|
|
|
Problem # 3 There is plenty of time for tying Ihram for Hajj, and so it is permissible to delay it until he finds ample time for staying in 'Arafat, but it not permissible to delay it farther. It is approved to tie Ihram on the Day of Tarviyah (i.e. 8th of Dhu'l Hijjah). Rather, it is more cautious (to do so)
Problem # 4 If a person forgets tying Ihram , and sets out for 'Arafat, he shall be bound to return to tie it from Mecca. If it is not possible for him to do so due to insufficiency of time or some excuse, he shall tie it from wherever he is. If he does not recollect it throughout the performance of the rites of Hajj, his Hajj shall be valid. A person ignorant of the rules shall be treated as a forgetful person. If a person deliberately abandons tying Ihram until the lapse of the time for staying in 'Arafat and Mash'ar, his Hajj shall be declared void.
Problem # 5 It is not permissible for a person who is bound to perform Hajj-al Tamattu' to revert to any of other two kinds of Hajj of his own accord. Of course, if the time for completion of 'Umrah and arriving for Hajj is short, it shall be permissible for him to shift to the intention for Hajj-al Ifrad, and perform 'Umrah after Hajj. The minimum time for the limitation of time, according the more proper opinion, is when there is fear of missing voluntarily staying in 'Arafat. Apparently the rule has a general application even to an approved Hajj, so that if a person intend to perform an approved Hajj-al Tamattu', and the time for the performance of 'Umrah and arriving for Hajj is short, it shall be permissible for him to revert to Hajj-al Ifrad. According to the stronger opinion, 'Umrah shall not be obligatory on him.
Problem # 6 If a person who is bound to perform Hajj-al Tamattu before embarking on 'Umrah knows that the time for the performance of the 'Umrah and arriving for Hajj is short, it is not far from being permissible for him at the very outset to revert to Hajj-al Ifrad. Rather if he knows at the time of tying Ihram about the time being short, it shall be permissible for him to tie lhram for Hajj-al Ifrad and perform it, and then perform Umrah-al Mufradah subsequently, So his Hajj shall be considered complete, and it would suffice for an Islamic Hajj. If a person embarks on 'Umrah with the intention of performing 'Umrah-al Tamattu' when there was ample time, and then deliberately delays the performance of circumambulation and Sa'y (between Safa and Marvah) until the time becomes short, then there shall be difficulty (in permissibility and) sufficiency for reverting (to Hajj-al Ifrad). It is more cautious for him to revert (to Hajj-al Ifrad), and in case the Hajj were obligatory on him, he must not suffice with it.
Problem # 7 If a menstruating woman or one having puerperal blood has an insufficient time for purification (Tuhr) and completing the performance of 'Umrah, she shall be bound to revert to Hajj-al Ifrad , and complete it and then perform the 'Umrah after Hajj. If she enters Mecca without tying Ihram due to an excuse, and the time (for 'Umrah) were short, she shall tie Ihram for Hajj-al Ifrad, and shall perform the 'Umrah-al Mufradah after Hajj, and it shall be valid and sufficient for being an Islamic Hajj.
Problem # 8 The form for Hajj-al Ifrad shall be similar to that of Hajj-al Tammattu', except in one respect, namely, that sacrifice (of an animal) is obligatory in the latter, while it is approved in the former.
Problem # 9 The form of 'Umrat-al Mufradah is identical with that of the 'Umrat-al Tamattu', except in the following respects:
Firstly, in an 'Umrat-al Tamattu' there is the condition of trimming the hair of the head, and it is not permissible to shave the hair of the head, while in an 'Umrat-al Mufradah one is free to opt for either.
Secondly, in an 'Umrat-al Tamattu' there is no Tawaf al-Nisa', though it is more cautious, while in an 'Umrat-al Mufradah it is obligatory to perform Tawaf al-Nisa'.
Thirdly, the Miqat for an 'Umrat-al Tamattu' is one of the following Miqats, while that for an 'Umrat-al Mufradah it is the closest place outside Haram, though it is permissible to tie lhram in one of those Miqats.
Miqat is a place specified for tying Ihram. They are five for 'Umrah for Hajj.
First: Dhu'1 Halifah. It is the Miqat for the inhabitants of Madinah, or those coming via Madinah. It is more cautious to confine it to the Masjid al-Shajarah itself, and not any other place near it, and this rule is not free from significance.
