or because he can travel by car to a point near the pillars, then he must stone each day within its own time.

His statement, “If he delays it beyond that,” means beyond the final day of the Days of Tashriq; then he must offer a sacrificial animal—even if he had an excuse. If he had an excuse, he is absolved of sin, but the omission must still be remedied by a sacrificial animal.

Thus, if we suppose that a man thought that stoning the pillars was not obligatory, or thought that their prescribed order was not obligatory, and he came to ask us after the Days of Tashriq had passed, then, according to the view followed by the author, he must offer a sacrificial animal.

If he says, “But I was ignorant,” we say: Yes, you were ignorant, and the sin is waived from you. Yet this act that you missed due to your ignorance has a substitute: a sacrificial animal. Therefore, you must slaughter an expiatory offering and distribute it among the poor in Mecca.

Note: The apparent meaning of the author’s words is that if he delays it beyond the third day, he should perform the stoning and offer a sacrificial animal. This is not what is intended, because once those days have passed, the time for stoning has ended, and it is no longer to be performed.

His statement, “Or if he does not spend the night there, then he must offer a sacrificial animal”: the pronoun refers to Mina—that is, if he does not spend two nights there when departing early, or three nights when remaining until the end, then he must offer a sacrificial animal. The meaning intended by “a sacrificial animal” when used without qualification has already been mentioned in the author’s statement, “And the sacrificial animal is a sheep,” and so on.

His statement, “Or if he does not spend the night there,” indicates that if he misses one of the nights, he does not owe a sacrificial animal. This is indeed the case (1); rather, he must feed one poor person