Tāwūs stated: “Whoever performs ʿumrah outside the months of ḥajj, then remains in Mecca until the pilgrimage and performs ḥajj in that same year, is a mutamattiʿ.”

The scholars are unanimously agreed that anyone who is not counted among “those present at the Sacred Mosque” is deemed a mutamattiʿ. They differed, however, about the Meccan himself—does tamattuʿ apply to him or not? Those who say that it does all concur that he is not required to offer a blood-sacrifice, because the Almighty says:

“That is for him whose family are not present at the Sacred Mosque” (al-Baqarah 2:196).

They also disagreed about who, besides the Meccan, falls under the term “present at the Sacred Mosque.” Mālik said: “It refers to the inhabitants of Mecca, Dhū Tuwa, and any place of comparable distance from Mecca.” Abū Ḥanīfah said: “It includes the people residing at the miqāts and everyone inward from there to Mecca.” Al-Shāfiʿī, in Egypt, said: “It is whoever lives within a distance of two nights’ travel from Mecca, which is the outermost limit of the miqāts.” The Ẓāhirīs held: “It is whoever resides within the Sanctuary.” Al-Thawrī said: “It is only the people of Mecca.”

Abū Ḥanīfah maintains that tamattuʿ does not apply to those present at the Sacred Mosque, and Mālik regarded it as disliked. The root of the disagreement lies in how broadly or narrowly the phrase “those present at the Sacred Mosque” is construed; thus there is no doubt that the people of Mecca are included, just as there is no doubt that anyone living beyond the miqāts is excluded.

This, then, is the well-known form of tamattuʿ. Its essence is that the pilgrim enjoys the release from iḥrām between the two rites and is spared a second journey to the second rite, namely ḥajj.

There are two other kinds of tamattuʿ over which the jurists have differed. The first is dissolving the ḥajj into an ʿumrah—that is, switching one’s intention from iḥrām for ḥajj to iḥrām for ʿumrah. The majority of scholars from the earliest generations and the jurists of the various regions deem this disliked, whereas Ibn ʿAbbās considered it permissible, a view adopted by Aḥmad and Dāwūd.

All agree that in the year of the Farewell Pilgrimage the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—ordered his Companions to dissolve their ḥajj into an ʿumrah, as indicated by his words: “Had I known beforehand what I came to know later, I would not have driven the sacrificial animals; I would have made it an ʿumrah.” He also instructed any of his Companions who had not brought a sacrificial animal to convert their iḥrām to an ʿumrah, and the Ẓāhirīs build their case on this.

The majority, however, regarded that directive as specific to the Companions of the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—and cite as evidence the report transmitted by Rabīʿah ibn Abī ʿAbd al-Raḥmān from al-Ḥārith ibn Bilāl ibn al-Ḥārith al-Madanī, from his father, who said:

“I asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, is this dissolution meant exclusively for us or also for those who come after us?’ He replied, ‘It is exclusively for us.’”