✨ *And be patient, and your patience is only with Allah, and do not grieve over them, and do not be distressed by what they plot.* 

✨ *And be patient, and your patience is only with Allah, and do not grieve over them, and do not be distressed by what they plot.* 

(Nahl 127)

✨ *And be patient, and your patience is only with Allah, the Exalted, and in fact, it is one of the great blessings of Allah, and gratitude for it is obligatory.

 ✨ *And do not grieve over them* 

✨Another point in the noble verse is that it says, "Do not grieve over them." This shows that *the prophets and saints of God suffer from the ignorance and disbelief of the people. Imam Hussein (AS) used to advise people many times on the scene of Karbala and before that on the way to Karbala.* 

✨ Imam Hussein (AS) introduced himself several times on the day of Ashura and preached to the enemy army, while the enemy was very harsh on him, and in this situation, ordinary people cannot react except with anger and hostility. *This is one of the miracles of the behavior of the prophets and saints that while they were subjected to hostility and persecution, they could advise their enemy and be kind to him.* 

✨ Imam Sadiq (AS) said: Commander of the Faithful Ali (AS) complained to the Holy Prophet (PBUH) as follows: "... O Messenger of God (PBUH)! I endured sufferings and hardships that no successor of the Prophet in any nation could endure, to the point that I was killed by the blow of Abdur Rahman bin Muljam, and God is witness to how my allegiance was violated. Talha and Zubair took Aisha to Mecca under the pretext of performing the Hajj and Umrah rituals, but they changed her route and brought her to Basra. I was forced to mobilize to prevent their rebellion and reminded them of God and you, but they did not return until God gave me victory over them and the blood of twenty thousand Muslims was shed and seventy hands that wanted to hold Aisha's camel were cut off. O Messenger of God (peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family)! What I saw in your battles and the battles after you was not more difficult for me than the Battle of Jamal; because that battle was one of the most difficult, most terrifying and greatest battles that I saw; So I was patient, just as God disciplined me with the same manners as you, with this verse: So be patient, as the prophets of the firm resolve were patient. (Al-Ahqaf: 35) And the verse: *And be patient, and your patience is only with Allah* I too was patient.

✨Tafsir Ahlul Bayt (a.s.) Vol. 7, p. 776

✨ Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol. 53, p. 20

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently made claims about his ability to solve Iran's water crisis, today he and his cabinet have been brought to his knees in the face of an unprecedented drought in the occupied territories.

According to the Tasnim News Agency political group, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently made claims about his ability to solve Iran's water crisis, today he and his cabinet have been brought to his knees in the face of an unprecedented drought in the occupied territories.

This natural event is a crushing response to his interventionist statements in Iran's internal affairs under the pretext of providing water. History has always witnessed that those who seek to interfere in the internal affairs of others often become weak and helpless in the face of their own fundamental internal challenges. This article examines this bitter paradox, a paradox in which the defamatory claims of the Gaza executioner are shattered by environmental and climatic realities.

The current situation in the occupied Palestinian territories is indicative of a profound environmental crisis that goes beyond a seasonal drought. The unprecedented decrease in rainfall, combined with extreme heat and persistent drought, has forced the Israeli authorities to declare a state of “drought.” This situation has severely challenged the regime’s water management structure and infrastructure.

Vital water resources, which are the main arteries of life and agriculture in this arid region, are under severe pressure. The famous Hula Valley, once a symbol of water management and restored wetlands in Israel, is now facing a sharp decline in water levels. Local reports indicate that the situation in this area and other major water sources has been described as “desolate.” This not only affects drinking water supplies, but also puts the food chain and agricultural economy at risk.

Ofer Barna, director of the Upper Galilee Regional Council, has issued a stark warning that has resonated with farmers. He stressed that farmers will lose the ability to grow many of their strategic and essential crops in the near future. The warning, above all, emphasizes the fragility of a system based on limited water resources in a region where climate change is already having its devastating effects. This is not just a climate crisis; it is an existential warning for the agricultural infrastructure and, in the long term, the regime’s ability to sustainably inhabit the region.

What is very striking and politically ridiculous is that this serious domestic crisis has occurred while Netanyahu, in a fabricated "political show," was trying to boast about Iran's water problems from a position of fake power and even use this excuse to legitimize support for Iran's internal unrest. In statements that went beyond interference in international affairs, Netanyahu claimed that Iran had entered a crisis due to mismanagement of its water resources and that Tel Aviv could provide solutions. These claims, which are often viewed in the domestic context of Iran as "the gibberish of a leader under pressure," have now become a bitter joke and an open scandal in the light of his own complete inability to manage the water crisis within his own borders.

