Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (7/80)

the Messenger’s words and intent is more likely to be among the most knowledgeable of people concerning them. Thus, the correct view is that held by Shaykh al-Islam regarding whether tamattuʿ is obligatory: it was obligatory upon the Companions. As for those after them, it is preferable but not obligatory.

The relied-upon position in the school is that tamattuʿ is preferable in all cases, even for one who has brought along a sacrificial animal; for him too, tamattuʿ is more preferable.

But how is he to do this, when he may not shave his head until the Day of Sacrifice, due to Allah’s saying: “And do not shave your heads until the sacrificial animal has reached its place of slaughter” [al-Baqarah 2:196]? They say: when he has performed tawaf and saʿy, he does not shave his head; rather, he intends that the umrah has ended, but he does not exit the state of consecration by shaving. Then, when the eighth day of Dhu al-Hijjah arrives, he enters into consecration for Hajj. There is no doubt that this is an exceedingly weak view, and I have not seen anything like it in the sunnah.

The correct view is that one who has brought along a sacrificial animal cannot perform tamattuʿ, because he cannot exit the state of consecration, whereas tamattuʿ necessarily entails doing so.

Shaykh al-Islam said: We do not say that tamattuʿ is unconditionally preferable, nor that qiran is unconditionally preferable, nor that ifrad is unconditionally preferable. Rather, it should be said: whoever has brought along a sacrificial animal, qiran is preferable for him, for three reasons:

First, because tamattuʿ is not possible in his case. How can he perform tamattuʿ when he has not exited the state of consecration? The one who has brought along a sacrificial animal does not exit it until the Day of Sacrifice, so when could he perform tamattuʿ?

Second, because qiran along with bringing a sacrificial animal was the practice of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him; therefore, qiran is preferable.

Third, because it combines Hajj and umrah. Even though, if he were to perform ifrad while having brought along a sacrificial animal, it would be valid, qiran is preferable for one who has brought along a sacrificial animal for these three reasons.

الإنسان كان أعرف الناس بقوله ومراده، فالصحيح ما ذهب إليه شيخ الإسلام من حيث وجوب التمتع وعدمه، وأنه واجب على الصحابة. وأما من بعدهم فهو أفضل وليس بواجب. والمذهب أن التمتع هو الأفضل مطلقاً، حتى من ساق الهدي، فالتمتع في حقه أولى. لكن كيف يعمل، وهو لا يحل له أن يحلق إلا في يوم العيد لقوله تعالى: ﴿وَلَا تَحْلِقُوا رُؤُوسَكُمْ حَتَّى يَبْلُغَ الْهَدْيُ مَحِلَّهُ﴾ [البقرة: ١٩٦]؟ قالوا: إذا طاف وسعى لا يحلق، بل ينوي أن العمرة انتهت، لكن لا يحل بالحلق، فإذا كان اليوم الثامن من ذي الحجة أحرم بالحج، وهذا لا شك أنه قول ضعيف جداً، ولم أر السنة أتت بمثله. فالصواب أن من ساق الهدي لا يمكنه أن يتمتع؛ لأنه لا يمكنه أن يحل، والتمتع لا بد فيه من الحل. وقال شيخ الإسلام: لا نقول إن التمتع أفضل مطلقاً، ولا القران أفضل مطلقاً، ولا الإفراد أفضل مطلقاً، فيقال: من ساق الهدي فالأفضل له القران؛ وذلك لثلاثة أوجه: الأول: لأن التمتع في حقه متعذر، فكيف يتمتع وهو لم يحل، والذي ساق الهدي لا يحل إلا في يوم العيد فمتى يتمتع؟ الثاني: لأن القران مع سوق الهدي فعل النبي ﷺ، فالقران إذاً أفضل. الثالث: أنه يجمع بين الحج والعمرة، مع أنه لو أفرد وقد ساق الهدي صح، فصار القران لمن ساق الهدي أفضل لهذه الأوجه الثلاثة.