, namely the Day of ‘Arafah and the days thereafter, and an appointed place: ‘Arafah, Muzdalifah and Minā. Thus, a person cannot leave the consecrated state of Hajj before reaching its appointed place, just as he cannot end the fast before its appointed time—unless, of course, he has a valid excuse, such as being prevented from completing Hajj. Such a person is like someone with a valid excuse to break the fast. This differs from prayer: if a person invalidates it, he starts it anew, because prayer can be performed again within its allotted time, whereas Hajj cannot.

Section

As for eating forgetfully, those who regard the ruling on this as contrary to analogy say: It falls under the omission of a commanded act. Whoever omits a commanded act out of forgetfulness has not discharged his obligation, as when someone forgets to pray or forgets to form the intention to fast. His worship is invalidated only by committing a prohibited act.

Those who maintain that it accords with analogy, however, say: Analogy dictates that whoever commits a prohibited act out of forgetfulness does not invalidate his worship, because someone who does so incurs no sin. This is indicated by the words of Allah Most High:

“Our Lord, do not hold us accountable if we forget or make a mistake.”

It is authentically reported that Allah said: “I have done so.”

The scholars do not dispute that someone who acts forgetfully incurs no sin. They do, however, disagree over whether his worship is invalidated. The proponent of this view argues: If he incurs no sin, then he has not committed an unlawful act; and someone who has not committed an unlawful act has not invalidated his worship. Worship is invalidated only by omitting an obligation or committing an unlawful act. Thus, if what he did falls under the commission of an unlawful act, but he did it forgetfully, his worship is not invalidated.

The proponent of this view also says: Analogy dictates that