The Iranian nation, with its historical wisdom and intelligence, thwarted Netanyahu’s sinister plan, which attempted to exploit Iran’s internal weaknesses to advance its political goals. But now, the irony of history has come upon him; Netanyahu himself remains desperate and powerless in the face of the power of nature. This situation shows that focusing on propaganda and foreign intervention will never replace managing domestic crises and paying attention to vital infrastructure.

Israeli minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has called for the assassination of Palestinian Authority (PA) officials if the United Nations endorses a plan on postwar management of the Gaza Strip that mentions Palestinian statehood.

Ben-Gvir made the remarks at a meeting of his extremist Otzma Yehudit party on Monday, hours before a UN Security Council vote on the US-drafted Gaza resolution. 

The draft resolution states that conditions may be in place for “a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood” while “Gaza re-development advances and when the PA reform program is faithfully carried out.”

Ben-Gvir called top PA officials “terrorists” and insisted that a Palestinian state must never be established. 

“If they accelerate the recognition of the Palestinian … state, and the UN recognizes a Palestinian state, targeted assassinations of senior Palestinian Authority officials… should be ordered,” he added.

Ben-Gvir also said Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas should be arrested if the UN vote takes the idea of Palestinian statehood forward, noting that a solitary confinement cell is “ready for him” at the Israeli Ketziot prison.

The draft resolution would follow up on the ceasefire deal between Israel and the Palestinian Hamas resistance group, which took effect on October 10 and brought an end to Israel’s two-year-long genocidal war on Gaza.

The proposal also lays out a multi-stage process that would hand Gaza over to an international stabilization force to oversee the disarmament of Hamas.

Additionally, it will place Gaza under the authority of a technocratic Palestinian administration answering ultimately to the so-called “board of peace” chaired by the US President Donald Trump.

Hamas and other Palestinian factions rejected the “dangerous” resolution submitted by the US to the UN Security Council as “an attempt to subject the Gaza Strip to international authority.”

In a statement, they dismissed any foreign military presence inside the Gaza Strip and any clause relating to the disarmament or harming “the Palestinian people’s right to resistance.”

The wording of the resolution “paves the way for external domination over Palestinian national decision-making by transferring the administration of Gaza and reconstruction to an international, supranational entity with broad powers, thereby stripping Palestinians of their right to manage their own affairs.”

Speaking on Saturday, Ben-Gvir alleged that “there is no such thing as a Palestinian people” and that Palestinians are a “collection of immigrants from Arab countries.”

Israel unleashed its genocidal war on Gaza on October 7, 2023, but it failed to achieve its declared objectives despite killing at least 69,483 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injuring 170,706 others.

The Gaza genocide mounted calls worldwide for the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state.

Press TV’s website

Israel has formally appealed to the International Criminal Court (ICC), demanding the removal of the chief prosecutor from the Gaza genocide case, and the nullification of arrest warrants issued for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former minister of military affairs Yoav Gallant.

In a document published on Monday, Israel’s Foreign Ministry asserted, without providing evidence, that prosecutor Karim Ahamd Khan pursued Israel’s genocide case with “improper personal motives.”

Israel also demanded the revocation of the arrest warrants issued by the court on November 21, 2024, at Khan’s request, against Netanyahu and Gallant.

The indictments include the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts committed during the regime’s genocidal campaign in Gaza, which, since October 7, 2023, has killed at least 69,490 Palestinians and wounded 179,000 others.

Since the issuance of these warrants, Israel and its chief Western partners, especially the United Kingdom and the United States, have engaged in a campaign of intimidation and propaganda against the ICC and Khan.

In July, Khan and the ICC were threatened with being “destroyed” should they proceed with the case against the Israeli leadership.

Khan was also privately pressured by then-British Secretary of Foreign Affairs David Cameron in April 2024, who warned that the UK would defund and withdraw from the ICC if the court moved forward with warrants against the Israeli authorities.

In May 2024, US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham also “threatened” Khan with sanctions if he applied for the warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant.

Subsequently, the administration of US President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on Khan and four ICC judges.

Furthermore, Khan received a security briefing alerting him that Israel’s spy agency, Mossad, “was active in The Hague and posed a potential threat” to his safety.

Khan also met with Nicholas Kaufman in May, a British-Israeli lawyer at the ICC, to discuss the Israeli investigation.

