545 - Issue: He said: (And whoever is carried around [the Ka'bah], the tawaf is for him, not for the one carrying him.)

As for when he is carried around while being carried due to an excuse, there are several possibilities: Either they both intend it on behalf of the one being carried, in which case it is valid for him and not for the carrier, without any disagreement that we are aware of. Or they both intend it on behalf of the carrier, in which case it counts for him, and there is nothing for the one being carried. Or each of them intends the tawaf for himself, in which case it counts for the one being carried and not for the carrier. This is one of the two views of al-Shafi'i; the other view is that it counts for the carrier because he is the actor. Abu Hanifah said: It counts for both of them, because each of them is performing tawaf with a valid intention, so the tawaf suffices for him, just as if his companion had not intended anything; and because if he carried him at Arafat, the standing (wuquf) would count for both of them, likewise here. This view is sound. The argument for the first [position] is that it is a tawaf that has sufficed for the one being carried, so it does not count for the carrier, just as if they had both intended the one being carried. Also, it is a single tawaf, so it cannot count for two individuals, and the tawaf of a rider only counts for one. As for when he carries him at Arafat, the standing there does not depend on the carrying, for the purpose is to be in Arafat, and they are both present there. The purpose here is the action, which is one, so it cannot count for two individuals. Its validity for the one being carried is more appropriate, because he did not intend by his tawaf anything other than for himself, while the carrier did not make his intention for the tawaf purely for himself, for if he had not intended the tawaf for the one being carried, he would not have carried him. His ability to perform the tawaf does not depend on carrying him. Thus, the one being carried became an object of intention for both of them, and the carrier's intention for himself was not pure, so it did not count for him due to the lack of specification. Abu Hafs al-'Ukbari said in his "Sharh": The tawaf does not suffice for either of them, because a single action cannot count for two, and neither of them has more right to it than the other. We have already stated that the one being carried has more right to it due to the purity of his intention for himself and the carrier's intention being for him, and it does not count for the carrier due to the lack of specification. If one of them intends it for himself without the other, the tawaf is valid for him. If the intention is lacking from both of them, or each of them intends it for the other, it is not valid for either of them.