Aina hii inajumuisha mambo mawili: kubainisha faradhi na sharti zake, na mtu ambaye faradhi hiyo ni wajibu kwake, na wakati wake.

This category comprises two things: the identification of the obligations and the conditions, and the person for whom it is obligatory and when.

Hakuna mjadala kuhusu wajibu wake, kwa sababu ya maneno ya Mwenye Enzi, "Na kuhiji Nyumba ni wajibu kwa Mwenyezi Mungu kwa watu, kwa yule anayeweza kupata njia ya kuifikia."236 Masharti ya wajibu ni ya aina mbili: masharti ya usahihi (uhalali) na masharti ya wajibu. Hakuna mjadala miongoni mwa wanazuoni wa fiqhi kwamba masharti ya usahihi ni pamoja na kuwa Muislamu, kwa sababu hija ya mtu asiye Muislamu si sahihi. Walitofautiana kuhusu usahihi wake pale inapofanywa na mtoto mdogo (sabt). Malik na al-Shafi'i walishikilia kwamba inaruhusiwa (na ni sahihi), ilhali Abu Hanifa aliikataza.

There is no dispute about its obligation, because of the words of the Exalted, “And pilgrimage to the House is a duty unto Allah for mankind, for him who can find a way thither”.236 The conditions of the obligation are of two kinds: conditions of validity and the conditions of obligation. There is no dispute among the jurists that the conditions of validity include (professing the faith of) Islam, as pilgrimage by a person who is not a Muslim is not valid. They disagreed about its validity when performed by a minor (sabt). Malik and al-ShafiT maintained that it is permissible (and valid), while Abu HanTfa prohibited it.

Sababu ya kutofautiana huku inatokana na mgongano kati ya hadithi moja na kanuni za kisheria. Wale waliokiruhusu walitegemea hadithi maarufu ya Ibn ʿAbbas, iliyopokewa na al-Bukhari na Muslim, ambayo ina maneno: “Mwanamke mmoja alimwinua mtoto mdogo kumwelekea Mtume ﷺ, akasema: ‘Je, kuna hijja kwa huyu, Ee Mjumbe wa Allah?’ Akasema: ‘Ndiyo, nawe unapata thawabu.’” Wale waliokikataza walitegemea kanuni kwamba ibada haisihi ikifanywa na mtu asiye na utambuzi wa kutofautisha mema na mabaya.

The reason for the disagreement stems from the conflict of a tradition with the principles. Those who permitted it acted on the basis of the well known tradition of Ibn <Abbas, which is recorded by al-Bukhan and Muslim, and it contains the words, “A woman raised a young boy toward the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and said, ‘Is there hajj for him, O Messenger of Allah?’ He said, ‘Yes, and there is reward for you’”. Those who disallowed this relied on the principle that worship is not valid if performed by one lacking discretion.

Wanafunzi wa Malik pia walitofautiana kuhusu uhalali wa kutekeleza hukumu hiyo kwa niaba ya mtoto mchanga. Hakuna mzozo kuhusu uhalali wa kutekelezwa na mtu ambaye sala yake ni sahihi, jambo linalolingana na kauli ya Mtume ﷺ, "Kuanzia miaka saba hadi kumi".

Malik’s disciples also differed about the validity of its performance on behalf of an infant. There is no dispute about the validity of its performance by one whose performance of prayer is valid, which corresponds to what the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “From seven to ten”.

Masharti ya wajibu ni pamoja na kuwa Muislamu, kwa mujibu wa maoni kwamba makafiri wanaelekezwa kwa sheria za Kiislamu.237 Hakuna mzozo kuhusu sharti la uwezo (wa kimwili na wa kifedha) kwa hili, kwa sababu ya maneno ya Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu, "Kwa yule anayeweza kupata njia ya kufika huko."238 Ingawa kuna tofauti ya maoni kuhusu undani wake, uwezo kwa ujumla unachukuliwa kuwa wa aina mbili: wa moja kwa moja na wa kupitia mwakilishi. Katika uwezo wa moja kwa moja, hakuna tofauti kati ya wanazuoni wa sheria kwamba masharti yake ni uwezo wa mwili, uwezo wa kifedha, na usalama. Walitofautiana kuhusu undani wa uwezo wa mwili na wa kifedha. Al-Shafi'i, Abu Hanifa, na Ahmad, na hii ilikuwa pia maoni ya Ibn Abbas na ʿUmar ibn al-Khattab, walishikilia kwamba masharti ya haya ni chakula cha safari na upatikanaji wa usafiri. Malik alisema kwamba kwa mtu anayeweza kutembea kwa miguu, upatikanaji wa mnyama wa kupanda (njia ya usafiri) si sharti la wajibu, na hija ni wajibu kwake. Vilevile, ziada ya mali si sharti la uwezo, kwa mtazamo wake, ikiwa mtu anaweza kujipatia riziki njiani hata kama itamlazimu kuomba.