In a note of the meeting on file at the ICC, Kaufman told Khan that if the warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant were not dropped, “they will destroy you, and they will destroy the court.”

Meanwhile, in a letter to the Israeli regime’s president, Isaac Herzog, Trump urged him to pardon Netanyahu in a separate domestic criminal case.

“I hereby call on you to fully pardon Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been a formidable and decisive War Time Prime Minister,” Trump wrote.

Netanyahu is currently facing charges of fraud, bribery, and breach of trust in three separate cases that began during Trump’s first term. He has pleaded not guilty and continues to claim his innocence while testifying in court.

In response to this intervention, Herzog declined to take a position, stating that a pardon request must follow official, established procedures.

“The president has made it clear on multiple occasions that anyone seeking a pardon must submit a formal request in accordance with the established procedures,” his statement clarified.

Press TV’s website

A former senior United Nations human rights official has denounced the UN Security Council’s adoption of a resolution backing a US plan for foreign forces in the besieged Gaza Strip, describing the vote as a "day of shame" for the world body. 

In a social media post on Tuesday, Craig Mokhiber, former director of the New York office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), described the vote on the US resolution as a "day of shame" for the world body and called it a “colonial outrage.”

The former rights official further accused governments worldwide of being “on their knees before the US empire and its violent Israeli client.”

The US-drafted resolution was adopted on Monday with 13 votes in favor, with two abstentions from Russia and China in the 15-member council.

The plan is based on US President Donald Trump's 20-point project for Gaza's future, including only a singular line that envisions the possibility of a future Palestinian state.

It outlines a Trump-chaired "Board of Peace" to oversee affairs in the besieged Palestinian territory as a transitional authority. It also authorizes an "international stabilization force" that would ensure "demilitarization" of Gaza. 

Mokhiber also criticized the "horrific" resolution as a violation of international law.

 “This proposal has been rejected by Palestinian civil society and factions, as well as by defenders of human rights and international law everywhere,” Mokhiber said. 

 “The struggle for Palestinian freedom will continue undeterred,” he emphasized.

The Hamas resistance movement and other Palestinian factions, including Islamic Jihad, have condemned the resolution for imposing an “international guardianship” over Palestinians.

“The resolution imposes an international guardianship mechanism on the Gaza Strip, which our people and their factions reject,” Hamas said.

“It also seeks to achieve the occupation’s objectives, which it failed to accomplish through its brutal genocide,” he stated. 

The Palestinian group criticized the resolution for “detaching the Gaza Strip from the rest of Palestinian territory” in an attempt to impose new realities against the will of the Palestinian people.

The Islamic Jihad Movement also affirmed its rejection of the US resolution, stating that it violates the Palestinian people’s “right to self-determination.”

It further censured the use of humanitarian aid as a tool of pressure and noted that the resolution fails to hold Israel accountable for the blockade of Gaza.

Critics and independent observers argue that the US draft seeks to use the UN’s authority to normalize Israel’s genocide and impose another foreign regime on Palestinians.

The plan is also criticized for operating outside recognized international legal frameworks, establishing a parallel order based on security control and external authority.

The diplomats said that the Americans could decide to go forward unilaterally with a force from willing countries that would not have the UN backing.

Hamas and Israel agreed last month to the US-brokered Gaza ceasefire, aimed at ending the latter’s two-year-long genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged territory.

The truce took effect on October 10, but Israel has continued to violate it by carrying out airstrikes, incursions, shootings, and arrests.

Press TV’s website

The United Nations Security Council has adopted a resolution drafted by the United States to establish an International Stabilization Force (ISF) in the Gaza Strip.

The resolution, passed on Monday, endorses US President Donald Trump's Gaza plan and authorizes the creation of a peacekeeping coalition that would include Muslim-majority countries such as Egypt, Indonesia, and Azerbaijan.

In response, the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas rejected the resolution, arguing that it imposes international guardianship, does not address Palestinian rights, and aims to disarm the resistance movements.

Hamas said the resolution does not meet the political and humanitarian demands and rights of the Palestinian people.

The movement stressed that any international force must be deployed only at Gaza’s borders to monitor the ceasefire under UN supervision.

"Assigning the international force with tasks and roles inside the Gaza Strip, including disarming the resistance, strips it of its neutrality, and turns it into a party to the conflict in favor of the occupation," the group added.

Russia, which had circulated a rival resolution, abstained along with China on the 13-0 vote.

US Ambassador Mike Waltz said the force will be “a strong coalition of peacekeepers, many from Muslim-majority nations like Indonesia [and] Azerbaijan.”

