Continuation of the discussion on one who performed 'Umrah, then traveled, then returned in the state of ihram for Hajj: is the sacrificial animal obligatory upon him?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Until the time for Hajj arrived, and then he returned in the state of ihram for Hajj. In this case, the sacrificial animal is not waived for him. The proponent of this view claims that this is the apparent meaning of the Qur'an. However, there is a point of discussion regarding its being the apparent meaning of the Qur'an, because His saying [Al-Baqarah 2:196] indicates that this man is a traveler for Hajj, and were it not for the 'Umrah, he would not have been able to perform tamattu'. This indicates that he did not travel between the two. The second opinion is that traveling a distance of qasr waives the sacrificial animal, whether he traveled to his own town or to another town. Accordingly, if a resident of Riyadh performs 'Umrah during the months of Hajj with the intention of Hajj, then travels to Madinah and returns from Madinah in the state of ihram for Hajj, the sacrificial animal is waived for him, because he traveled a distance of qasr between the 'Umrah and the Hajj.
The third opinion is to distinguish: if he travels to his family and then returns and enters the state of ihram for Hajj, the sacrificial animal is waived for him; but if he travels to a place other than his family's location, it is not waived for him. So in the example we mentioned, a man from Riyadh who entered the state of ihram for 'Umrah and exited from it, then traveled to Madinah, then returned from Madinah in the state of ihram for Hajj: is the sacrificial animal waived for him or not? It is not waived. But if he returned to Riyadh, his town, and then returned from there in the state of ihram for Hajj, the sacrificial animal is waived for him. This opinion is the stronger one, because he initiated a new journey. Indeed, travel is leaving one's homeland, and this man initiated a journey for Hajj that is distinct from the journey for 'Umrah, so he is performing ifrad, not tamattu'. This is narrated from 'Umar and his son (may Allah be pleased with them both), namely that if he returns to his town and then enters the state of ihram for Hajj, he is performing ifrad, not tamattu'. And if he returns to another town, he is performing tamattu', because he did not initiate a new journey, since his travel to the other town is a continuation of his first journey, not a severance of the journey. This opinion is the stronger opinion in this issue.
whoever performs 'umrah [during the Hajj months] followed by Hajj
فمن تمتع بالعمرة إلى الحجThe third opinion is to distinguish: if he travels to his family and then returns and enters the state of ihram for Hajj, the sacrificial animal is waived for him; but if he travels to a place other than his family's location, it is not waived for him. So in the example we mentioned, a man from Riyadh who entered the state of ihram for 'Umrah and exited from it, then traveled to Madinah, then returned from Madinah in the state of ihram for Hajj: is the sacrificial animal waived for him or not? It is not waived. But if he returned to Riyadh, his town, and then returned from there in the state of ihram for Hajj, the sacrificial animal is waived for him. This opinion is the stronger one, because he initiated a new journey. Indeed, travel is leaving one's homeland, and this man initiated a journey for Hajj that is distinct from the journey for 'Umrah, so he is performing ifrad, not tamattu'. This is narrated from 'Umar and his son (may Allah be pleased with them both), namely that if he returns to his town and then enters the state of ihram for Hajj, he is performing ifrad, not tamattu'. And if he returns to another town, he is performing tamattu', because he did not initiate a new journey, since his travel to the other town is a continuation of his first journey, not a severance of the journey. This opinion is the stronger opinion in this issue.