The conditions of obligation include being a Muslim, in accordance with the opinion that the disbelievers are addressed by the laws of Islam.237 There is no dispute about the stipulation of ability (both physical and financial) for this, because of the words of the Exalted, “For him who can find a way thither”.238 Though there is a disagreement over the details of this (ability) it is generally considered to be of two kinds: direct and by delegation. In direct ability there is no disagreement among the jurists that its conditions are bodily ability, financial ability, and security. They disagreed about the details of bodily and financial ability. Al-Shafi T, Abu Hamfa, and Ahmad, and this was c the view of Ibn Abbas c and ^mar ibn al-Khattab, held that the conditions for these are food provisions and the availability of transportation. Malik said that for the person who is able to walk the availability of a riding animal (a means of transportation) is not a condition of obligation and pilgrimage is obligatory for him. Likewise, surplus is not a condition for ability, in his view, if the person is able to earn a living on the way even if he has to beg.

Sababu ya kutofautiana huku inatokana na mgongano kati ya hadithi (ambayo imewekwa kufafanua maana ya uwezo) na maana ya jumla ya maneno yake. Hii ni kwa sababu imepokewa hadithi kutoka kwa Mtume (rehema na amani za Mungu ziwe juu yake ﷺ) kwamba "aliulizwa, 'Uwezo (wa kwenda Hija) ni upi?' Akasema, 'Chakula cha safari na mnyama wa kupanda.'" Abu Hanifa na al-Shafi'i walifasiri hili kuwa linamhusu kila mtu, ilhali Malik alifasiri kuwa linamhusu mtu asiyeweza kutembea na ambaye pia hana nguvu ya kujitafutia riziki njiani. Al-Shafi'i aliunda msimamo huu kwa sababu mbinu yake ni kwamba, ikiwa neno lisilofafanuliwa limo katika Qur'ani kisha Sunna ikatolewa kama ufafanuzi wa neno hilo lisilofafanuliwa, haiwezekani kuepuka ufafanuzi huo.

The reason for this disagreement arises from the conflict between the tradition (which is) laid down for the elaboration of ability and the general implication of its words. This is so as a tradition from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) is laid down that “he was asked, ‘What is the ability (to perform the pilgrimage)?’ He said, ‘Food provisions and a riding animal’”. Abu HanTfa and al-ShaficT interpreted this to apply to everybody, while Malik interpreted it to apply to a person who was not able to walk and also did not have the strength to eke out a living on the way. Al-Shafi<T formed this opinion as it is his method that if an unelaborated text occurs in the Qurian and then a sunna is laid as an elaboration of this unelaborated word it is not possible to avert the elaboration.

Kuhusu wajibu wake kwa mtu mwenye uwezo kupitia kumwakilisha mwingine (kuhiji kwa niaba), Malik na Abu Hanifa wanashikilia kwamba kumwakilisha mwingine si wajibu, hata pale uwezo huo upo, ikiwa kutoweza kuhiji mwenyewe kwa mwili kumepatikana. Al-Shafi'i anashikilia kwamba ni wajibu. Hivyo, kwa mtu mwenye mali ya kutosha ambayo kwayo mtu mwingine anaweza kuhiji, na yeye mwenyewe hawezi kuhiji kimwili, basi lazima amhijishe mtu mwingine kwa niaba yake. Lakini ikipatikana mtu anayeweza kuhiji kwa niaba yake kwa mali yake mwenyewe na uwezo wake wa kimwili, kama ndugu au jamaa wa karibu, basi wajibu wake unaondoka. Hili ni suala ambalo wamelipa jina la ma'dub (mtu aliyezuiliwa na udhaifu), ambaye ni mtu asiyeweza kupandishwa juu ya mnyama wa kupanda. Kwa mtazamo wake, mtu akifa bila kuhiji, inawalazimu warithi wake kutoa kitu katika mali yake ambacho kwacho mtu fulani anaweza kuhiji kwa niaba yake.