The force will “deploy under a unified command” and begin its activities “while Israel phases out its presence,” Waltz added.

The United Kingdom said it voted for the resolution to advance the US peace plan for Palestinians and Israelis and stressed the urgent need to deploy the International Stabilization Force.

The international force will be deployed under a unified command to secure Gaza, oversee its demilitarization, and take in aid through safe corridors.

According to the resolution, this process will unfold as Israel phases out its Gaza presence, and a vetted police force assumes new responsibilities.

A transitional administration will also be formed, coordinating reconstruction efforts through a trust fund backed by the World Bank.

It must also operate exclusively in coordination with official Palestinian institutions, with no role for Israel in it.

Washington formally circulated the draft resolution to the 15 Security Council members last week. The text would authorize a two-year mandate for a transitional governance body and an international stabilization force.

Russia, China, and some Arab states oppose the proposal, citing concerns about a yet-to-be-established board temporarily governing the strip and the absence of any transitional role for the Palestinian Authority.

According to four UN diplomats briefed on the matter, China and Russia — two veto-wielding members — have called for the “Board of Peace” under US President Donald Trump’s Gaza ceasefire plan to be removed from the resolution entirely.

However, the US maintains the language around the board that the US has proposed as a transitional administration for Gaza in the latest draft released late Wednesday.

The Russian draft requests that the UN Secretary-General identify options for an international stabilization force for Gaza, and does not mention the "Board of Peace".

Among the sticking points regarding the US text are the pathway to an independent Palestinian state and the timeline for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, according to the diplomats.

Still, the US mission to the UN urged the Security Council to move ahead with Washington's resolution.

"Attempts to sow discord now – when agreement on this resolution is under active negotiation – has grave, tangible, and entirely avoidable consequences for Palestinians in Gaza," a US mission spokesperson alleged.

The diplomats said that the Americans could decide to go forward unilaterally with a force from willing countries that would not have UN backing.

Hamas and Israel agreed last month to the US-brokered Gaza ceasefire, aimed at ending the latter’s two-year-long genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged territory.

The truce took effect on October 10, but Israel has continued to violate it by carrying out airstrikes, incursions, shootings, and arrests.

The deal marks the first phase of Trump’s 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan, with further stages to be negotiated at a later date.

Press TV’s website

As with Hajj, Umrah also falls into two types: obligatory and recommended. Umrah would become incumbent only once in the lifetime of one who has istitaah. As with Hajj, its obligation is immediate. In its obligation, there is no requirement for having istitaah for Hajj. If one were mustati for Umrah, it would become incumbent on him to perform, even if one is not mustati for Hajj. The opposite also holds true: If a person has istitaah for Hajj but is not mustati for Umrah, he should perform the Hajj.

But for those who are away from Makkah, such as the Iranians who shoulder the duty of Hajj at-Tamattu, the istitaah of Hajj and the istitaah of Umrah would be the same, as Hajj at-Tamattu is a combination of both. This is contrary to the case of people who are in Makkah or close to it. They shoulder the duty of Hajj and Umrah Mufradah, for one of which they should have istitaah.

Getting into the state of ihram is compulsory for anyone who wants to enter Makkah to get to the state of Umrah or Hajj. If he wants to enter Makkah sometime other than the Hajj season, he should perform Umrah Mufradah. This does not apply to one for whom only a month has passed after ihram. In such a case, ihram is not necessary.

Going on repeated Umrah (more than once), like going on Hajj repeatedly, is mustahabb. Spacing is not needed between two Umrah, but based on precaution, one can perform only one Umrah for himself every month. Each person can however, perform an Umrah on behalf of others.

Conditions of the naib:

a. Maturity

b. Sanity

c. Faith

d. Confidence in performing the rites

e. Knowledge of Hajj rites and rituals

f. Exemption from the obligatory Hajj that particular year

g. Having no excuses to abstain from certain Hajj rites

Conditions of one for whom a naib is hired:

For the obligatory Hajj, the person for whom a naib is hired should be a deceased one, and in case he is alive. Hajj should be incumbent on him, while he cannot personally go on Hajj due to an incurable disease or old age. In the Hajj Istihbabi, this is not a condition, and the person who hires a naib does not have to be mature and sane. There is no need for the naib and one who hires him to have familiarity. One who has not so far gone on Hajj and is mustati can become a naib for another person.

Hiring a person who has little time for Hajj at-Tamattu and who is compelled to perform the Hajj al-Ifrad is not correct for a person on whom Hajj at-Tamattu is incumbent. But if the naib was hired with ample time and then the time ran out, he should engage in udul. This would suffice for Hajj at-Tamattu. The naib should be paid in return.