Problem # 1 According to the stronger opinion, one must not delay tying Ihram (from Masjid al-Shajarah) upto Juhfah that is for the Syrian people. But it is permissible to delay it if necessary due to ailment, weakness or any other excuse.
Problem # 2 For a polluted person, a menstruating woman or one having puerperal blood, it is permissible to tie Ihram while passing through the mosque, in case it is not necessary for them to stay there. Rather they are bound to do so in such circumstances. If, however, it is not possible for them to do so - without staying in the mosque, then a polluted person, in absence of water or in case of being unable to use it due to some excuse, shall perform Tayammum for entering the mosque and tying Ihram in it. The same rule shall apply to a menstruating woman or one having puerperal blood after having been clean of blood (but before having washed them). But in case of being unclean of the blood, if they cannot wait upto their becoming clean of the blood, then it is more cautious for them to tie Ihram outside the mosque at a place near it, and renew it at Juhfah or a place in its suburbs.
Second: Al-'Aqiq, It is the Miqat or the inhabitants of Nejd, Iraq or those coming via afore-mentioned regions. Its first end is Maslakh, middle Ghamrah and the last end Dhat al-'Irq. According to the stronger pinion, it is permissible to tie Ihram from any of these places as desired, the most preferable being Maslakh and then Ghamrah. If Taqiyyah demands that one should not tie Ihram from the first end, (namely, Maslakh) and delay it until Dhat al-'lrq, then it shall be m re cautious to delay it. Rather, its non-permissibility is not free from significance.
Third: Al-Juhfah. It is the Miqat for the people of Syria, Egypt, Morocco and those coming via these countries.
Fourth: Yalamlam. It is the Miqat for the people of Yemen, and those coming via that country.
Fifth: Qarn al-Manazil. It is the Miqat for the people of Ta’if , and those coming via Ta’if.
Problem # 3 In case there is no knowledge about these places of Miqat, they are established through legal evidence or notoriety producing satisfaction, and, in case of their unavailability, through the statement of informed persons by which one may attain certitude, let alone reliability. So if a person intends to tie Ihram, for example, from Maslakh, but he is not sure about that place, he shall have to delay it until he is sure of having entered the Miqat.
Problem # 4 If a person does not pass through any of the (afore-mentioned) Miqats, it shall be permissible for him to tie Ihram from any place parallel to any of them. If there are two Miqats on the way, according to the more cautious opinion, he shall be bound to tie Ihram from the more distant one from Mecca. It shall be better to tie Ihram again from the last end.
Problem # 5 By parallel (Mahadhat) is meant that on his way to Mecca, he must reach a place where the Miqat may be on his right or left in a straight line in a way that if one proceeds from there the Miqat shall be on his back. The criterion is to call it parallel according to the prevalent custom and not according to the rational exactitude. There is difficulty in the sufficiency in case of being parallel from above as may be attained by one who flies in a plane; if it is supposed that it is possible to tie Ihram in it observing the rule of being parallel. So caution must not be given up by considering it insufficient.
Problem # 6 The establishment of being parallel is attained by the same means as Miqat, as mentioned before rather it may be attained by means of the statement of experts based on scientific me hods, provided that certitude is obtained thereby (Other Miqats)
Problem # 7 What has been mentioned here relates to the Miqats of the 'Umrat-al Hajj. There are some other Miqats as well. They are as follows.
First: the holy Mecca. It is for Hajj-al Tamattu'.
Second: The Dwellings of the inhabitants (of Mecca). It is a Miqat for one whose residence lies after the Miqat towards Mecca. Rather, it is the Miqat for the inhabitants of Mecca. Similarly, it is the Miqat for the immigrants (who have come from outside and have settled in Mecca and) whose conditions for Hajj have shifted to those meant for Meccans, though it is more cautious for them to tie Ihram from Ju'ranah. All these people shall tie Ihram for Hajj- al Ifrad and Hajj-al Qiran from Mecca. Apparently tying Ihram from their homes by the two types of persons, (namely, the Meccans and immigrants, or those who have migrated to Mecca and settled down there) is allowed by way of special permission (Rukhsat); otherwise, it is permissible for them to tie Ihram from one of the Miqats.
Third: The closest place from the Haram.. It is the Miqat for every 'Umrat-al Mufradah, regardless whether it is performed after the Hajj-al Qiran or Hajj-al Ifrad or not. It is preferable if it were from Hudaibiyah, Ju'ranah or Tan'im, Tan'im being closer to Mecca than the other places.