With respect to its obligation through ability by delegation, Malik and Abu Hanifa maintain that delegation is not binding, even when that ability is there, if the inability for direct performance exists. Al-ShafiT maintains that it is binding, thus, for a person who possesses sufficient wealth with which someone other than he can perform the pilgrimage, if he himself cannot perform it physically, then that person must perform it on his behalf. But if someone is found who can perform it on his behalf with his own wealth and physical ability, like a brother or next of kin, his liability is dropped. This is an issue that they termed ma^dub (incapacitated person), who is a person who cannot be seated on the riding animal. In his view, if a person dies without performing the pilgrimage, it is binding upon his heirs to set something from his estate with which some person can perform the pilgrimage on his behalf.

Sababu ya kutofautiana katika jambo hili inatokana na mgongano kati ya qiyas (kulinganisha kwa mfano) na hadithi moja. Qiyas inaelekeza kwamba ibada haziwezi kufanywa na mtu mmoja kwa niaba ya mwingine kwa njia ya uwakilishi; kwa hiyo hakuna anayeswali kwa ajili ya mwingine, wala hatoi zakat mahali pa mwingine. Hadithi inayopingana na msimamo huu ni hadithi maarufu ya Ibn ‘Abbas aliyoipokea mabwana wawili wa hadithi (al-Bukhari na Muslim), inayosema kwamba mwanamke kutoka kabila la Khath‘am alimwambia Mtume wa Allah ﷺ: “Ee Mtume wa Allah, Hijja ni wajibu aliowawekea waja wake, lakini mimi namwona baba yangu ni mzee asiyeweza kukaa imara juu ya mnyama wa kupanda. Je, nifanye Hijja kwa ajili yake?” Akasema: “Ndiyo.” Hilo lilikuwa kwa mtu aliye hai. Kwa mtu aliyekufa, kuna hadithi iliyopokelewa na al-Bukhari, pia kutoka kwa Ibn ‘Abbas, aliyesema: “Mwanamke kutoka Juhayna alimjia Mtume ﷺ akasema: ‘Ee Mtume wa Allah, mama yangu aliweka nadhiri ya kufanya Hijja, lakini amekufa; je, nifanye Hijja kwa ajili yake?’ Akasema: ‘Fanya Hijja kwa ajili yake. Je, unadhani kama angekuwa na deni usingemlipia? Deni la Allah lina haki ya kulipwa kwanza.’” Hakuna tofauti kati ya wanazuoni wa Kiislamu kwamba Hijja inayofanywa kwa niaba ya mwingine ni ya hiari (sunna). Tofauti yao iko katika kama inaweza kufanywa kama wajibu.

The reason for disagreement over this arises from the conflict of analogy with a tradition. Analogy dictates that acts of worship cannot be performed by one person on behalf of another by delegation, thus, no one prays on behalf of another nor does one pay zakat in another’s place. The tradition opposing this is the well-known tradition of Ibn ‘Abbas recorded by the two shaykhs (al- BukharT and Muslim), and it reads “that a woman from Khath^m said to the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), CO Messenger of Allah, hajj is an obligation prescribed for His servants, but I find my father an old man who cannot sit firmly on a riding animal. Should I then perform the hajj for him?’ He said, ‘Yes’”. This was the case of a living person. In the case of a dead person there is a tradition that was recorded by al-BukharT, which is also from Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, “A woman from Juhayna came up to the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, my mother made a vow to perform hajj. but she died, so should I perform it on her behalf?’ He said, ‘Perform the pilgrimage for her. Do you think that if she had a debt would you not pay it off? The debt of Allah has a prior claim for satisfaction’”. There is no dispute among the Muslim jurists that it is voluntary when performed for another, the disagreement is about its performance as an obligation.

