A. Financial Capability (Istiṭā‘ah al-Mālīyah)

Ruling 34: For Financial Capability (Istiṭā‘ah al-Mālīyah) to be realized, the following must be secured:

(1) The expenses associated with the journey to and from the pilgrimage, as well as the necessary provisions during the journey;

(2) The living expenses of dependents throughout the journey;

(3) The life’s essentials and necessities;

(4) The adequate means to maintain his customary standard of living after returning. (Rujū‘ ilā l-Kifāyah[1]).

1. The Expenses and Provisions for the Journey

Ruling 35: "The Provisions for Journey" refers to all necessities required during a journey, including food, drink, and other supplies and essentials.

Ruling 36: Hajj is not obligatory upon individuals who lack the essential provisions and financial means for the journey and return, nor for those who possess no wealth to acquire such provisions, even if they are capable of earning the requisite expenses through business.

Ruling 37: Possessing the requisite journey provisions is not a prerequisite for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah); rather, if a mukallaf has money or wealth that can be used to cover journey expenses, such resources suffice, thereby qualifying him as capable (mustaṭī‘).

Ruling 38: If a person is owed an amount sufficient for Hajj expenses and is able to collect it—meaning that the due date for payment has arrived or the debtor is willing to pay earlier—then he must collect the debt and perform Hajj.

Ruling 39: If a woman’s mahr (dower) is sufficient to cover her Hajj expenses and is due from her husband:

1. If her husband is unable to pay, she cannot demand it, and is not considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘) for Hajj.

2. If the husband has the means to pay and claiming the mahr would not lead to harm [such as serious marital discord], she must demand it and perform Hajj.

3. If demanding the mahr would cause harm—for example, leading to conflict—it is not obligatory for her to claim it, and she is not considered mustaṭī.

Ruling 40: If a person lacks the financial means for Hajj but can easily obtain a loan and repay it later, he is not obligated to take a loan to become mustaṭī. However, if he does take the loan, Hajj becomes obligatory upon him.

Ruling 41: If a debtor does not possess any additional wealth beyond the amount needed for Hajj expenses and has outstanding debt:

1. If there is a specified due date for the debt, and he is confident that he can repay it accordingly, Hajj is obligatory; otherwise, it is not obligatory upon him.

2. If the debt is due but the creditor consents to a delay and the debtor is confident that he will be able to fulfill repayment at the designated time, Hajj’s performance becomes obligatory; otherwise, it is not obligatory.

Ruling 42: If a person experiences an urgent necessity to enter into marriage to the extent that refraining from marriage would result in excessive hardship (ḥaraj), he possesses the financial capability to marry, then the Hajj is only obligatory upon him if he maintains adequate funds to cover both his marriage expenses and the costs associated with Hajj.

Ruling 43: If the cost of transportation in the year of financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) exceeds the usual rate, and if a mukallaf can afford the additional expense without excessive hardship (ḥaraj) and severe difficulty (mashaqqah), it is obligatory for him to pay it and perform Hajj. A mere increase in price does not negate istiṭā‘ah. However, if they cannot afford the extra cost or if paying it would be overly burdensome, it is not obligatory for him to pay and is not considered mustaṭi‘. The same ruling applies to purchasing or renting other essential items for the Hajj journey. Likewise, if selling his assets at a significantly lower price than the market value would result in excessive difficulty, he is not obligated to sell them.

Ruling 44: The criterion for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) for Hajj is the ability to perform it in a manner that is conventionally deemed feasible for people. If a person believes he does not meet this criterion but suspects that, through investigation and effort, he might find a way to become financially capable (mustaṭi‘), he is not obligated to investigate. However, if he is uncertain about his financial capability (istiṭā‘ah), it is obligatory to assess his financial situation.

2. The Life Expenses for Dependents During the Hajj Journey

Ruling 45: Financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) for Hajj necessitates that the Hajj pilgrim possesses adequate funds to cover the life necessary expenses of his dependents until his return from Hajj.

Ruling 46: Dependents (‘ā’ilah) refers to those regarded as part of one’s family customarily, even if providing for them is not legally obligatory.

