perform Hajj on behalf of another who has commenced the Hajj before completing it, nor may one perform the circumambulation (tawaf) on behalf of another if one has not performed it for oneself. Once this is established, he is obligated to return the expenses he took, because the Hajj did not count for him (the other person), so it is similar to as if he had not performed Hajj at all.

Section: If one who has not performed the Hajj of Islam enters into ihram for a voluntary (tatawwu') Hajj or a vowed one, it counts toward the Hajj of Islam. This is the opinion of Ibn Umar, Anas, and al-Shafi'i. Malik, al-Thawri, Abu Hanifa, Ishaq, and Ibn al-Mundhir said: It counts toward what he intended. This is another narration from Ahmad, and the view of Abu Bakr, for reasons previously mentioned. Our argument is that he entered into ihram for Hajj while he was obligated to perform it, so it counts toward his obligation, just like an absolute (mutlaq) Hajj. If he enters into ihram for a voluntary Hajj while he has a vowed one, it counts toward the vowed one; because it is obligatory, it is like the Hajj of Islam. The Umrah is like the Hajj in what we have mentioned, because it is one of the two rituals, so it resembles the other. The substitute is like the one on whose behalf he acts in this regard; whenever the substitute enters into ihram for a voluntary or vowed Hajj on behalf of one who has not performed the Hajj of Islam, it counts toward the Hajj of Islam, because the substitute follows the position of the one on whose behalf he acts. If he appoints two men to perform the Hajj of Islam and a vowed or voluntary one, whichever of them is first to enter into ihram, his Hajj counts toward the Hajj of Islam, and the other counts as voluntary or toward the vow, because the ihram cannot count for anything other than the Hajj of Islam for the one upon whom it is obligatory, and likewise for his substitute.

Section: If a man has fulfilled the obligation of one of the two rituals but not the other, it is permissible for him to act as a substitute for another regarding that which he has fulfilled, but not the other. It is not for a child or a slave to act as substitutes in Hajj on behalf of others, because they have not discharged the obligation of Hajj for themselves, so they are like the free adult in that regard, or even more so. It is possible that they are permitted to act as substitutes in a voluntary Hajj but not an obligatory one, because they are of the class of those who perform voluntary but not obligatory acts, and it is impossible for the Hajj in which they acted as substitutes to count toward their own obligation because they are not among those for whom it is obligatory, so it remains for the one on whose behalf it was performed. On this basis, they are not required to