Katika mada hii, wanazuoni walitofautiana kuhusu mtu anayefanya hija kwa niaba ya mwingine, aliye hai au aliyekufa, kama ni sharti kwake kuwa yeye mwenyewe alishafanya hija. Baadhi ya wanazuoni wa fiqhi walishikilia kwamba hilo si sharti, lakini ikiwa amekwisha kutekeleza wajibu huo kwa ajili yake mwenyewe, basi hilo ni bora zaidi. Hii ndiyo ilikuwa maoni ya Malik kwa mtu aliyefanya hija kwa niaba ya aliyekufa, kwa kuwa kwa mtazamo wake hija kwa niaba ya aliye hai si sahihi. Wanazuoni wengine walishikilia kwamba ni sharti kwake kuwa ametekeleza wajibu huo kwa ajili yake mwenyewe. Hii ndiyo ilikuwa maoni ya al-Shafi‘i na wengine wengi pamoja naye. Ikiwa mtu ambaye hajafanya hija kwa ajili yake mwenyewe atafanya hija kwa niaba ya mwingine, hija hiyo itageuzwa kuwa ya kwake mwenyewe. Hoja ya wanazuoni hawa ni hadithi ya Ibn ‘Abbas, kwamba Mtume (rehema na baraka za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake) alimsikia mtu akisema talbiya kwa niaba ya mtu aliyeitwa Shubrama. Akasema: "Na huyu Shubrama ni nani?" Yule mtu akajibu kwamba ni ndugu yake, au (alisema) jamaa yake wa karibu. Akasema: "Je, umeshafanya hija kwa ajili yako mwenyewe?" Mtu huyo akasema: "Hapana." Akasema: "Fanya hija kwa ajili yako mwenyewe kwanza, kisha kwa ajili ya Shubrama." Kundi la kwanza la wanazuoni walipinga hadithi hii kwa kuwa ilisimuliwa kama mawquf hadi kwa Ibn ‘Abbas (yaani, isnadi haikuwa na jina la mwanafunzi wa Sahaba).

In this topic, they disagreed about the person who performs hajj for someone else, who may be living or dead, as to whether it is a condition for him that he should have performed hajj himself. Some of the jurists held that this is not a condition, but if he has performed the obligation for himself that would be better. This was Malik’s opinion for the person who performed hajj on behalf of a dead person, for in his view hajj for a person who is living is not valid. The other jurists held that it is a condition that he should have performed the obligation for himself. This was the opinion of al-Shafi‘T and others besides him, and if a person, who had not performed hajj for himself, did perform hajj for another it would be converted to a personal performance. The reliance of these jurists is upon the tradition of Ibn ‘Abbas “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) heard a manJ pronouncing the talbiya on behalf of someone called Shubrama. He said, ‘And who is this Shubrama?’ The man replied that he was his brother or (he said) his close relative. He said, ‘Have you performed hajj for yourself?’ The man said, ‘No’. He said, ‘Perform hajj for yourself first and then for Shubrama’”. The first group of jurists objected to this tradition as it was narrated as mawquf up to Ibn cAbbas (i.e. the isnad (chain) did not contain1 the name of the Companion’s disciple).

Pia walitofautiana, katika mada hii, kuhusu mtu anayejitolea kufanya hijja kwa niaba ya mtu mwingine kwa malipo. Malik na al-Shafi'i hawakuridhia jambo hili, lakini walisema kwamba likitokea basi linaruhusiwa. Abu Hanifa hakuliruhusu. Alitegemea hoja kwamba lengo ni kutafuta ukaribu kwa Allah (SWT), na malipo hayaruhusiwi kwa ajili hiyo. Hoja ya kundi la kwanza ni makubaliano juu ya kuruhusiwa kupata malipo kwa kuandika mushafu na kwa ujenzi wa misikiti, ambayo nayo pia ni njia ya kutafuta ukaribu kwa Allah (SWT). Kuajiriwa katika hijja, kwa mujibu wa Malik, kuna aina mbili. Ya kwanza ni ile ambayo wanafunzi wake waliiita al-balagh, ambapo mtu hujitolea kwa malipo yatakayotosha kugharamia chakula kinachohitajika na mnyama wa kupanda. Ikiwa malipo hayo yatapungua kuliko al-balagh, atalipwa kiasi kitakachotosha, na ikibaki ziada atalazimika kuirudisha. Aina ya pili ni kuajiriwa kwa desturi, ambapo upungufu wowote hulazimika kuutimiza yeye mwenyewe, na ikiwa kuna ziada, ni yake. Wengi wanashikilia kwamba hijja haimlazimu mtumwa hadi aachiliwe huru, lakini baadhi ya wafuasi wa madhehebu ya Dhahiri wanamfanya awajibike nayo.

They also differed, in this topic, about a person who offers himself for a wage to perform hajj on behalf of someone else. Malik and <al-Shafic7 disapproved of this, but said that if it happens it is permissible. Abu HanTfa did not permit it. He relied on the argument that the purpose was to seek nearness to Allah and wages are not allowed for that. The argument of the first group was the consensus about the permissibility of earning wages for writing the mushaf and for the construction of mosques, which are also one way of seeking nearness to Allah. Hiring during hajj, in Malik’s view, is of two kinds. The first is what his disciples called the balagh, whereby a person offers his services for a wage that would be enough to provide the (required) provision and a riding animal. If that wage falls short of the balagh he is to be paid what would be enough, and if an excess is left over he is to return it. The second is the customary hiring whereby something falling short is to be made up by him and if there is an excess it belongs to him. The majority maintain that hajj is not binding upon a slave until he is manumitted, but some of the Zahirites make it obligatory for him.