One on Whom Hajj had become obligatory but had not gone on Hajj pilgrimage in the first year of istitaah due to ailment or inability to walk because of old age or of imminent distress and difficulty by going on Hajj should hire a naib in case there is no hope of his recovery. Based on ihtiyat wajib, he should immediately hire a naib. If Hajj does not become incumbent on him, he will definitely face no obligation in this regard.

When the naib performs the Hajj, the one who hired him does not need to personally go on Hajj later even if the excuse he had no longer exists. But if this excuse is removed before the completion of Hajj, the pilgrimage on behalf will not suffice.

One on whom Hajj is incumbent, whether through having istitaah or being duty-bound, should not engage in niyabah for another person.

If the hired person dies after ihram and entrance into the Haram, (Sacred Mosque of the Kabah) this would suffice for the Hajj of the one whom he represented. But if he dies after ihram and before entrance into the Haram, it would not suffice based on ihtiyat wajib. In this case there is no difference whether the Hajj was supererogatory, by hire (on behalf), the Hajj in Islam or the obligatory Hajj, the same decree that applies to one who goes on Hajj in person would apply here.

If a naib is hired to carry out the religious duty of one who hires him - as is the case for hiring the naib for Hajj - and if he dies after ihram and entrance into the Haram, he deserves the entire wage (of naib).

One who has gone to Makkah as a naib without having personally performed the obligatory Hajj should follow the ihtiyat mustahabb and, after niyabah, perform Umrah Mufradah for himself. This ihtiyat is not binding. Nevertheless, it is highly recommended.

One who cannot perform some Hajj rites due to valid reasons cannot be hired as a naib for Hajj. If such a person who has excuses not to perform some rites, gratuitously and voluntarily goes on Hajj on behalf of another person, this would not suffice.

Secondary Issues Related To Niyabah

The caravan attendants who are compelled to leave Mashar at midnight to perform the required tasks in Mina or who have to accompany the weak pilgrims to Mina, would be among those having excuses for not being able to have ikhtiyari wuquf in Mashar. Therefore, their niyabah will be invalid. But, if they have been hired as a naib before employment (as a caravan attendant), they have to perform the Hajj and observe ikhtiyari wuquf.

For a living person who can hire a naib, it would suffice to employ the naib at the miqat.

One who performed the Hajj for the first time, say as a caravan attendant, could go on Hajj as a naib for his deceased father or mother, unless he was not mustati in the first year and has become mustati in the next year.

Ihram would be incorrect for one who, as a naib, becomes a muhrim at the Masjid ash-Shajarah and goes to Makkah where he realises he was personally mustati. He should return and become a muhrim for his own Umrah Tamattu and perform his own religious duties.

The condition of faith and belief of the naib, being a prerequisite for niyabah in Hajj, also applies to other rites in which niyabah is permissible, such as ramy and tawaf.

It is incumbent on the naib to perform the rites in accordance with the decrees of his own Marja Taqlid.

A naib who, at the time of accepting niyabah, was fully capable of representing another person at the Hajj but who has an excuse at the time of becoming a muhrim or even before, could continue his niyabah if his excuse does not make him violate some Hajj rites. But if his excuse makes him violate some Hajj rites, the contract for his niyabah could be declared null and void. Based on the ahwat, the naib and one who has hired him should make a compromise on the former's wages, and the duty of the Umrah and Hajj would be vested with the latter.

Gratuitous or wage earning niyabah is not acceptable from those hired to render services and unable to have ikhtiyari wuquf in Mashar, as well as all other people who have excuses and who have performed such incomplete forms of Hajj. Their niyabah would not be acceptable as the Hajj of the persons who have hired them, and they do not deserve wages.

One who cannot perform the ikhtiyari rites of the Hajj is exempt and cannot become a naib.

The niyabah of a person who lacks the ability to correct his qiraah is null and void. If he has the ability, the niyabah of such a person is valid, provided he corrects his qiraah.

Question 1: Suppose a person who registers his name, receipt of payment, and specifies in his will that after his demise his son should go on Hajj and perform it on behalf of him, passes away. Upon the father's death, the son obtains financial istitaah but he can only go on Hajj using his father's receipt of payment. Now by using this receipt and arriving at miqat should he perform the Hajj on behalf of his father? Or would he obtain istitaah and have to perform Hajj for himself.

