(F 312) Are pilgrims being exploited and subjected to greed due to the excessive costs of Ḥajj? A tourist trip to the most beautiful areas in Turkey, where the travel agency provides you with airfare, a five-star hotel, two luxurious meals, and daily internal excursions for 14 days, costs no more than $1,500 per person. So how can we believe that the cost of Ḥajj is around $5,000 per person or more? Based on this, there are those who argue that we should delay performing Ḥajj because Allāh does not accept acts of worship tainted with humiliation, exploitation, and extortion, according to them. They believe that performing Ḥajj in this degrading manner contributes to corruption and mischief on earth. Scholars have addressed similar issues and ruled that it is permissible to perform Tayammum (dry ablution) if water is only available at an exorbitant price, to avoid exploitation and extortion in performing religious duties. Therefore, scholars and intellectuals should play a role in educating the community and clarifying Allāh’s ruling on this matter: that Ḥajj is not obligatory if excessively high fees, amounting to multiples of the actual cost, are imposed. Moreover, there is exploitation of applicants due to the infinite number of applicants and limited visas. Each applicant deposits an amount from which a percentage is deducted, benefiting the Ministry of Hajj and Umrah without the pilgrims actually going on Ḥajj. At the same time, there is no other site except Nusuk to apply through. We request your clarification and explanation. – International Institute of Islamic Studies

(F 312) Are pilgrims being exploited and subjected to greed due to the excessive costs of Ḥajj? A tourist trip to the most beautiful areas in Turkey, where the travel agency provides you with airfare, a five-star hotel, two luxurious meals, and daily internal excursions for 14 days, costs no more than $1,500 per person. So how can we believe that the cost of Ḥajj is around $5,000 per person or more? Based on this, there are those who argue that we should delay performing Ḥajj because Allāh does not accept acts of worship tainted with humiliation, exploitation, and extortion, according to them. They believe that performing Ḥajj in this degrading manner contributes to corruption and mischief on earth. Scholars have addressed similar issues and ruled that it is permissible to perform Tayammum (dry ablution) if water is only available at an exorbitant price, to avoid exploitation and extortion in performing religious duties. Therefore, scholars and intellectuals should play a role in educating the community and clarifying Allāh’s ruling on this matter: that Ḥajj is not obligatory if excessively high fees, amounting to multiples of the actual cost, are imposed. Moreover, there is exploitation of applicants due to the infinite number of applicants and limited visas. Each applicant deposits an amount from which a percentage is deducted, benefiting the Ministry of Hajj and Umrah without the pilgrims actually going on Ḥajj. At the same time, there is no other site except Nusuk to apply through. We request your clarification and explanation.

Firstly, Ḥajj is a specific obligation that includes two aspects: physical and financial. Therefore, the obligation is linked to the condition of being able to perform it, as stated in the verse: “And [due] to Allāh from the people is a pilgrimage to the House – for whoever is able to find thereto a way” [Aāli-῾Imrān: 97]. The term “whoever is able” replaces “the people,” indicating that it applies to those who are able among the people. It is a replacement of the whole entity with the partial entity that refers to the accountable people. Those who are unable due to the absence of either reason are exempt from the obligation.

Secondly, Ḥajj expenses are categorized as follows:

Travel expenses from the home country to the holy land.
Accommodation expenses during Ḥajj, depending on the type of Ḥajj.
Administrative expenses charged by the host country.

Travel and accommodation expenses are subject to supply and demand, occupancy rates, inflation, and prices, especially in a limited area that hosts three million people within a specific period. It is undeniable that transport and accommodation institutions benefit from the pilgrimage by increasing their profits. This has always been the case historically, with the difference being the value of money at different times. Thus, using this type of increase to obstruct the pilgrimage is not valid, or else it would have been obstructed throughout history.

Some can afford these costs without hardship and are therefore obligated to perform Ḥajj. Those who cannot are excused from the obligation. Calling for a boycott of Ḥajj due to the high cost contradicts the clear text that exempts those who are unable.

Thirdly, regarding the administrative expenses charged by the host country to provide and permit Ḥajj services, scholars have differed on whether these nullify the obligation. The majority view is that it does not nullify the obligation but falls within the overall capability. Al-Shāfi῾ī opined that any amount taken from the pilgrim as fees, regardless of the amount, nullifies the obligation. Mālik conditioned that the fees must be exorbitant and recurrent to nullify the obligation. If not, the obligation remains for those who can pay.

Thus, there is no single ruling. Considering the current state of Ḥajj, high prices are not a valid reason to invalidate it for those who can afford it.

It should be noted that repeatedly performing Ḥajj under such circumstances is not required. Those excused from the obligation should use their money for other acts of goodness and reward.

Regarding the issue of deducting a percentage of the application amount as a profit for the Ministry of Hajj and Umrah without the pilgrim actually going on Ḥajj, and the lack of an alternative application site other than Nusuk, no amount should be deducted from the reservation payment unless the cancellation is from the pilgrim. The deducted amount should be considered a deposit, permissible according to the Ḥanbalī school, in compensation for the loss of the sale benefit and the service (in this case). If the cancellation is from the service provider, no deduction is allowed, as it constitutes unlawfully taking people’s money.

Fatwā issued by Dr. Khālid Naṣr