Hii yote inahusu mtu ambaye ibada hii ni wajibu kwake, na mtu ambaye utekelezaji wake ni sahihi.

This is all about the person on whom this worship is obligatory and about the person whose performance is valid.

Kuhusu wakati ambapo amri hiyo inakuwa wajibu, wanazuoni walitofautiana kuhusu ikiwa amri inahitaji utekelezaji wa papo hapo au wa baadaye. Kauli zote mbili zinahusishwa na Malik na wanafunzi wake. Kauli dhahiri ya wanazuoni wa baadaye wa madhehebu yake ni kwamba utekelezaji ni wa baadaye, lakini wanafunzi wake kutoka Baghdad walisema ni wa papo hapo. Riwaya kutoka kwa Abu Hanifa na wanafunzi wake zinatofautiana, lakini kauli wanayoipendelea ni kwamba ni wa papo hapo. Al-Shafi'i alisema kwamba wajibu unaenea katika kipindi cha muda. Hoja ya wale wanaosema kwamba wajibu unaenea katika kipindi cha muda (si wa papo hapo) ni kwamba Hija ilifaradhishwa miaka kadhaa kabla Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake) hajafanya Hija. Lau ingehitaji utekelezaji wa papo hapo, Mtume (rehema na amani za Mwenyezi Mungu ziwe juu yake) asingechelewesha kufanya Hija yake. Na lau angefanya hivyo kwa sababu ya udhuru, angeifafanua. Hoja ya kundi lingine ni kwamba, ikiwa wajibu umefungwa kwa wakati fulani, kanuni ni kumhesabia dhambi mtu anayeuacha hadi wakati upite, kwa kulinganisha na wakati wa sala. Tofauti kati ya hili na amri ya sala, kwa mtazamo wa kundi la pili, ni kwamba wajibu wake haufanywi upya kila sasa, ilhali katika sala unafanywa upya kila wakati. Kwa ujumla, wale waliodai kwamba mwanzo wa wakati wa wajibu wa Hija, kwa mtu mwenye uwezo wa kuitekeleza, unafanana na mwanzo wa wakati wa sala walisema kwamba utekelezaji ni wa baadaye, huku wale waliodai kwamba unafanana na mwisho wa wakati wa sala walisema kwamba utekelezaji ni wa papo hapo. Sababu ya kuulinganisha na sehemu ya mwisho ya wakati wa sala ni kwamba unakomeshwa kwa kuingia wakati ambapo kitendo chake hakina uhalali, kama vile wakati wa sala unavyokomeshwa kwa kuingia wakati ambapo mwabudu hahesabiwi kuwa anaswali. Wanafiqh hawa pia wanatoa hoja kwa kuzingatia hatari inayohusishwa na kuahirisha hija hadi mwaka mwingine, kwa sababu kuna uwezekano mkubwa zaidi wa kifo kutokea katika kipindi kirefu zaidi. Wanashikilia kwamba hili ni tofauti na kesi ya kuchelewesha sala kutoka wakati wake wa mwanzo hadi wa mwisho, kwani uwezekano wa mtu kufa ndani ya muda huo mfupi ni mdogo sana kuliko ndani ya mwaka mmoja. Pengine wanaweza kuongeza kwamba kuchelewesha sala ndani ya muda wake uliowekwa hakumtenganishi mwabudu na fursa ya kutekeleza sala, lakini kuchelewesha hija katika kesi hii kunasababisha kumalizika kwa muda wake na kuanza kwa kipindi kirefu zaidi ambacho utekelezaji wa ibada hii si sahihi. Hili halifanani na kesi ya amri isiyo na masharti, kwa sababu katika amri isiyo na masharti, kwa mtazamo wa wale wanaoshikilia kwamba inaruhusu uhuru wa kutekeleza kwa kuchelewa, kuchelewesha utekelezaji hakusababishi kuwasili kwa wakati ambao ibada inayotakiwa si sahihi, kama inavyotokea katika kesi ya hija inapofika wakati wake na mtu anaiahirisha hadi siku zijazo. Basi, mgogoro juu ya suala hili hauhusiani, kama ilivyodhaniwa, na mjadala wao kuhusu kama amri isiyo na masharti inalazimu utekelezaji wa papo hapo au wa kuchelewa.

