Incorrect customs that people have adopted in Hajj and 'Umrah.

The Shaykh : What I want to say is a point that requires attention. It is the custom of people who commit some errors in their Hajj or 'Umrah to come to the scholars and say, "I did such and such, so is a sacrificial animal (hady) required of me, or is a blood payment (dam) required of me?" The scholar then issues a ruling that a blood payment is required of him, and sometimes the answer is that multiple blood payments are required due to the number of errors and violations.
I say that this answer is incorrect; it may be a double error or a single error. The explanation is that they may obligate a blood payment for something that is not established in the authentic Sunnah. For example, a person wears a shirt while in the state of ihram, or wears his cloak (jibbah) while in the state of ihram. He comes and asks, and the Shaykh says, "A blood payment is required of you," even though it is established in Sahih al-Bukhari and he was not ordered to pay a blood payment. So he erred. And even though he erred, they now obligate a blood payment upon him. Where did this obligation come from? There is no evidence for it in the Book or the Sunnah. All that is in the matter is that there is a report (athar) from Ibn 'Abbas that whoever forgets something of the rituals of Hajj or makes a mistake, a blood payment is required of him. This report could have been acted upon, and the ruling could have been based on it, were it not for the hadith I mentioned earlier regarding the story of the pilgrim in his cloak. So I say this is the first error: to obligate a blood payment upon every person who makes a mistake.
The second error, and this is my opinion, is that one should not limit the answer to saying, "A blood payment is required of you." Rather, the one who is asked for a ruling, i.e., the mufti, should ask the questioner whether what he did was done intentionally or by mistake. If it was intentional, then he should not say, "A blood payment is required of you," and end the matter. He should clarify that he is sinful because he violated the explicit text of the Shari'ah. You entered the state of ihram wearing a shirt, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Do not wear a shirt, a cloak, or a turban," and so on, from the hadith of Ibn 'Umar.
So the one who is asked for a ruling should clarify to people that if you did this intentionally, you are sinful. And this sin is more dangerous for this sinner than being told that its expiation is to slaughter a sacrificial animal or offer a blood payment. But if you did not intend it and rather made a mistake, then as in the hadith of the Bedouin mentioned earlier.
And here we say to those women in the state of ihram who wear the niqab: they have found an exit for themselves through the blood payment. But it is sufficient for you that you have sinned; you have committed a sin because you intended to violate the explicit text of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) . This is the first point.
Second, where did you get the idea that offering a blood payment will save you from the sin? This is what is said: "And treat the disease with what was the cause of the disease". It is not permissible to have such an open violation of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). This is an exaggeration in religion. The woman in the state of ihram is in one of two states: it is obligatory for her not to wear the niqab, and it is obligatory for her not to tie the handkerchief on her head. It is permissible for her to let it hang down over her face, and this is the best for her. It is permissible for her to uncover the disk of her face, because this is the original state and it is permissible, even though letting it hang down is better. But it is not permissible, in the pursuit of this better option, to commit what is prohibited, which is violating the saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) . This is the answer to what you asked. What do you have?