Answer: The son can go on Hajj using the receipt based on his father's will in case the will for what is additional to the Hajj Miqati does not exceed one third and the heirs have allowed it. He should perform the Hajj on behalf of his father.

Question 2: In the past two cases, if the son shoulders the duty of performing Hajj on behalf of his father but performs his own Hajj, would it be considered his obligatory Hajj of Islam or not?

Answer: No.

Question 3: A person's father who was mustati passes away. The son takes his father's receipt and goes on Hajj with the intention of representing his father. He reaches miqat where he himself is mustati. What should he do? I should explain that there is no will. Nor has he been asked to engage in niyabah. For instance, he was the sole heir and Hajj would not be possible for him unless in this way.

Answer: In this case, he should perform his own Hajj and hire a naib for his father.

Question 4: Being responsible for the Hajj caravan, I had to take care of the sick and disabled people in my group and, therefore, performed idhtirari wuquf. Please explain my religious duty.

Answer: If you accompanied disabled and sick persons who had excuses not to engage in ikhtiyari wuquf, here is no problem for you. But if served as a naib for someone else, your niyabah would not be acceptable.

Question 5: A person served as naib for a deceased person without having any excuses not to perform some Hajj rites at the time of being hired as naib. But several years after performing the Hajj, he realised that in the Mashar al-Haram he had engaged in idhtirari wuquf with women and sick persons for whom he was guide and went to Mina. He was unaware of the fact that the naib should engage in inkhtiyari wuquf. What duty does he shoulder?

Answer: This should not have been done on a Hajj in which he was hired as naib and he does not deserve any wages. In terms of the wages, he should refer to the person who hired him. Or in case his contract for niyabah has not expired, he should once again go on Hajj as a naib and correctly perform the rites.

Question 6: My late father had stated that his eldest son should go to Makkah on his behalf. I am the eldest son and have become mustati with the inheritance. So far, I have not been able to convert my share of the inheritance into cash. Under such conditions, can I perform the Hajj on my father's behalf or not?

Answer: Supposing that you have financial istitaah through converting your share of the inheritance into cash, you should primarily perform your own-obligatory Hajj and later on perform it on behalf of your father or hire a naib for him.

Question 7: A lady for whom the Hajj was obligatory said in her last will that the executor of her will should go on Hajj on her behalf using money from what she left behind. Now the executor of her will has physical, financial, and other types of istitaah, but has not registered name for Hajj based on an excuse and lacks istitaah for travelling. Could the executor of the will engage in Hajj Niyabi?

Answer: If the executor of the will did not previously have istitaah, if the route is not open to him now, and if he is not mustati, he can be hired for Hajj Niyabi. But if he can reach the miqat without being hired, he should not perform Hajj Niyabi and should perform his own Hajj.

Question 8: While hiring someone for Hajj, if the person hiring the naib is unaware that the latter has excuses and hires him, would the niyabah wages be halal for the naib? Would his Hajj Niyabi be correct and be considered the obligatory Hajj of Islam or other type of Hajj for the one who has hired him?

Answer: In case he had an excuse and was hired, he does not deserve wages and it would not suffice for the Hajj Niyabi.

A woman, who lacked financial means during her husband's lifetime, acquires the financial means for Hajj after his death through his inheritance, but since she has an illness that prevents her from going on Hajj she will not be called a mustati and Hajj is not obligatory for her. Likewise, if, after becoming a widow, she does not have a job, farming or industrial occupation with which to earn a living upon return from Hajj, she will not become mustati, even if what she has received as inheritance is enough for her to go on Hajj and return.

A woman whose marriage portion is equal to or more than the Hajj expenses is a mustati for Hajj, provided she can obtain her marriage portion without causing trouble and difficulty (for her husband).

A woman whose marriage portion is sufficient for Hajj and is owed the same by her husband, since he cannot afford to pay it does not have the right to demand the marriage portion and is not mustati.

If a person has a very expensive house and can go on Hajj with the difference earned through selling it and buying a cheaper one, should not sell the house if it is not higher than his status and position. In this case he is not a mustati. If the house is more than his social standing, he is a mustati, provided all other conditions are met.

Those who can meet the expenses of the Hajj journey through business or other means and who upon return can meet a part of their expenses through earnings such as preaching and the remaining part from allowances through legal sources (theological schools) are mustati, even if they need the allowance to meet their expenses upon return from Hajj.

If one sells a piece of land or something else to buy a house, he will not become mustati in case he needs the money to buy a house, even if the money is sufficient to cover the Hajj expenses.