With respect to the time when it becomes obligatory, they disagreed whether the,command necessitates immediate or delayed compliance?239 Both opinions are attributed to Malik and his disciples. The apparent opinion of the later jurists of his school is that it is delayed, butrhis disciples from Baghdad said that it is immediate. Reports from Abu HanTfa and his disciples differ, but their preferred opinion is that it is immediate. Al-ShaficT said that it is spread out over a period of time. The reliance of those who say that it spreads over a span of time (is not immediate) is that hajj became obligatory years before the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) performed the hajj. If it required immediate compliance the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) would not have delayed the performance of his hajj. If he had done so because of an excuse he would have explained it. The argument of the other group is that if it is specific to a particular time, the principle would be to attribute sin to the person who relinquishes it till the time passes, the basis (for the analogy) being the time of prayer. The distinction between this and the command for prayer, in the view of the second group, is that its obligation is not renewed from moment to moment and in prayer it is renewed every moment. On the whole, those who held the initial time of obligation in hajj, as applicable to an individual who has the ability (for performance), to be similar to the initial time of prayer said that compliance is delayed, while those who held it to be similar to the last time of prayer said that compliance is immediate. The reason for holding it to be similar to the last portion of the time of prayer is that it is terminated with the advent of the time in which his act is not valid, just as the time of prayer is terminated with the advent of time in which the worshipper is not considered to be offering his prayer as W#. These jurists also argue on the basis of the risk that becomes associated with the postponement to another year because of the greater possibility of death occuring during a longer period. They maintain that this is different from the case of delay in prayer from its first time to its last, as the likelihood of the person’s death within that short time is far less than it is within a year. Perhaps they may add that delaying prayer within its fixed period does not separate the worshipper from the chance to perform the prayer as 'add*, but delay in this case of hajj leads to the expiry of its period and the start of a much longer period in which the performance of this worship is not valid. This is not similar to the case of the unqualified command, because in the unqualified command, in the view of those who maintain that it implies liberty of delayed compliance, a delay in performance does not lead to the advent of a time in which the required worship is not valid, as it does in the case of hajj when it is time for it and the subject postpones it to the future. The disagreement, then, on this issue does not belong, as has been assumed, to the category of their dispute whether an unqualified command necessitates immediate or delayed compliance.

Walitofautiana, ndani ya mada hii, kuhusu kama ni sharti la wajibu wa Hija kwa mwanamke kwamba awe na mume au dhu mahram (jamaa wa karibu ambaye ndoa naye ni haramu) aliye tayari kumsindikiza safarini kwenda Hija. Malik na al-Shaafi'i walisema kuwa hili ni sharti mbadala moja la wajibu. Sharti jingine mbadala ni kwa mwanamke kwenda Hija pamoja na mwenzi wa kike mwaminifu. Abu Hanifa, Ahmad, na kundi la wanazuoni wa sheria walisema kuwa kuwepo kwa mume au mahram aliye tayari ni sharti la wajibu.

They disagreed, within the topic, whether it is a condition for the obligation of hajj on a woman that she must have a husband or a dhu mahram (a relative of the prohibited degree for marriage) who is willing to accompany her on the journey for hajj. Malik and al-Shaf?T said that this is one alternative condition for the obligation. The other alternative is for a woman to go for hajj with a trustworthy female companion. Abu HanTfa, Ahmad, and a group of jurists said that the availability of a willing husband or a mahram is a condition for the obligation.

Sababu ya kutofautiana huku inatokana na mgongano kati ya amri ya kuhiji na kusafiri kwa ajili yake, na katazo la mwanamke kusafiri peke yake bila mume wake au mahram. Hii ni kwa sababu imethibitishwa kutoka kwa Nabii ﷺ kupitia Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, Abu Hurayra, Ibn 'Abbas, na 'Umar, kwamba alisema: "Si halali kwa mwanamke, anayemwamini Allah na Siku ya Mwisho, kusafiri bila dhu mahram." Wale waliopa kipaumbele ujumla wa amri ya hija walisema kwamba anaweza kusafiri kwa ajili ya hija hata asipoambatana na dhu mahram (bali pamoja na kundi la wanawake waaminifu). Wale waliokiwekea kikomo kile kiwango cha jumla kwa hadithi hii, au waliona kuwa ni ufafanuzi wa "uwezo", walisema kwamba hatakiwi kusafiri kwa ajili ya hija isipokuwa akiambatana na dhu mahram.

