(Series of Answers by the Eminent Scholar Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah, Ameer of Hizb ut-Tahrir, to Questions from Visitors to his Facebook Page)
Answers to Questions: Regarding "Hajj for the Elderly" and "Literal and Metaphorical Meaning"
To: Hamed Qashou
The First Question:
Our beloved Ameer, may Allah protect you, care for you, and grant victory through your hands.
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
Narrated by Abdullah bin al-Zubayr: عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الزُّبَيْرِ قَالَ جَاءَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ خَثْعَمَ إلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ : إنَّ أَبِي أَدْرَكَهُ الْإِسْلَامُ وَهُوَ شَيْخٌ كَبِيرٌ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُ رُكُوبَ الرَّحْلِ ، وَالْحَجُّ مَكْتُوبٌ عَلَيْهِ أَفَأَحُجُّ عَنْهُ ؟ قَالَ: أَنْتَ أَكْبَرُ وَلَدِهِ ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ ، قَالَ: أَرَأَيْتَ لَوْ كَانَ عَلَى أَبِيكَ دَيْنٌ فَقَضَيْتَهُ عَنْهُ أَكَانَ يُجْزِي ذَلِكَ عَنْهُ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: فَاحْجُجْ عَنْهُ
"A man from Khath'am came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and said: 'My father embraced Islam as an old man and he cannot sit firmly on a mount, yet Hajj is prescribed for him. Should I perform Hajj on his behalf?' He (saw) asked: 'Are you his eldest son?' He said: 'Yes.' He (saw) said: 'What do you think, if your father had a debt and you paid it off, would that satisfy it on his behalf?' He said: 'Yes.' He (saw) said: 'Then perform Hajj on his behalf.'" (Narrated by Ahmad and al-Nasa'i with similar meaning).
Is it understood from the hadith that the son's Hajj on behalf of his father is an obligation (wajib), or is it in the context of the son being dutiful (birr) to his father?
This is because the man explained to the Noble Messenger (saw) that his father is an elderly man who cannot ride a mount...
And it is known that Hajj is obligatory for those who are financially and physically capable.
What we know is that for those who are not capable, the sin of not performing the obligation is dropped.
The Second Question:
Is not the phrase "gives life to the bones" in the words of the Almighty:
قَالَ مَنْ يُحْيِ الْعِظَامَ وَهِيَ رَمِيمٌ
"He says, 'Who will give life to these bones when they are decayed?'" (QS. Ya-Sin [36]: 78)
a form of metaphor (majaz), where the part is mentioned but the whole is intended?
I asked it under this topic.
May Allah reward you with goodness and keep you as a support and treasure for the great Ummah of Islam, and support you with a decisive victory from Himself, Glory be to Him.
A. Hamza
The Answer:
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.
Regarding the answer to your first question, dear brother:
Regarding the hadith you mentioned: It was narrated from Yusuf bin al-Zubayr, from Abdullah bin al-Zubayr, who said: A man from Khath'am came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and said: "My father is an old man, he cannot ride, and the obligation of Allah in Hajj has reached him. Does it suffice if I perform Hajj on his behalf?" He (saw) said: "Are you his eldest son?" He said: "Yes." He (saw) said: "What do you think, if he had a debt, would you pay it back?" He said: "Yes." He (saw) said: "Then perform Hajj on his behalf."
It was narrated by al-Nasa'i, and Yusuf bin al-Zubayr was unique in mentioning the phrase "Are you his eldest son?". For this reason, some researchers have commented on it due to this point. As for the rest of the hadith, it is authentic according to the majority of scholars, and there are those who authenticated it even with the phrasing "his eldest son." Nevertheless, the hadith was narrated without the mention of "eldest son" from Ibn Abbas:
Ibn Hibban narrated in his Sahih from Sulayman bin Yasar who said: Abdullah bin Abbas told me that a man asked the Messenger of Allah (saw) and said: "O Messenger of Allah, my father entered Islam as an old man. If I tie him to my mount, I fear I might kill him, and if I do not tie him, he cannot stay firm on it. Should I perform Hajj on his behalf?" The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "What do you think, if your father had a debt and you paid it off, would it suffice for him?" He said: "Yes." He (saw) said: "Then perform Hajj for your father."