When the due time for Hajj arrives, the mustati cannot dispense with his status of istitaah, and before this time, based on ihtiyat wajib he should not dispense with the status istitaah.

If a person who was hired to go on Hajj on behalf of another person who was not a mustati at the time of concluding the contract but who before the Hajj became a mustati through means other than the sum of the contract, should cancel the contract and perform his own obligation of the Hajj in Islam.

Caravan attendants who arrive in Jeddah would become mustati if, while serving the Hajj pilgrims, they are able to perform all Hajj rites and rituals and meet all other conditions of istitaah, for instance, having actual or potential means of earning a living and being competent for a job or industrial and other ability with which they could earn a proper living upon return. These persons should perform the Hajj in Islam that fulfils their obligation of Hajj. If the caravan attendants do not meet the required conditions, they’re not mustati and their Hajj will be istihbabi, but they should perform the obligatory Hajj, if they later become mustati.

It is incumbent on the physicians and other people who come to miqat on duty and who meet all conditions of istitaah in miqat to perform the Islamic obligation of Hajj, even though it is necessary for them to carry out their duties as well.

One who has financial capability and meets other conditions of istitaah should go on Hajj. Performing other good deeds such as visiting the holy sites or building mosques will not substitute the obligation of going on Hajj.

If, during the obligatory Hajj, the mustati were to make the intention of istihbab due to negligence or on the assumption of not having attained istitaah, or even consciously and willfully with the aim of practice for performing the obligatory Hajj better the following year, there is a degree of doubt for the fulfilment of Hajj unless the intention for the Hajj was according to what has been decreed by the Divine Legislator. On this basis, as a matter of ihtiyat, he should go on Hajj the next year.

If the mustati passes away after putting on the ihram and entering the Sacred Mosque, the
Hajj obligation will be removed from him.

If the deceased person was mustati in his lifetime and deliberately delayed the Hajj pilgrimage, Hajj remains due on him and a Hajj Miqati should be performed for him from what he has left.

For one who meets all the conditions of a mustati for Hajj but has not performed it, the obligation of Hajj remains, even if due to old age or an incurable disease it is not possible for that person to go on Hajj in the latter case the person should send a representative to perform Hajj on his behalf.

A wife does not require the permission of her husband to go on obligatory Hajj, and she should perform her obligatory Hajj even if her husband does not approve of her travelling for Hajj.

Family, in case of financial istitaah for which nafaqah is a requisite, refers to a person's formal family, though it may not be religiously qualified for his maintenance allowance.

Question 1: Suppose a person becomes ill in Madinah (say if he undergoes an apoplexy) and is hospitalised for two weeks by the doctors. If after convalescence, it is difficult to take him to Makkah to perform the Hajj rites, what is his duty?

Answer: If it is the first year of istitaah and the person lacks the strength, even for an emergency case, to carry out the Hajj rites, the status of istitaah will become null and void, and the Hajj will not be obligatory. If, however, it is not the first year of istitaah and the Hajj is already incumbent on him and the person is despaired of regaining health, then a substitute should carry out the rites of Umrah and Tamattu.

Question 2: At present, those who want to perform the Hajj pilgrimage should register their names in advance and make the necessary arrangements. If the turn of a person takes several years to come, and before the coming of the turn that person finds other means of going on Hajj and borrows money and goes to Makkah, will such a pilgrimage be considered the obligatory Hajj of Islam?

Answer: If Hajj has not already become incumbent and the person cannot presently go on Hajj without borrowing money, Hajj is not obligatory for him, and such a pilgrimage cannot be considered the obligatory Hajj of Islam.

Question 3: I went on Hajj by borrowing money and receiving a month's salary in advance. Since the person who lent the money fully approved of my going on Hajj and did not need his money, would my Hajj be regarded obligatory or not?

Answer: If your financial istitaah met the required conditions, your Hajj will be correct and deemed obligatory, provided that you can easily repay your debt later on. But if you obtained financial istitaah by borrowing money, you have not become mustati, and your Hajj will not be considered the obligatory Hajj of Islam.

Question 4: Based on lots drawn by the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organisation, Allah (SwT) willing, I will be able to go on Hajj in the coming years based on the following conditions:

(a) The entire expenses of the Hajj performed by my spouse and me have been met by khums money.

(b) I am a schoolteacher and lead an ordinary life with continence.

(c) I do not have a house or an automobile of my own. I am a tenant in every city where I work.

(d) I have ordinary housing appliances. In view of these conditions and doubts raised by others about Hajj being obligatory for my spouse, and me would our Hajj meet conditions necessary for obligation?