3. Essential Life Necessities

Ruling 47: A prerequisite for the obligation of Hajj for a mukallaf is the possession of essential life necessities and items that are customarily deemed appropriate for his social status and requirements. However, it is not obligatory to possess these items precisely; rather, if he has financial resources or assets that can be used to acquire these necessities, he is considered financially capable (mustaṭi‘).

Ruling 48: The customary status of individuals [regarding financial capability] differs among individuals. For instance, if homeownership is considered a necessity of life for someone or his social status necessitates having a home, or if residing in a rented, institutional, or endowed property would cause excessive hardship (ḥaraj) and severe difficulty (mashaqqah) or humiliation, then owning a private home or the means to cover its costs is a condition for his financial ability (istiṭā‘ah) to perform Hajj.

Ruling 49: If a person possesses financial resources adequate for the performance of Hajj but requires those resources for essential needs, such as securing housing, obtaining medical treatment, or providing for basic life necessities, then that individual is not considered mustaṭi‘, and the performance of Hajj is not obligatory upon him.

Ruling 50: If a person possesses assets that exceed what is customary for his social status regarding essential life necessities, such as housing, furniture, vehicles, work tools, and the like, and if the sale of the excess would not cause hardship (ḥaraj) or humiliation, and the proceeds from such a sale are adequate to cover the expenses for Hajj (or contribute to these expenses), then he obliged to sell the excess and perform Hajj.

Ruling 51: If a mukallaf sells a piece of land, for example, to purchase a residential house, and if the house is considered an essential or customary need for him, then simply obtaining the money from the sale of that land does not make him capable (mustaṭī‘), even if the amount equals or supplements the expenses required for Hajj.

Ruling 52: If a person possesses assets that have become unnecessary, such as an old vehicle that is no longer needed after purchasing a new one, and the proceeds from selling it are sufficient for his financial ability (istiṭā‘ah), or supplement the expenses required for Hajj, then Hajj is obligatory upon them provided that other conditions are met.

4. Enjoying the Adequate Means to Maintain His Customary Standard of Living after Returning. (Return to [financial] Sufficiency)

Ruling 53: One of the conditions for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) is returning to financial sufficiency (rujū‘ ilā al-kifāyah). This means that, upon returning from Hajj, the mukallaf is obligated to possess wealth or a source of income—such as trade, agriculture, industry, rental properties, etc.—, so that these sources are sufficient to maintain an appropriate standard of living in accordance with his customary social status and that of his family.

Ruling 54: If a mukallaf lacks a financial income upon returning from Hajj but can sustain himself through religious funds such as Khums, zakāt, or similar means, Hajj remains obligatory upon him.

Ruling 55: Returning to financial sufficiency (Rujūʿ ilā l-kifāyah) is also a condition for a woman’s financial capability (istiṭā‘ah). If a married woman attains financial capability while her husband is alive, the maintenance (nafaqa) provided by her husband is sufficient for her financial capability (istiṭā‘ah). However, upon returning from Hajj, a woman without a husband must have adequate wealth or income to maintain a standard of living appropriate to her customary social status; otherwise, she is not considered capable (mustaṭī‘).

Ruling 56: If a person lacks the financial means and travel provisions for Hajj but another person offers to cover his expenses—for instance, by stating, “[If you] go to Hajj, I will bear its costs”—then Hajj becomes obligatory upon him, and he must accept it. This is known as Hajj al-Badhlīyya (Hajj by Bestowal). In Hajj al-Badhlīyya (Hajj by Bestowal), returning to financial sufficiency (return to competence) is not a condition, nor is it necessary for the benefactor to provide the exact provisions for the journey; rather, it is sufficient if the benefactor pays its monetary value. However, accepting the gift is not obligatory if the benefactor does not give the funds specifically for Hajj but merely constitutes an amount sufficient for it. However, if the gift is received and the recipient meets the condition of returning to financial sufficiency, Hajj becomes obligatory upon him.

Ruling 57: Hajj al-Badhlīyya (Hajj by Bestowal) suffices as the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam). Thus, if the mukallaf becomes capable (mustaṭī‘) in subsequent years, it is not obligatory for him to perform Hajj again.

