Tenth: He commanded those who had entered ritual consecration for Hajj alone or for Hajj combined with ‘umrah, and had not brought a sacrificial animal, to convert their pilgrimage to ‘umrah followed by Hajj (tamattu‘) (1). It is well known that someone combining Hajj and ‘umrah has already performed ‘umrah during the months of Hajj alongside his Hajj. How, then, could he command him to convert that combined pilgrimage into ‘umrah in order to demonstrate that ‘umrah is permissible during the months of Hajj, when he has already performed it and joined Hajj to it?

Eleventh: Converting Hajj into ‘umrah accords with analogical reasoning based on established principles; it does not contradict them (2). Even had no scriptural text prescribed it, analogy would have entailed its permissibility. Thus, the scriptural text prescribing (3) it accords with analogy. This was stated by Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (4), who explained that, by agreement of the imams, someone in ritual consecration may undertake more than he was initially bound to perform. Thus, if he enters consecration for ‘umrah and then adds Hajj to it, this is permissible without dispute. But if he enters consecration for Hajj and then adds ‘umrah to it, this is not permissible according to the majority. This is the position of Mālik and Ahmad, and the apparent position of al-Shāfi‘ī’s school. Abū Hanīfah permits it, based on his principle that someone combining Hajj and ‘umrah performs two sets of circumambulation and two performances of sa‘y (walking between Safā and Marwah).

He said (5): This is also what analogy entails according to the position reported from Ahmad that someone combining Hajj and ‘umrah performs two sets of circumambulation and two performances of sa‘y. That being so, someone who has entered consecration for Hajj has undertaken only Hajj (6). When he changes to ‘umrah followed by Hajj, he undertakes both ‘umrah and Hajj. Thus, what he undertook through this conversion was