Problem # 1 It is not permissible to tie Ihram before Miqats, (and if tied), it shall not be valid. It is also not sufficient to pass from the Miqats after having already tied Ihram. Rather it is indispensable to start it from the Miqat. There are two exceptions to this rule. They are as follows.
First: If a person has vowed to tie Ihram before Miqat, in which case it is permissible and valid, and the person is bound to fulfill it. In such case, the person is not bound to renew the tying of Ihram at the Miqat, nor is he bound to pass from it. It is more cautious to specify the place in his vow, so that, according to the more cautious opinion; it is not valid to vow tying Ihram before Miqat without specifying the place. It is not far from being valid in case of hesitation between two places, as when he says. "For the sake of Allah, I am bound to tie Ihram either from Kufah or Basra, though the caution is contrary to it. There is no difference (in this rule), whether the Ihram were meant for an obligatory or approved Hajj or for 'Umrat-al Mufradah. Of course, if it were meant for a Hajj-al Tamattu' or 'Umrat-al Tamattu', it is a condition that it must be performed in the months of Hajj.
Problem # 2 If a persons vows an violates it deliberately or out of forgetfulness, and fails to tie Ihram at the place vowed, his Ihram shall not be declared void if he ties the Ihram from the Miqat. He shall, however, be liable for expiation, in case he has defied it deliberately.
Second: If a person intends to arrive for the 'Umrah of Rajab, and is afraid of missing it if he delays it upto the Miqat vowed, in which case it shall be permissible for him to tie the Ihram before Miqat. This 'Umrah shall be considered to relate to Rajab even if its rites are performed in Sha'ban. It is better to be more cautious by renewing it at Miqat, as it is also more cautious to delay it till the last time, though apparently it is permissible before the time becomes short in case he is sure he would not arrive if he delays it till the Miqat. Apparently there is no difference (in the application of the rule) whether the 'Umrah were an approved, obligatory or votive one, or the like.
Problem # 3 It is not permissible to delay tying Ihram at Miqat. It is not permissible for a person who intends to perform Hajj or 'Umrah or enter Mecca to pass from the Miqat of his own accord without tying Ihram. Rather it is also not permissible to pass from a place in the vicinity of the Miqat, even if there were another Miqat before him. If he has not tied Ihram there, he shall be bound to return to that place. Rather it is more cautious for him to return, even if there were another Miqat before him. If, however, he intends neither to perform Hajj nor to enter Mecca, as when he has some job outside Mecca, even if it were within Haram, he shall not be bound to tie Ihram.
Problem # 4 If a person delays tying Ihram from the Miqat knowingly and intentionally, and is not able to return due to the shortage of time or some other excuse, and there is also no other Miqat before him, his Ihram and Hajj shall be rendered invalid, and he shall be bound to perform it next year if he is capable to do so. If, however, he was not capable (next year), it shall not be obligatory on him, though he shall be considered to have sinned by having abandoned tying the Ihram.
Problem # 5 If a person is sick, and cannot take off his garments and wear the two pieces of cloth (of Ihram), intention and Talbiyah (saying. "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik” (Here I am. O Allah! Here I am) shall be sufficient for him. When the excuse is removed, he must put on the two pieces of cloth (of lhram), but he shall not be bound to go back to Miqat.
Problem # 6 If a person is unable to have initiating Ihram at Miqat due to ailment, unconsciousness or the like, and passes from the Miqat, and then the excuse is removed, he shall be bound to return to Miqat, if possible; otherwise, he shall tie Ihram wherever he is. It is more cautious to return towards Miqat as much as possible, though, according to the stronger opinion, it is not obligatory to do so. If, however, he were within the limits of Haram, he shall go out of the limits of Haram, if possible. In case it is possible, he shall tie Ihram wherever he is. It is better to be cautious by returning towards outside the Haram as much as possible. The same rule shall apply in case he had abandoned it due to forgetfulness or ignorance of the rule or the subject. The same shall be the rule in case he does not intend to perform Hajj or enter Mecca, and passes from Miqat, and then decides to perform Hajj. Then he shall return to Miqat according to the details already mentioned. If a person forgets tying Ihram, and does not recollect it until the last rites of 'Umrah, but is not able to compensate it, then it is more cautious to consider his 'Umrah to be invalid; though its validity is not far from being likely. If he fails to recollect it until the end of the rites of Hajj, his 'Umrah and Hajj shall be valid.