Ruling 58: If a person is invited to perform Hajj by an institution or another person to carry out a specific task, and if he is obligated to fulfill that task as a condition of the invitation, then his Hajj is not considered Hajj al-Badhlīyya (Hajj by Bestowal).

Miscellaneous Rulings Regarding Financial Capability (Istiṭā‘ah al-Māliyah)

Ruling 59: If a person is financially capable (mustaṭī‘) to perform Hajj, he is not permitted to disqualify himself from financial capability(istiṭā‘ah) for Hajj after the time when he must spend his wealth to perform Hajj arrives. The obligatory caution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib) is that he must also not intentionally disqualify himself from the requisite financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) for Hajj even before this time.

Ruling 60: It is not a prerequisite for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) to be established in Mukalla’s residence; consequently, when a mukallaf achieves financial capability (istiṭā‘ah), even at the mīqāt, the performance of Hajj becomes obligatory for him. Thus, if he attains financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) upon arriving at the mīqāt, it is obligatory for him to perform Hajj, and this Hajj suffices as his obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam).

Ruling 61: If a person attains financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) upon arriving at the mīqāt, he is considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘), making Hajj obligatory upon him, provided he meets all other conditions of financial capability (istiṭā‘ah). Thus, if individuals such as caravan staff possess the means to cover the expenses of their dependents, necessities, provisions for a conventional standard of living, and rujū‘ilā l-kifāyah (return to sufficiency), Hajj is obligatory upon them, and this Hajj suffices as their obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam). Otherwise, their Hajj is considered recommended (mustaḥabb), and if they later achieve financial capability(istiṭā‘ah), they are obligated to perform the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam).

Ruling 62: If a person is hired to provide services during Hajj and receives payment sufficient for his financial capability (istiṭā‘ah, it is not obligatory for him to be hired to achieve that capability. However, once he accepts the hiring contract (ijārah), Hajj becomes obligatory, as long as performing the rites does not interfere with his contracted services. Otherwise, despite his financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) from the received payment(wage), he would not be considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘) in that year.

Ruling 63: If a financially incapable person is hired as a proxy (niyābah) to perform Hajj on behalf of another and subsequently attains financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) through funds other than the payment for the Proxy Hajj, he is obligated to perform Hajj for himself in that year and fulfill the Proxy Hajj in the following year. However, the contract becomes void if it specifies that the Proxy Hajj must be performed in the same year.

Ruling 64: If a financially capable person, either due to negligence or on purpose, intends to perform a recommended (mustaḥabb) Hajj—whether to practice the rites for better performance in a subsequent year or under the mistaken belief that he is not financially capable (mustaṭī‘)—and later comes to know that he has indeed been financially capable (mustaṭī‘), then whether his Hajj suffices for his obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam) is a matter of objection. The obligatory caution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib) is that he is obligated to perform his obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam) in the following year unless he had intended to fulfill his current religious duty and merely assumed it to be mustahabb [at that time]; in such a case, this Hajj suffices as his obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam).

B. Physical Capability (Istiṭā‘ah al-Badaniyyah)

Ruling 65: Physical Capability (Istiṭā‘ah al-Badaniyyah) refers to the bodily health and strength necessary to perform Hajj. Therefore, Hajj is not obligatory upon an ill or elderly person who lacks the strength to go for the journey of Hajj, or performing Hajj would cause him excessive hardship (ḥaraj) or severe difficulty (mashaqqah).

Ruling 66: Until entering the state of iḥrām, a mukallaf must have physical capability. Therefore, if he travels with the intention (nīyyah) of performing Hajj, and if, before entering the state of iḥrām, due to his illness, he is unable to continue the journey, then it is clear that he has not possessed physical capability. Nor is Hajj obligatory upon him, nor is he obligated to appoint a proxy (niyābah) for Hajj. However, if Hajj has already become obligatory (wājib) upon him and neglected to perform it, and if he has no hope of recovering the capability to perform Hajj without excessive hardship (ḥaraj) and severe difficulty (mashaqqah), even in future years, he is obligated to appoint a proxy for Hajj. But if there remains hope for recovery and the ability to perform Hajj, he is obligated to perform his Hajj himself in the first possible year. However, if he falls ill after entering the state of iḥrām, specific jurisprudential rulings apply to the situation.