Answer: As per the conditions cited, if your spouse has enough money to go on Hajj and return, she would be mustati. You would have istitaah only when you have household appliances for yourself and your family in accordance with your social position, and when upon return you could make a living for yourself and your family through what you earn.

Question 5: If a person was mustati but neglected to go on Hajj until he lost his turn, now that names are no longer being registered, would it be permissible for him to perform Hajj by way of connections and recommendations inside or outside Iran and through expending huge amounts? This is because otherwise, his duty of fulfilling the obligation would be delayed for years and he tears that, Allah (SwT) forbid, he would be considered as one who has forsaken Hajj.

Answer: He should go on Hajj in any way possible if it does not violate the regulations of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and in a way that he would not face distress and difficulty.

Question 6: Supposing Hajj has not already become incumbent on a person but while registering names for the Hajj, he became mustati. Later on, he, however, faced financial problems and needed the money he had deposited with the bank (for registering his name). Could he withdraw the money or not? Would it make any difference if his turn comes in the first year or in the next years?

Answer: Based on this supposition, he is not mustati and can withdraw his money. It would make no difference.

Question 7: A person, who had to perform the obligatory Hajj departed for Hajj from Pakistan, fell ill in Madinah but continued his journey to Makkah in that condition, and passed away in a hospital in Makkah before performing the Hajj. At the time of his death, his entire property consisted of some money and a piece of land in Pakistan. Given the fact that his money is not enough for Hajj on his behalf, should his heirs sell the piece of land and hire someone to fulfill his Hajj, or would the obligation of Hajj no longer be due upon his death?

Answer: If he arrived in Makkah with the ihram for Umrah Tamattu and passed away before performing Umrah or after completing its rites, whatever he performed will be accepted and the obligation of Hajj would be removed from him. But if he entered Makkah without ihram for Umrah and passed away there, and in case Hajj had remained incumbent on him, a substitute on his behalf should be hired out of what he has left behind. A Hajj Miqati would suffice in such a case. But if Hajj had not remained incumbent on him, he would not be considered a mustati, and there is no need to hire a person to perform Hajj on his behalf.

Question 8: If a person becomes mustati in miqat and performs the obligatory Hajj of Islam, would it suffice or not? Would kifayah be a precondition or not?

Answer: If he becomes mustati, it is sufficient, but he should have kifayah.

Question 9: In cases where an organisation or body sends a person on Hajj without asking him to do anything in return, would it be regarded as Hajj Badhli and should it be necessarily accepted?

Answer: Provided that it is legitimate, it would be Hajj Badhli if there were no commitment to do anything in return for it.

Question 10: A person has four sons, all of whom are married, and can meet his annual expenses and has no debts, but he and his sons make their living jointly from the same source of income. Now, since the Hajj expenses of only two people can be met, is Hajj obligatory in this case? If so, is it only incumbent on the father or on the sons as well? If Hajj is incumbent on the sons, which one has the priority to perform it?

Answer: One who has enough property to meet his Hajj expenses, go to Makkah, and upon return afford a living, which befits him, is mustati and should perform the Hajj.

Question 11: Having financial istitaah and being 72 years old, I have been prevented from going on Hajj pilgrimage by the Health ministry in accordance with domestic laws, as I am addicted to opium. What is to be done from the viewpoint of Sharia?

Answer: If you were previously mustati but did not go on Hajj pilgrimage, you shoulder the duty of going on Hajj. If previously you did not have istitaah, you are not mustati under the present conditions, unless you can abandon opium addiction, obtain the required permit, and go to Makkah.

Question 12: If a person has capital or equipment and can sell part of it to lead a comfortable life and go on Hajj with the difference, would he be mustati?

Answer: If all the other conditions are met, he will be deemed mustati.

Question 13: A person has an orchard that has not brought him any income for several years but which, if sold, would cover his Hajj expenses. He is sure that by the time the orchard bears fruit, he would be old and retired and would be dependent on it for his living. Would such a person be mustati?

Answer: If he has no source of income other than the orchard, he will not be considered mustati.

Question 14: In the case of debt, how much money should a person possess to have istitaah? In case he has the needed money but suffers from cardiac ailment and has been notified by the physicians at the Hajj and Pilgrimage Organisation that his pilgrimage might be dangerous, should he substitute someone else?

Answer: If before attaining istitaah he fell ill and consequently lacked the strength to go to Makkah, he will not become mustati and there is no need to substitute someone else for Hajj. In addition, financial istitaah would develop only when he has enough money for a round trip and can easily repay his debt.