The reason for the disagreement arises from the conflict of the command for hajj and of taking up travel for it with the proscription about a woman’s travelling alone without her husband or a mahram. This is so as it is established from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) through Abu Sa Td al-Khudri, Abu Hurayra, Ibn <Abbas, and TJmar, that he said € “It is not permitted for a woman, who believes in Allah and the Last Day to travel without a dhu mahram”. Those who gave predominance to the generality of the command of hajj said that she may travel for hajj even when she is not accompanied by a dhu mahram (but with a trustworthy group of women). Those who restricted the general implication with this tradition, or held that it is an elaboration of “ability”, said that she is not to travel for hajjy unless she is accompanied by a dhu mahram.

Tumeshazungumza sasa kuhusu ibada hii inayoitwa hija, kuhusu msingi unaofanya iwe wajibu, na kwa nani na lini. Katika sehemu hii kinabaki kujadili ibada inayojulikana kama 'umra. Kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi walisema kuwa ni wajibu. Hii ndiyo ilikuwa maoni ya al-Shāfi'ī, Aḥmad, Abū Thawr, Abū 'Ubayd, al-Thawrī, al-Awzā'ī, na ilikuwa ni maoni ya Ibn 'Abbās na Ibn 'Umar miongoni mwa Maswahaba, pia ya kundi la Tābi'ūn. Mālik na kundi la wanazuoni walisema kuwa ni sunna. Abū Ḥanīfa alisema kuwa ni ya hiari, ambayo pia ilikuwa maoni ya Abū Thawr na Dāwūd. Wale walioshikilia kuwa ni wajibu walitoa hoja kwa kauli ya Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu: "Timizeni hija na 'umra kwa ajili ya Allah."241

We have now spoken about this rite, which is called hajj,, regarding the basis due to which it becomes obligatory, and for who and when. In this section there remains the discussion of the rite known as 'umra. A group of jurists said that it is obligatory. This was the opinion of al-ShaficT, Ahmad, Abu Thawr, Abu °Ubayd, al-Thawri, al-Awza T, and c it was the opinion of Ibn c Abbas and Ibn TJmar from among the Companions, and also of a group of the Tabi un. Malik and a group of jurists c said that it is a sunna. Abu HanTfa said that it is voluntary, which was also the opinion of Abu Thawr240 and Dawud. Those who maintained that it is obligatory argued on the basis of the words of the Exalted, “Perform the pilgrimage and the himra for Allah,”241

na pia kwa msingi wa Hadithi zilizopokewa. Mojawapo ni riwaya kutoka kwa Ibn 'Umar kutoka kwa baba yake, aliyesema: "Mwarabu wa jangwani, mwenye sura nzuri na amevaa nguo nyeupe, alimjia Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ na kusema: 'Uislamu ni nini, ee Mjumbe wa Allah?' Akajibu: 'Kwamba ushuhudie kuwa hakuna mungu isipokuwa Allah, kwamba Muhammad ni Mjumbe wake, kusimamisha sala, kutoa zaka, kufunga mwezi wa Ramadhani, kuhiji Nyumba na kufanya 'umra, na kujitakasa na najisi'." 'Abd al-Razzaq ametaja kuwa "Ma'mar alitupa habari kwa mamlaka ya Qatada, ambaye alikuwa akisimulia kwamba aya ‘Na Hija ya Nyumba ni wajibu kwa Allah kwa watu, kwa yule awezaye kupata njia ya kufika huko’ ilipoteremshwa, Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ alisema: 'Hizo mbili, hija na 'umra, yeyote atakayezifanya amekwisha tekeleza wajibu'." Imepokewa kutoka kwa Zayd ibn Thabit kutoka kwa Nabii ﷺ kwamba alisema: "Hija na 'umra ni wajibu wawili, na haitakudhuru kwa lipi utakaloanza nalo." Imepokewa kutoka kwa Ibn 'Abbas kwamba 'umra ni wajibu, na baadhi ya watu wamehusisha kauli hii kwa njia ya isnadi kwa Nabii ﷺ.

