As for the mut'ah (temporary enjoyment of Umrah before Hajj) and qiran (combining Hajj and Umrah), if he was permitted to perform them, the [obligation for the] sacrificial animals falls upon the person who requested the substitute, because he authorized the cause for them. If he was not permitted, the obligation falls upon the substitute, because it is like his own offense. The sacrificial animal for ihsar (being prevented from completing the Hajj) is the responsibility of the person who requested the substitute, because it is for the sake of obtaining release (18) from the hardship of travel; it is therefore like the expenses for the return journey. If he invalidates his Hajj, the obligation of making it up (qada') rests upon him, and he shall return what he had taken, because the Hajj did not suffice on behalf of the person who requested the substitute due to his negligence and offense. The same applies if he misses the Hajj through his own negligence. If he misses it without negligence, the expenses are counted for him because it did not occur through his own action, so he is not in violation, just as if he had died. If we say that making it up is obligatory, it is his responsibility personally, just as if he had entered into a Hajj thinking it was obligatory upon him while it was not, and he then missed it.

Section: If the substitute takes a route while it is possible for him to take a closer one, the surplus in expenses remains in his own wealth. If he hastens in a manner that he could have avoided, the same applies. If he remains in Mecca longer than the duration for shortening prayers after it became possible for him to travel back, he must spend from his own money, because he was not permitted to stay. As for one who cannot leave before that, he is entitled to expenses, because he was permitted to do so, and he is entitled to return travel expenses. [This applies] even if he stays in Mecca for years, as long as he does not adopt it as a home. If he adopts it as a home, even for an hour, he is not entitled to return travel expenses because, by the intention of residence, he has become a Meccan; thus, his expenses are dropped and are not to be counted. If he falls ill on the road and returns, he is entitled to return travel expenses because he had no choice in the matter, and it occurred without his negligence; thus, it is similar to the case where the road was blocked [or he was prevented from continuing] (19). If he says, "I feared I would become ill, so I returned," the liability is upon him, because it was only a supposition. It is narrated from Ahmad, regarding someone who became ill in Kufa and returned, that he must return what he had taken. In all these cases, if he was permitted to spend, he is entitled to do so, because the money belongs to the one who requested the substitute, and what is permitted is lawful. If either of them stipulates that the sacrificial animals that become due are the responsibility of the other, the condition is invalid, because this is among the necessities of his action or the Hajj obligatory upon him, so it is not permissible to stipulate it upon someone else, just as if he had stipulated it upon a stranger.