykh : Yes, let us mention the absolute disagreement, and may Allah guide you to the stronger position. And I, in truth, do not have a preference on this matter, because the reasoning that he is not eligible for Hajj is strong, and the reasoning that he was prevented only because of the master's right is also strong, because the original rule is that he is among those who perform worship. There is a hadith on that but there is also disagreement about its authenticity and its use as evidence. Otherwise, if the hadith were authentic and traced to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), it would be the deciding factor. I am holding back on this, but with the help of Allah, if we find slaves who enter ihram while in a state of slavery and are then freed while standing at 'Arafah, Allah will make a way out for them, if Allah wills. Yes, is the time over? Yes.
The audience : Yes.
The Shaykh : So, is freedom a condition for validity or a condition for obligation?
Presence: A condition for obligation.
The Shaykh : It is a condition for obligation. So if a slave performs Hajj, his Hajj is valid, but does it suffice for the obligatory Hajj or not? There is disagreement among the scholars on this. Those who say it does not suffice argue that a slave is not eligible for the obligation, just as a child is not; if a child performs Hajj before reaching puberty, it does not suffice for the Hajj of Islam, so likewise a slave is not eligible for the obligation, so his Hajj does not suffice, but it is valid. Some scholars held that a slave's Hajj is valid with his master's permission, because the reason for exempting a slave from Hajj is that he does not have money and because of the master's right. If his master gives him money and permits him, he is a person of legal capacity, an adult, and of sound mind, so Hajj is obligatory upon him. Many scholars held this view, but the well-known view of the majority is that it does not suffice for him, but it is valid.
When the author said, "If slavery is removed," we learned that Hajj is valid for a slave, meaning he enters the state of ihram for Hajj while he is a slave.
The questioner : What is the stronger position?
The Shaykh : Yes, let us mention the absolute disagreement, and may Allah guide you to the stronger position. And I, in truth, do not have a preference on this matter, because the reasoning that he is not eligible for Hajj is strong, and the reasoning that he was prevented only because of the master's right is also strong, because the original rule is that he is among those who perform worship. There is a hadith on that