There are five conditions to be observed essentially at the time of tying Ihram.. They are as follows:
First: Intention. It is not in the sense of intending to tie Ihram; it is rather in the sense of intending any of the kinds of Hajj or 'Umrah. For example, when a person intends to perform Umrah, and utters Talbiyah, he shall become Muhrim (i.e. one tying Ihram) and all its relevant rules shall apply to him. As regards the intention of tying Ihram, there is no sense in executing it in its own name. If the person fails to intend any of the kinds of Hajj or 'Umrah, his Ihram shall also not be executed, regardless whether the omission has taken place deliberately, erroneously or out of ignorance. The Hajj or 'Umrah whose intention has been omitted shall also become void if the abandonment has been done deliberately, In case, however, it has been done due to mistake or ignorance, it shall not be rendered void. The person shall, however, be bound to tie Ihram anew, if possible; otherwise, he shall tie the Ihram wherever he is, according to the details already mentioned.
Problem # 1 Closeness (to Allah) and sincerity of purpose are conditions required in Intention (of Ihram) as required in other 'Ibadat as well. In case of absence of either or both of them, Ihram shall be rendered invalid. It is also essential that Intention must be simultaneous with its start, so that it is not sufficient to have intention in the middle. If a person has abandoned it, he shall be bound to have it renewed.
Problem # 2 It is also a condition in intention to specify the Hajj or 'Umrah intended, whether it is a Hajj-al Tamattu', Qiran or Ifrad, whether it is for himself or on behalf of someone else, and whether it is Hijjat al-Islam, a votive Hajj or an approved Hajj. If he intends to perform it without specifying it, or leaves its specification to be done later, it shall be rendered void. But he is not bound to specify its nature, (being obligatory or approved), except when the specification of the above things depends on the specification of its nature. It is neither a condition to express the intention in words nor to pronounce it in the heart.
Problem # 3 It is not a condition in intention to intend renouncing forbidden things briefly or in detail. Rather even if a person intends to do some of the forbidden things, it would not have any adverse effect on his Ihram. Of course, the intention to do something that would invalidate Hajj cannot be combined with the intention of Hajj.
Problem # 4 If a person forgets whether he had specified Hajj or 'Umrah, then if its validity actually depends on specifying either of them, he shall make another intention anew about what is valid, in which case it shall take place validly. If it is permissible to revert from one of them to the other, he may revert (from one of them to another), in which case it shall be considered valid. If both of them are valid, and it is not permissible to revert (from one of them to another), he shall act according to the rules of Brief Knowledge, if it is possible and without any harm; otherwise, whatever is possible without any harm shall be considered likely.
Problem # 5 If a person in his intention says, for example, the Hajj of such a one, then if he knows the nature of his Hajj, it shall be valid; otherwise, it would be more proper to declare it void.
Problem # 6 If a person initially owes a particular kind of Hajj Of 'Umrah, but he intends some other kind of it, it shall be declared void. If he owed what has become obligatory on him by a vow or the like, it shall not be declared void if he intends some other kind of it. If he intends one kind but expresses another in words, the criterion shall be what he actually intended. If during the performance of a kind of it, he doubts whether he had intended that particular kind or some other one, the decision shall be in favour of its being what he actually intended.
Problem # 7 If a person makes an Intention of performing 'Umrat-aI Tamattu' instead of Hajj-al Tamattu' out of ignorance, then his intention were the performance of what was being performed by others too, and presumed that what is performed first is named Hajj, apparently it shall be valid, and he shall be considered to have performed 'Umrah .But if he presumed that Hajj-at Tamattu' is precedent to its 'Umrah, so he made the intention of Hajj in place of 'Umrah in order to go to 'Arafat and perform the rites of Hajj and then perform 'Umrah, then his Ihram shall be rendered invalid, and he shall be bound to tie it again at Miqat, if possible. Otherwise he shall act according to the details mentioned under the rule relating to abandoning Ihram
Second: The four Talbiyahs, the form of which, according to the more proper opinion is to say "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik Labbaik la Sharika lak Labbaik”. If he sufficed with it, he shall be considered to be one having tied Ihram, and his Ihram shall be valid. To be more cautious, it is better to add to what has been mentioned before: "innal Hamda van Ni'mata laka val Mulk La Sharika lak Labbaik.” It is more cautious than that to add the following after it. "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik Innal Hamda van Ni'mata laka val Mulk La Sharika lak Labbaik."