From this, it is clear that the Messenger (saw) treated the failure to perform Hajj by the elderly man who cannot remain firm on a mount as a debt upon him. That is, it is obligatory for him even if he cannot ride a mount due to old age and weakness. The jurists (fuqaha) have discussed the hadith, taking into account that Allah (swt) made the obligation of Hajj dependent on capability (istita'ah):
وَلِلَّهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ سَبِيلًا
"And Hajj to the House is a duty that mankind owes to Allah, those who can afford the journey." (QS. Ali 'Imran [3]: 97)
Thus, some jurists considered the hadith of the elderly man to be specific to that questioner and not for others, so that the hadith does not contradict the capability mentioned in the verse. In cases other than that, it would not be obligatory for the son to perform Hajj on behalf of his incapable father except as an act of filial piety (birr), on the basis that this ruling is specific to that questioner. This is similar to the specific ruling for Abu Burda regarding the sacrifice of a young goat (jadha’ah), which al-Bukhari narrated from al-Bara’ bin ‘Azib (ra), who said: ... Abu Burda bin Niyar, the maternal uncle of al-Bara’, said: "O Messenger of Allah, we have a young female goat (’anaq jadha’ah) that is dearer to me than two sheep. Will it suffice for me?" He (saw) said: "Yes, but it will not suffice for anyone after you." A young goat is not sufficient for sacrifice, but it was made specific to Abu Burda.
What I prefer is to reconcile the hadith and the verse before resorting to specificity (khusus), because the default is that the rulings are addressed to all people. A ruling is not diverted to specificity unless a text states so, such as the case of Abu Burda and the Messenger’s (saw) statement to him: "Yes, but it will not suffice for anyone after you." If reconciliation is impossible... but here there is no text indicating specificity, and reconciliation is not impossible. It is possible to reconcile the verse and the hadith by saying that Hajj is not obligatory except when there is financial and physical capability; the case of a son with his father is an exception to this. If the son is capable and the father is not, then it is obligatory for the son to perform Hajj on behalf of his father because the Messenger (saw) counted Hajj on behalf of the parent in this case like a debt that the son must settle for his father.
Accordingly, if you are able to perform Hajj on behalf of your father even if he cannot, or if he passed away without performing Hajj, then you must perform Hajj for your father. It is like a debt upon the parent, and its repayment is obligatory upon the son and then the heirs, according to the Sharia rulings in this chapter.
However, if you are not capable, neither by yourself nor by paying someone else's fees, then Allah does not burden a soul beyond its capacity. When you are able to do so, you should do it, Allah willing.
The answer to your second question:
One does not resort to metaphorical meaning (majaz) unless the literal meaning (haqiqah) is impossible. For example:
يَجْعَلُونَ أَصَابِعَهُمْ فِي آذَانِهِمْ مِنَ الصَّوَاعِقِ حَذَرَ الْمَوْتِ
"They thrust their fingers into their ears from the thunderclaps for fear of death." (QS. Al-Baqarah [2]: 19)
Here, "their fingers" is a metaphor for "fingertips" because literally, it is impossible to put entire fingers into the ears; rather, only the fingertips are placed in the ears.
Another example is:
وَدَخَلَ مَعَهُ السِّجْنَ فَتَيَانِ قَالَ أَحَدُهُمَا إِنِّي أَرَانِي أَعْصِرُ خَمْرًا
"And two young men entered the prison with him. One of them said, 'I see myself [in a dream] pressing wine.'" (QS. Yusuf [12]: 36)
Here, "wine" is a metaphor for "grapes," because wine cannot be pressed literally. Rather, what is pressed are the grapes from which wine is made.
However, if the literal meaning is not impossible, then one does not resort to metaphor. So His (swt) saying:
وَضَرَبَ لَنَا مَثَلًا وَنَسِيَ خَلْقَهُ قَالَ مَنْ يُحْيِ الْعِظَامَ وَهِيَ رَمِيمٌ
"And he presents for Us an example and forgets his [own] creation. He says, 'Who will give life to these bones when they are decayed?'" (QS. Ya-Sin [36]: 78)
The literal reality of giving life to bones is not impossible for Allah (swt). Therefore, we say "gives life..." literally and not metaphorically. From this, we understand that the bones of a carcass are also dead (ritually impure).
Your brother, Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
Link to the answer from the Ameer's Facebook page
Link to the answer from the Ameer's Website
Link to the answer from the Ameer's Google Plus page