which is the last of the sermons prescribed for Hajj. He informs the people that there are two departure options in Hajj, between which Allah Most High has given them a choice: “Whoever hastens his departure in two days, there is no sin upon him; and whoever delays, there is no sin upon him” (2:203). He informs them that whoever departs from Mina before sunset is no longer required to spend the night there or to stone the jamarāt the following day, whereas whoever remains there until sunset must spend the night there and stone the jamarāt the following day.
There is no sermon on the seventh day of the first ten days, because no rite of Hajj begins on that day. Thus, no sermon is prescribed for it, just as there is no sermon on the night of the final day of the Days of Tashrīq. This is unlike the Day of Arafah and the First Day of Departure, on which a rite is prescribed. Nor is there a sermon on the Day of Sacrifice, because the imam informs them in the sermon on the Day of Arafah of what they need to know for the following day, namely, the Second Departure; therefore, there is no need to repeat the sermon then.
This imam, by virtue of his office, may not make the First Departure, remain overnight at Mina, and then make the Second Departure on the day following the Day of Shaving—that is, on the thirteenth—after stoning all three jamarāt. Since he is the one whom the people follow, he may not depart until he has completed all the rites.
Once the ruling concerning the Second Departure has taken effect, his authority comes to an end and he has fulfilled what was required of him. These are the five rulings connected with his authority.
As for the sixth matter, concerning which there is disagreement, it comprises three issues. The first is that if one of the pilgrims does something warranting a discretionary punishment or entailing a fixed legal punishment, the matter must be considered. If it has no connection with Hajj, he may neither administer the discretionary punishment nor enforce the fixed legal punishment. If it is connected with Hajj—for example, if …—then he may administer a discretionary punishment as a deterrent and disciplinary measure. As for the fixed legal punishment, he may not enforce it, since it falls outside the acts of Hajj. Some, however, have held that he may enforce it because it is among the rulings of Hajj.
The second is that he may not adjudicate between the pilgrims in disputes unrelated to the rulings of Hajj. As for adjudicating between them in disputes concerning the rulings of Hajj—such as when a married couple disputes whether intercourse entails an expiation and the expenses of performing the Hajj again—then, according to the third possibility we have mentioned, if one of the pilgrims does something requiring a compensatory sacrifice, he may inform him of what is due and order him to offer it. Whether he may compel him to do so and become a claimant against him in demanding it follows the possibility we mentioned regarding enforcement of a fixed legal punishment.
The governor of the pilgrims may issue a fatwa to anyone who asks him for one, provided that he is a jurist, even though he may not adjudicate. He may not condemn them for doing something that is legally permissible, except where he fears that an ignorant person may take it as a model. Thus, ʿUmar reproached Talḥah for wearing a red-dyed garment during Hajj and said, “I fear that the ignorant may follow your example.” He may not compel the people to follow his own school of law in the rites.
If he conducts Hajj for the people while not in a state of ihram, doing so is disliked, but the Hajj performed under his leadership is valid. This differs from prayer, which he may not validly lead if he himself is not performing that prayer.