And it suffices for him, even if he recovers after entering the state of ihram

The Shaykh : Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) said at the beginning of tonight's lesson: "And it suffices for him, even if he recovers after entering the state of ihram". The pronoun in "suffices" refers to Hajj, and the pronoun in "for him" refers to the one who delegated. The pronoun in "even if he recovers" also refers to the one who delegated. "After entering the state of ihram" means after the delegate enters the state of ihram. This means that if the one who delegated, who was ill and believed his illness would not be cured, is healed by Allah (Mighty and Majestic) after the delegate has entered the state of ihram, then the Hajj suffices for the one who delegated. It suffices as fulfilling the obligation. Why? We say that the one who delegated did what he was commanded to do, which is appointing someone else in his place. And whoever does what he is commanded is absolved of the obligation. This is clear. It is understood from the author's words that if he recovers before entering the state of ihram, it is not valid; it does not suffice. It does not suffice for the one who delegated if he recovers before entering the state of ihram. Why? Because he did not begin the ritual, which is the obligation. So the obligation of Hajj remains on the one who delegated himself before he began the ritual in which he delegated. Therefore, he is required to perform Hajj himself. However, there remains a problem: this delegate has now incurred expenses and traveled to Makkah, reaching the miqat, but he has not yet entered the state of ihram. What is his status regarding the expenses for the round trip? Also, this man, meaning the delegate, will say in his ihram, "Labbaik for so-and-so." We say the answer to this problem is: if the delegate learns that the one who delegated has recovered before he enters the state of ihram, then what he does after that is at his own expense, because he knows that his Hajj does not suffice for the one who delegated. As for the expenses he incurred before that, they are on the one who delegated. For example, suppose he spent one thousand riyals from when he left his town until he reached the miqat, and then his client recovered before he entered the state of ihram. We say now that it does not suffice for him to enter the state of ihram on his behalf. So how much is on the one who delegated? One thousand riyals, because he spent it by his order before the period of his agency ended. What comes after that is on the delegate if he continues the journey. But if he returns, on whom is the expense of the return? The expense of the return is on the one who delegated, because this delegate traveled from the town for the benefit of the one who delegated. So what he spent is on this one who delegated. Yes, and with this, the problem is resolved. If it happens that the delegate did not know of his client's recovery and continued and performed the Hajj, what does he do now? We say this Hajj does not suffice for the one who delegated, but it becomes a voluntary act for him. And the expense or fee that was determined for the delegate is obligatory on the one who delegated, because this was a delegate who did not know. The action of an agent before he knows of the termination or removal of the agency is valid and effective, just as if you appointed a person to sell something for you, then you dismissed him from the agency, but he did not know of the dismissal until he acted. Then his action is valid based on the original agency, which he did not know had been terminated.