obligatory, as is the Friday prayer according to those who regard it as a substitute, and dry ablution for someone unable to use water: it is obligatory for him, yet it is a substitute. If a substitute can be obligatory, there is all the more reason why it may be recommended. An intervening release from ihrām does not prevent the whole from constituting a single act of worship. The principal circumambulation of Hajj, for example, is unanimously considered an essential pillar, yet it is performed only after the first release from ihrām. Likewise, the stoning of the pillars during the days at Minā is performed after complete release from ihrām. Fasting in Ramadan is interrupted by breaking the fast each night, yet this does not prevent it from constituting a single act of worship. Hence Mālik and others said that a single intention suffices for the month (1), because it constitutes a single act of worship. And Allah knows best.
Section
As for your claim, “If adding ‘umrah to Hajj is impermissible, then converting Hajj into ‘umrah must be all the more impermissible”—we hear the mill clattering, but see no flour. Why should one necessarily follow from the other? What evidence supports this claim, for which you have no proof?
Moreover, if the person making this claim is a follower of Abū Hanīfah, he acknowledges (2) the invalidity (3) of this analogy. If he belongs to another school, he must demonstrate the validity of his analogy, but he has no way of doing so.
It may further be said: someone who adds ‘umrah has reduced what (4) he had undertaken. He would have performed one circumambulation for Hajj and then another for ‘umrah. When he combines the two, however, one circumambulation and one performance of sa‘y (walking between Safā and Marwah) suffice, according to the authentic Sunnah. This is the position of the majority, so he has reduced what he had undertaken (5). As for