ibn ʿAmr said to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, ‘I am a man who fasts frequently. Should I fast while travelling?’ He replied, ‘If you do not fast, that is good; and if you fast, there is no harm.’” He thus commended not fasting and stated that there was no harm in fasting.

The same applies to “wiping over leather socks.” No one has reported that, after putting on leather socks while in a state of ritual purity and subsequently breaking his ablution, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would remove them and wash his feet. Rather, he would wipe over them. This is the point at issue. If someone is not wearing leather socks, his duty is to wash his feet; it is not prescribed for him to put them on merely in order to wipe over them. Rather, the question concerns someone who has put them on because he needs them: is it preferable to wipe over them, to remove them, or are both options equally preferable? There are three opinions. The correct view is that wiping is preferable, in keeping with the Sunnah.

Furthermore, someone who performs Hajj as tamattuʿ has done what is prescribed according to the agreement of the recognized scholars, whereas the pilgrimage of someone who does not perform tamattuʿ is disputed. It is established that Ibn ʿAbbās and a group of the early generations held that tamattuʿ is obligatory, and that anyone who has performed tawāf (circumambulation) and saʿy (walking between Safā and Marwah), without having brought a sacrificial animal, leaves the state of ihrām whether or not he intended to do so. According to them, no one may perform Hajj except as tamattuʿ. This is the position of Ibn Hazm and other Zāhirī scholars. It is also the position of the Shia, because the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, instructed his Companions to do this during the Farewell Pilgrimage. Thus, if tamattuʿ is