C. The Capability of an Open and Safe Route for Hajj (al-Istiṭā‘ah al-Amniyyah/al-Istiṭā‘ah al-Ṭarīqiyyah)

Ruling 67: Al-Istiṭā‘ah al-Amniyyah/al-Istiṭā‘ah al-Ṭarīqiyyah means that the route for performing Hajj is both open and safe. Therefore, a mukallaf for whom the route is blocked in such a way that he is unable to reach the mīqāt or complete the rites of Hajj, as well as a mukallaf for whom the route is open but unsafe—such as being threatened with harm to his life, body, reputation, or wealth—is not obligated to perform Hajj.

Ruling 68: If a mukallaf is financially capable (mustaṭī‘), but his Hajj depends on registration in a draw, and he believes there is a possibility that his name will be drawn in that same year, then the obligatory caution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib) is that he is obligated to register. If not selected, he is not considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘), and Hajj is not obligatory upon him. However, if performing Hajj in future years depends on maintaining his place on a waiting list, then the obligatory caution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib) is that he is obligated to preserve his financial capability and remain on the list until he can perform Hajj.

Ruling 69: If a mukallaf has registered for Hajj and his turn is scheduled for future years, it is obligatory to advance his position in the queue, as long as doing so does not infringe on the rights of others or violate the regulations of the Islamic government.

Ruling 70: A woman’s journey to perform obligatory (wājib) Hajj does not depend on her husband’s permission, and her husband may not prevent her from performing the obligatory Hajj.

The Istiftā’āt (Juristic Inquiries) on Being Mustaṭī‘

Ruling 72: If a person earns his livelihood from religious dues such as Khums and zakāt, and there remains an amount from these dues sufficient to cover the expenses associated with Hajj, is this person regarded as financially capable (mustaṭī‘), provided that all other conditions are met?

Answer: If the person has been entitled to receive such dues [by religious Law (Shar‘)], he is considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘).

Ruling 73, Question: Before dispatching pilgrims to the Hajj, medical examinations are conducted, and those who lack physical ability are not accepted. Are those who fail the medical examinations—and have not yet been granted permission to go to Hajj—no longer considered capable (mustaṭī‘)?

Answer: In such a case, they are not considered to be capable (mustaṭīʿ). Nevertheless, if there should be hope for their recovery, the obligatory caution (al‑iḥtiyāṭ al‑wājib) is that they should not disqualify their financial capability (istiṭā‘ah).

Ruling 74, Question: If a wife does not demand her deferred mahr (dowry/marriage portion), which her husband is obligated to pay when financially capable (mustaṭī‘), and assuming he possesses the financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) to perform Hajj, does the husband meet the condition of financially capable (mustaṭī‘) for Hajj, or does the obligation to pay the mahr take precedence over the performance of his obligatory Hajj?

Answer: The husband is not obligated to pay the mahr unless the wife demands it. If he can afford to pay the mahr without difficulty whenever demanded, fulfilling the obligation of Hajj takes precedence over the payment of the mahr.

Ruling 75, Question: If a person saves money over several months, does he meet the condition of being financially capable (mustaṭīʿ), especially knowing he will not achieve financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) through any other means?

Answer: It is not obligatory for him to establish financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) by this means. However, if he should manage to save a sum adequate for the expenses related to the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam), and provided that the remaining conditions for financial capability are met, he will be considered financially capable (mustaṭīʿ).

Ruling 76, Question: Is visiting one’s parents considered a social, religious, or personal necessity? If so, is it permissible for a person financially capable (mustaṭīʿ) to defer the performance of his obligatory Hajj and allocate his funds for such a visit, assuming that the visit entails travel and similar arrangements?

Answer: If he is financially capable (mustaṭīʿ), it is obligatory for him to perform Hajj; therefore, it is impermissible to disqualify his financial capability even for the sake of maintaining connections with relatives (ṣilat al-raḥim). The obligation of such connections is not limited to in-person visits; this duty can also be fulfilled through letters or phone calls. If visiting parents in another city is deemed necessary due to their circumstances or his own, if such a visit is recognized as a customary necessity, and if he lacks sufficient funds for both the visit and Hajj, then in this case, he is not considered financially capable (mustaṭīʿ).

