Alhamdulillah was Salatu was Salamu Ala Rasoolillah Amma Ba’ad.
A question was raised regarding abstaining from Hajj and Umrah as long as the Two Holy Sanctuaries remain under the rule of Al Saud, given that the profits are directed to Trump. In response to this, we say:
I have heard some encouragement regarding this matter from certain brothers, but there is extensive consideration to be given from both the juridical and rational perspectives.
From a juridical perspective, Hajj and Umrah fall between obligatory and recommended acts, unlike the purchase of goods and similar transactions, which generally fall under permissible matters. The distinction is significant, as one should not abandon what has been ordained (made Wajib) or encouraged (made Mustahab) by Islamic teachings merely because an opposing entity may benefit from the consequences of performing these acts.
Hajj and Umrah remain legitimate acts of worship even if the Two Holy Sanctuaries are under the current rulership. The Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and his companions performed Umrah while the Sacred Mosque was under the control of the original disbelievers. This was evident during the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, where they were initially prevented from entering while Quraysh was in a state of war. Later, following the treaty, they performed Umrah, which serves as explicit evidence regarding this matter. There is no doubt that the disbelievers of Quraysh financially benefited from the expenditures made during Umrat al-Qadha (the compensatory Umrah performed after the treaty of Hudaybiyyah was finalized with the disbelieving Quraysh), and perhaps those resources later aided them in breaking the treaty and waging war against the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and his companions.
The issue of mixed finances, whether in earnings or expenditures, is an unavoidable aspect of transactions. There is no doubt that a portion of what one purchases may ultimately benefit adversaries of Islam, and that part of one’s earnings may originate from impermissible sources. However, the determining factor is one’s direct action. If one purchases food from a grocery store that also sells tobacco or magazines, this does not constitute support for such aspects. Likewise, if one sells fabric to a woman who later uses it to create attire that leads to temptation, this does not imply that one has aided her in committing a prohibited act.
The pilgrim or the one performing Umrah does not engage in these acts to support the government in financing Trump; rather, they pay an amount that enables them to fulfill their rites. Their intention is to cover the expenses associated with the pilgrimage and compensate those who facilitate it. As for how the earnings of those providing these services are spent, there is absolutely no responsibility upon the pilgrim in that regard.
From a rational perspective, the boycott being advocated should not be one that causes harm to us in worldly matters, let alone religious ones. Otherwise, why do we not boycott cars, computers, and mobile phones on an individual level, not to mention the boycott of weapons, equipment, and technology on a broader scale? Many of these expenditures genuinely and directly benefit America, unlike the funds associated with Hajj and Umrah.
The funds associated specifically with Hajj and Umrah are not necessarily those acquired by Trump from this government. Rather, the majority of Hajj and Umrah expenses are allocated to serving the pilgrims and maintaining the Two Holy Sanctuaries, which involve extensive projects requiring vast financial resources. What Trump primarily benefits from is the revenue derived from petroleum.
There must be a clear objective behind a boycott. If the goal is to prevent these funds from reaching Trump, then this is not achieved, as the money will reach him whether we perform Hajj or not. If the aim is to reduce the amount reaching him, this too is unattainable, because the masses eagerly awaiting the opportunity to perform Hajj and Umrah will fill the gap left by those choosing to boycott. This argument will not persuade the general Muslim population, who long with fervent devotion for the Two Holy Sanctuaries, except for a small minority who may find validity in such a ruling and choose to follow it.
Therefore, we advise our brothers to refrain from impulsive enthusiasm in matters that do not benefit Islam and Muslims but rather harm them personally. We ask the Almighty to grant us the opportunity to perform Hajj and Umrah under the rule of the Islamic Caliphate. May blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his companions.
-Shaykh Dr. Muhammad bin Rizq bin Tarhuni.
Source
(Originally written on: 17th Dhul-Hijjah 1440 AH – 18th August 2019 CE.)
(Translated by Mohammed bin Thajammul Hussain Manna.)
Saheehus-Seerah 