Problem # 8 It is obligatory to express the above formula in the proper manner observing the pronunciation of the words according to the Arabic Grammar, So ungrammatical Arabic is not sufficient if a person is able to express it correctly, even if through prompting or correction. If a person is not able to do so, then it would be more cautious to adopt both the courses of expressing it in whatever way one can and translate it into his own language. Besides this, it is better to have someone else to do it on his behalf. In case of ability to express the original, it shall not be valid to translate it. A dumb man shall make signs with his fingers along with the motion of his tongue. Besides this, it is better for him to have someone else to express it on his behalf. Talbiyah shall be pronounced on behalf of an indiscreet child.
Problem # 9 No Ihram is executed for 'Umrat-at Tammatu' Hajj-at Tamattu', Hajj-al Ifrad or Umrat-al Mufardah except by expressing Talbiyah. But in case of Hajj-al Qiran, one is free to opt Talbiyah, Ish'ar (marking the sacrificial animal with a wound) or Taqlid (Hanging a footwear in the neck of a sacrificial animal). Ish'ar is exclusively meant for a camel, while Taqlid is common between a camel and other sacrificial animals. It is better to adopt both Ish'ar and Taqlid in case of a camel. So Ihram for Hajj-al Qiran is executed by any of these three alternatives, but while opting for Ish'ar and Taqlid, it is more cautious to add Talbiyah as well. To be more cautious, it is obligatory on the person performing a Hajj-al Qiran to express Talbiyah personally, though the execution of his Ihram shall not depend on it, so that, according to the more cautious opinion, it is obligatory on him by itself.
Problem # 10 If a person forgets pronouncing Talbiyah, it shall be obligatory on him to return to Miqat to make amends. In case it is not possible for him to do so, he shall follow the rule already mentioned with regard to the case of forgetting tying Ihram, according to the more cautious, though not stronger, opinion. If, before pronouncing Talbiyah, a person commits something entailing expiation, the expiation shall not be obligatory on him, as Ihram is not executed without Talbiyah.
Problem # 11 It is obligatory to pronounce Talbiyah once. Of course, it is approved to pronounce it to repeat several times and as many times as one can particularly after offering every obligatory or supererogatory prayer, or while ascending a high place or descending a valley, at the end of a night, while walking or riding, in the afternoon, or while meeting someone riding and in the early mornings.
Problem # 12 A person performing 'Umrat al- Tamattu' shall discontinue pronouncing Talbiyah at the sight of the dwellings in Mecca. It is more cautious to discontinue it on the sight of the dwellings of Mecca at the time of his offering the 'Umrah in case of expansion of the town (of-Mecca). A person offering 'Umrat al-Mufradah shall discontinue pronouncing Talbiyah at the time of entering Haram if he has come from outside, and at the sight of the Ka'bah if he had left Mecca for tying its Ihram. A person offering any kind of Hajj shall discontinue it in the afternoon of 'Arafat Day. To be more cautious, discontinuation of Talbiyah is done by way of its being obligatory.
Problem # 13 Apparently it is not necessary while repeating Talbiyah to adopt the form required at the execution of Ihram. Rather it is sufficient to say: "Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik", and rather it would suffice to say merely:"Labbaik".
Problem # 14 If, after pronouncing Talbiyah, a person doubts whether he has pronounced it correctly or not, the decision shall be in favour of its being correct. If a person makes intention and puts on the two pieces of cloth (of Ihram, and then doubts with regard to pronouncing Talbiyah, the decision shall be in favour of absence of it as long as he is in Miqat. But after the departure from Miqat, apparently the decision shall be in favour of having pronounced Talbiyah, particularly when he was busy in the performance of some of the later rites (of Hajj).
Problem # 15 If a person commits something entailing expiation, and doubts whether he had done it after Talbiyah, in which case the expiation would be rendered obligatory, or before it, expiation shall not be obligatory on him, without there being any difference in case of ignorance about the dates of both or about the date of either of them.