Ruling 77, Question: If a nursing mother becomes financially capable (mustaṭīʿ) of performing Hajj, and if her journey to Hajj would harm her nursing infant, is she permitted to refrain from performing Hajj?

Answer: If the harm is such that the nursing mother must remain with her child, or if her journey to Hajj would impose significant hardship and extreme difficulty (al-ʿusr wa-l-ḥaraj) upon herself, then Hajj is not obligatory.

Ruling 78, Question: If the value of a woman’s jewelry is sufficient for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) to perform Hajj, is she obligated to sell it and perform Hajj?

Answer: If the jewelry is essential for her and does not exceed her customary social status, she is not considered financially capable (mustaṭīʿ) and is not obligated to sell it to cover Hajj expenses.

Ruling 79, Question: A woman is considered financially capable (mustaṭīʿ) to perform her obligatory Hajj, but her husband does not permit her; what is her religious duty?

Answer: The husband’s permission for his wife is not a condition for performing the obligatory Hajj (Ḥajjat ul-Islam). However, if the woman’s journey without his permission leads to distress and hardship (ʿusr wa ḥaraj) for her, she is not considered financially capable (mustaṭī‘); therefore, Hajj is not obligatory upon her.

Ruling 80, Question: My husband promised me at the time of our marriage to take me for the obligatory Hajj. Does this promise make Hajj obligatory upon me?

Answer: A mere promise or verbal commitment does not make Hajj obligatory.

Ruling 81, Question: Is it permissible for a person to impose hardship on himself regarding essential living needs [to accumulate the means] to attain financial capability (istiṭāʿah) for Hajj?

Answer: It is permissible (ja’iz), but it is not religiously obligatory (wājib) according to Sharia Law. However, this permissibility applies only to the individual himself. It is not permissible to impose excessive hardship beyond what is customary (ʿurf) on one’s family, for whom the provision of maintenance (nafqa) is obligatory.

Ruling 82, Question: In the past, I was not very observant of religious obligations and possessed sufficient wealth to perform Hajj; in other words, I was considered financially capable (mustaṭīʿ). However, I did not perform my obligatory Hajj due to certain circumstances at that time. What is my duty now? I should note that I currently lack sufficient funds to perform Hajj. There are two choices available for me to perform my Hajj: registering with the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization or paying a higher cost. Does registration with the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization suffice?

Answer: If you previously met all the conditions necessary for religious financial capability (shar‘ī istiṭā‘ah) of Hajj, it remains an obligation upon you, and you must perform it by any permissible and lawful means, provided it does not lead to distress and hardship (ʿusr wa ḥaraj). However, if you did not fully meet the conditions for financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) in the past, then Hajj is not obligatory upon you in the described scenario.

Ruling 83, Question: Does a fear of life-threatening danger prevent the attainment of financial capability (istiṭā‘ah)?

Answer: If the fear of danger to one’s life is not considered rationally justified (i.e., not based on reasonable grounds), it does not prevent the attainment of financial capability (istiṭā‘ah).

Ruling 84, Question: If a person can perform Hajj using a deceased person’s Hajj voucher, with the heirs’ permission, is obtaining such permission considered a necessary preliminary step for performing this obligation, like registration with the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization? If he performs Hajj using a deceased person’s Hajj voucher, without the heirs’ permission, and provided that all other conditions of financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) are met, is the Hajj considered valid, and does it suffice for the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam)?

Answer: It is not obligatory (wājib) to obtain the heirs’ permission, but their permission is obligatory for him to use the deceased’s voucher. If he uses the voucher without the heirs’ permission, and if his financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) from the point of mīqāt onward depends on the voucher, then the Hajj performed will not be considered the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam). However, if the conditions for his financial capability (istiṭā‘ah) are met independently, without regard to the voucher, from the point of mīqāt onward, his Hajj is considered valid and suffices for the obligatory Hajj (the Ḥajjat ul-Islam).