Mr. A. Lodi of Alkhobar wants to know if he and his wife had violated the rules of ihraam, or consecration when they traveled to Jeddah for pilgrimage. The point that arises in many situations is whether a person may cross the point of meeqat on his way to Makkah without entering into consecration. The answer depends on the intention behind the action, or the purpose of the trip.
The rule specifies that when a person enters the Hil area, which is formed by making an imaginary line linking the points of meeqat, in order to do the pilgrimage or the Umrah, then that person, man or woman, should enter into the state of consecration at the point of meeqat. It follows that if he enters this area for a purpose other than doing the pilgrimage or the Umrah, then he or she need not enter into the state of consecration.
Mr. Lodi and his wife traveled by car from Alkhobar to Jeddah, without entering Makkah, in order to leave their young children with their relatives. They stayed in Jeddah for a couple of days before traveling to Madinah where they stayed for one day and came back to Jeddah. They stayed there for about 36 hours and traveled on the night of Dhul-Hijjah 7 to Mina. They went to Makkah shortly after that for their tawaf and sa’ie. That is how they began their pilgrimage.
There is no question about the first leg of their trip. It is true they crossed the point of meeqat, but they had no intention at the time of going to Makkah or starting their Umrah. Their intention, which was clear in their minds, was to go to their relatives and stay with them for a couple of days so that the children may get used to the relatives and accept staying with them during the absence of their parents. Moreover, they traveled on to Madinah, leaving the Hil area altogether. Hence, they violated no rule. This is an ordinary trip, not connected with their pilgrimage, although they have had the intention of doing the pilgrimage later on when they have completed their arrangements.
The second trip to Jeddah needs a more careful consideration, because it was the one preceding their pilgrimage. However, that trip must have been intended to look after their children and ensure that they have settled well with their relatives. It was not part of the trip to pilgrimage. They did not know at the time when exactly they may travel to Makkah because that depended on how the children were doing. Although Mr. Lodi has not said so, but I feel that had he found that the children were finding it difficult to settle, he and his wife would have stayed another day in Jeddah. Again, I would consider that this trip to Jeddah was not part of the journey to pilgrimage.
In the circumstances, Mr. Lodi and his wife started their pilgrimage when they felt that it was safe for them to leave their children. They initiated their pilgrimage journey in Jeddah and that was their meeqat, like the residents of Jeddah themselves. Hence, they have violated no rules and their pilgrimage is valid. They have no compensation to offer.
The soul and its feelings
Muhammad Aslam of Karachi tells me of an American magazine which publishes a weekly column about "Islamic Code and Conduct". He quotes the magazine as saying that, "Pakistani and Indian Muslims commonly speak of the soul being pleased or displeased by the worldly acts done by anyone according to the willingness or unwillingness of the person when alive." He wonders what is the truth about this in Islam.
To start with, I think what is meant here is the spirit, not the soul. The Qur’an has distinguished between the two, and used the Arabic noun nafs for "soul", while the spirit is called rooh. The soul does not have any existence after one dies. The spirit departs to where we do not know. In fact, when the Arabs of Makkah sent a delegation to the Jewish rabbis in Madinah asking them about the Prophet and whether he was a true prophet, those rabbis told them to put to him three questions. One of these was about the spirit and its nature.
It is reported that the rabbis told the Arab delegation that if he comes up with a detailed answer about the spirit, they must not believe him. When the Prophet was asked these three questions, he waited for their answers from God, because he did not know what to say about them. The answers to the first two questions were revealed to him in detail. As for the question about the spirit, he was commanded as follows: "They ask you about the spirit. Say: ‘Knowledge of it belongs to my Lord, while you have been given but scanty knowledge’."
With such an instruction given to the Prophet, I do not like to venture into that area. I do not discuss the spirit in any way. Some scholars have written about it, but we cannot be sure that what they have written is correct. It is infinitely better to say we do not know what the spirit is, and our lack of knowledge does not affect our faith in any way. May I add that the quotation given by my reader from that magazine is far from clear. I do not think that I understand it.