Third putting on two pieces of cloth after putting off what is forbidden to wear for a person in Ihram, and treating one of them as a loin-cloth (or trousers, Izar) and the other as a cloak (Rida). According to the stronger opinion, putting on both the pieces of cloth (of Ihram) is not a condition for the execution of Ihram; rather, it is obligatory by way of Ta'abbud. Apparently there is no particular manner of putting on both the pieces of cloth. It is sufficient to make one of them a loin-cloth and the other a gown, or cover one of the shoulders with it and leave other bare, or any other form, but it is more cautious to put them on in the customary manner. Similarly, it is also more cautious not to tie the two pieces, even with each other, or to stitch them with a needle or the like. But according to the stronger opinion, all these things are permissible as long as the two pieces do not cease to be a loin-cloth and a gown. Of course, caution must not be given up by avoiding tying the loin-cloth with the neck. It is sufficient for them to be called a loin-cloth and a gown, though it is more cautious that the loin-cloth may cover the navel and the knees and the gown may cover the two shoulders.
Problem # 16 It is more cautious not to suffice with a single piece of long cloth, making a loin-cloth with a portion of it and a gown with the rest, except in case of necessity. If the necessity is removed during the performance of the rites (of Hajj) the person must put on two pieces of cloth.
Similarly, it is more cautious to put on the pieces of cloth before making intention and pronouncing Talbiyah. In case he makes the intention and pronounces Talbiyah before putting on the pieces of cloth, he shall repeat the intention and Talbiyah anew. At the time of putting on the pieces of cloth (of Ihram), it is more cautious to intend the attainment of closeness (to Allah). But at the time of putting off the pieces of cloth (of Ihram), intention is not a condition, though it is more cautious and better to treat it as a condition.
Problem # 17 If a person ties Ihram while wearing a shirt, he shall be considered to have committed a forbidden act, but he shall not be bound to repeat tying Ihram. The same rule shall apply if he wears a shirt over or under the two pieces (of Ihram), though in this case it would be more cautious to repeat the process of tying Ihram, and put it off immediately.
If a person ties Ihram while wearing a shirt out of ignorance or forgetfulness, he shall be bound to put the shirt off, while his Ihram shall be intact. In case he puts on the shirt after Ihram, it shall be necessary to tear it off and take it out from below, contrary to the case if he ties the Ihram while putting on the shirt, in which case he shall be bound to put it off and not tear it off.
Problem # 18 It is not obligatory to continue putting on the two pieces of cloth (of Ihram). Rather, it is permissible to change them, or put them off to wash them for removing filth from them or making them clean. Apparently, it is permissible to put off both of them at a time.
Problem # 19 There is no objection in wearing more than two pieces of cloth (of Ihram), observing the necessary conditions, even if there is no compulsion.
Problem # 20 It is a condition for the two pieces of cloth (for Ihram) that they must be of the type that is allowed to put on while offering prayer. They are, therefore, not permissible if made of silk, skin of an animal forbidden to eat, usurped or soiled with an unclean matter not exempted for offering prayer. Rather, it is more cautious even for women not to put on clothes of their Ihram made of pure silk .It is more cautious for them avoiding to wear such clothes as Ihram until the end of Hajj.
Problem # 21 It is not allowed to make Ihram of thin cloth so that the body could be seen behind it. It is better that the Rida should also not be such.
Problem # 22 It is not obligatory for women to wear two pieces of cloth for Ihram. They are allowed to wear their stitched garments as Ihram.
Problem # 23 It is more cautious to clean or change the two pieces of Ihram if they become unclean inexcusably (for prayers), regardless whether it occurs during the performance of the Hajj rites or not. It is more cautious to expedite cleaning even the body (in case of pollution) while tying Ihram. In case of his failure, neither the Ihram shall be vitiated nor shall he be bound to expiate.
Problem # 24 It is more cautious not to make Ihram with skins, though it is not far from being permissible if the word garment applies to them, as also it is not obligatory for them to be stitched. So a felt is allowed to be used as Ihram if the word garment is applicable to it
Problem # 25 If a person is obliged to wear a gown or shirt for cold or the like, he shall be allowed to wear them, but he must turn the gown from front and middle, and use it as a loin - cloth, but should not put it on; rather, it is more cautious to turn it from inside and back, and he must also not put on a shirt and use it as a loin-cloth.
Of course, if the necessity is not fulfilled except by putting it on, he shall be allowed to put it on.
Problem # 26 If a person fails to wear two pieces of cloth as Ihram deliberately and knowingly, or wears a stitched garment while intending to tie Ihram, he shall be considered to have committed insubordination, but his Ihram shall remain intact.
If it were due to some excuse, he shall not be considered to have committed insubordination too.
Problem # 27 It is not a condition for Ihram to be clean of minor or major pollution. So it is allowed to tie Ihram even in a state of Janabat, menses and puerperal blood.
|
|
|