and also on the basis of the reported traditions. One of these is the report from Ibn TJmar from his father, who said, “A Bedouin, who had a fair countenance and was wearing white clothes came up to the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and said, ‘What is Islam, O Messenger of Allah?’ He replied, ‘That you testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is His messenger, and you establish prayer, pay the zakat, fast the month of Ramadan, perform the pilgrimage and the ^umra, and wash yourself free of impurities’”. cAbd al-Razzaq has mentioned that “Ma'mar informed us on the authority of Qatada, who used to relate that when the verse ‘And pilgrimage to the House is a duty unto Allah for mankind, for him who can find a way thither’,242 was revealed the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘The two, the hajj and the htmra, anyone who performs them has fulfilled the obligation’”. It is related from Zayd ibn Thabit from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “The hajj and the ^umra are two obligations, and there is no harm for you with whichever you commence”. It is related from Ibn cAbbas that himra is obligatory, and some have attribute this statement through an isnad to the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him).

Hoja ya kundi lingine la wanazuoni wa fiqhi, wanaoshikilia kuwa umrah si wajibu, imejengwa juu ya Hadith sahihi na maarufu zilizoeleza idadi ya nguzo za Uislamu, ambazo hazitaji umrah. Mfano ni Hadith ya Ibn Umar: “Uislamu umejengwa juu ya mambo matano,” ambamo alitaja hija peke yake. Pia kuna Hadith ya yule aliyemuuliza Mtume ﷺ Uislamu ni nini, na katika baadhi ya riwaya zake kuna maneno: “kwamba ufanye hija kwenda Nyumba.” Huenda wanazuoni hawa pia walisema kuwa amri yenye maana ya kukamilisha (kama ilivyotokea katika aya ya Qur'an 2:196 iliyonukuliwa hapo juu) haileti wajibu, kwa sababu maana yake ni kwamba mara tu wajibu au tendo la sunnah linapoanzwa, linapaswa kukamilishwa na si kukatishwa. Wanazuoni waliosema kuwa umrah ni sunnah pia walitoa hoja zao kwa kutegemea Hadith. Miongoni mwao ni Hadith ya al-Hajjaj ibn Arta kutoka kwa Muhammad ibn al-Munkadir kutoka kwa Jabir ibn Abd Allah, aliyesema: “Mtu mmoja alimuuliza Mtume ﷺ kuhusu umrah, je, ni wajibu? Akajibu, ‘Hapana, lakini ukifanya umrah ni bora kwako.’” Abu Umar ibn Abd al-Barr alisema kuwa hii si hoja yenye nguvu kwa kuwa al-Hajjaj ndiye mpokezi pekee.

The argument of the other group of jurists, who hold that it is not obligatory, is based on authentic and well-known traditions that have been laid down about the number of the obligations in Islam and that do not mention the <-umra, An example is the tradition of Ibn TJmar, “Islam is structured upon five things”, in which he mentioned the pilgrimage alone. There is also the tradition of the one asking what Islam is, and in some of its versions are the words, “that you perform the pilgrimage to the House”. Perhaps, these jurists also said that a command implying completion (as it appeared in the Quranic verse 2 : 196 quoted above) does not give rise to an obligation, as it means that once an obligation or a sunna act is started, it should be completed and not cut off. The jurists who maintained that it is a sunna, also argued on the basis of traditions. These include the tradition of al-Hajjaj ibn cArta from Muhammad ibn al-Munkadir from Jabir ibn <Abd Allah, who said, “A man asked the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) about the <umra, whether it was obligatory? He replied, ‘No, but if you perform the <umra it is better for you’ ”. Abu TJmar ibn Abd al-Barr c said that this is not persuasive insofar as he was the sole narrator.

Huenda, wale waliodai kuwa ni ya hiari walitoa hoja kwa msingi wa kile kinachopokewa kutoka kwa Abu Salih al-Hanafi, aliyesema: "Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema: 'Hijja ni wajibu na umra ni ya hiari'." Hata hivyo, hii ni hadithi munqati'.

Perhaps, those who maintained that it was voluntary argued on the basis of what is related from Abu Salih al-HanafT, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, '‘Hajj is obligatory and <umra is voluntary’”. This, however, is a munqatf tradition.

Chanzo cha kutofautiana kwa maoni hapa kinatokana na mgongano wa riwaya zinazohusu suala hili, na kutetereka kwa amri inayoamrisha kukamilishwa, kati ya kuwa je, kitendo hicho huleta wajibu au la.

The reason for the disagreement stems thus from the conflict of traditions on the subject, and the vacillation of the command requiring completion between whether or not if gives rise to an obligation.