There is no harm in the one performing tamattu' leaving for Jeddah and the like, and he remains in the state of tamattu'

Question: A person went to Makkah in the months of Hajj and performed tamattu' with 'Umrah for Hajj. Is it permissible for him to leave for Jeddah after he has exited the state of ihram from his 'Umrah? If he leaves for Jeddah, does the sacrificial animal for tamattu' become waived for him? If it is not waived, is Jeddah considered part of the vicinity of the Sacred Mosque? And if it is considered part of the vicinity of the Sacred Mosque, is there an additional sacrificial animal required for the one who left for it after exiting the state of ihram from his 'Umrah, then returned and performed Hajj, due to his leaving the sacrificial animal for tamattu'?

Answer: There is no harm in the one performing tamattu' leaving for Jeddah or other areas outside the sacred precinct after he has exited the state of ihram from his 'Umrah, if there is a need for it. The sacrificial animal for tamattu' remains obligatory upon him if he entered Makkah with the intention of Hajj. This is because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and his Companions, when they entered Makkah for the Farewell Pilgrimage, and he ordered those who did not have a sacrificial animal to exit the state of ihram and bring a sacrificial animal, did not prohibit them from leaving the sacred precinct. Nor did he say to them: "Whoever leaves the sacred precinct has the sacrificial animal waived for him." If leaving the sacred precinct had waived the sacrificial animal, he (peace and blessings be upon him) would have clarified that, because leaving is bound to happen among people due to their large numbers and the variety of their needs. So, when he did not draw their attention to this matter, it is known that their leaving for Jeddah and the like does not take them out of the state of being those who perform tamattu' with 'Umrah for Hajj. Some scholars held the view that if the one performing tamattu' leaves Makkah for a distance that allows shortening the prayer, such as Jeddah, Ta'if, and the like, it takes him out of the state of tamattu', waives the sacrificial animal, and makes his ihram for Hajj in the ruling of the one performing ifrad (Hajj alone). There is a consideration regarding this view.
The correct view is that the sacrificial animal is not waived for him, for the reasons mentioned above, and because of the generality of the saying of Allah the Exalted: [Surat al-Baqarah: 196]. I do not know of any legal evidence that indicates this school of thought. However, it was reported from 'Umar and his son (may Allah be pleased with them both) regarding the one who returned to his homeland after exiting the state of ihram from 'Umrah, then returned to Makkah and entered the state of ihram for Hajj as an individual, that there is no sacrificial animal upon him. Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm and others mentioned this. The reasoning for this is clear, and adopting this view is close to the truth, especially since it is the view of the Rightly Guided Caliph 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him).
It was also reported from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) what indicates the obligation of the sacrificial animal upon the one who performed 'Umrah in the months of Hajj and performed Hajj in the same year, absolutely, even if he traveled to his homeland or elsewhere. However, the view of the majority agrees with what was reported from 'Umar and his son (may Allah be pleased with them both). It was mentioned earlier that this view is close to the truth and its reasoning is clear, and there is no obstacle to it being a specification of the generality of the aforementioned noble verse.
However, it is not appropriate to include in this ruling the one who came to Makkah intending Hajj, performing tamattu' with 'Umrah for Hajj, then left for Jeddah or elsewhere due to an emergency, and did not return to his homeland. There is a clear difference between the two cases. And Allah is the One to be asked for help.
As for considering Jeddah part of the vicinity of the Sacred Mosque, if we say that the sacrificial animal is not waived for the one who goes there, this is not clear. There is no connection, in the most correct of the views, between the view that the sacrificial animal is not waived and the determination of the place whose residents are considered among those in the vicinity of the Sacred Mosque, or are not among them. Rather, this is one issue and that is another issue.
As for what is obligatory upon the one who left for Jeddah and then returned and performed Hajj without offering the sacrifice, it appears that only one sacrificial animal is obligatory upon him, which is the sacrificial animal for tamattu'. He must repent and seek forgiveness for the delay that occurred. As for the statement of those who say that the one who delayed the sacrificial animal for tamattu' until the days of Tashriq passed, either absolutely or without an excuse, has another sacrificial animal obligatory upon him, I do not know of a legal basis for this that is good to rely upon. The original state is the purity of the conscience, so it is not permissible to burden it except with a clear proof.