your family (1).” By this, ‘Umar and ‘Alī—may Allah be pleased with them both—meant that one should make one journey for Hajj and another for ‘umrah. Otherwise, neither of them entered the state of ihrām from his family home; nor did the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—or any of his caliphs do so.
When a ruler chooses what is more virtuous for his subjects, commanding one thing entails forbidding its opposite. Thus, his forbidding tamattu‘ expressed a preference, not a declaration that it was unlawful. He did not say, “And I declare them both unlawful” (2), as this Rāfidī has reported. Rather, he said, “I forbid them both.” His forbidding Hajj tamattu‘ was therefore based on preferring what was superior, not on declaring it unlawful (3).
It has also been said that he forbade converting Hajj into ‘umrah. Many jurists regard such conversion as unlawful, and it is a matter open to juristic reasoning. Abū Hanīfah, Mālik, and al-Shāfi‘ī prohibit it. Aḥmad and others [among the hadith jurists and others (4) do not regard it as unlawful; rather, they deem it recommended, and some of them even deem it obligatory. Nor do they adopt ‘Umar’s opinion] (5) on this issue, but instead follow the opinion of ‘Alī, ‘Imrān ibn Husayn, Ibn ‘Abbās, Ibn ‘Umar, and other Companions—may Allah be pleased with them.
As for temporary marriage with women [which is disputed] (6), the verse contains no explicit statement declaring it lawful, for He, Exalted is He, said: