And how could it be otherwise, when Suraqah ibn Malik asked the Prophet ﷺ about this dissolution, saying, “Is it meant for the Companions alone?” and he replied, “No; rather, it is for the entire ummah.”
All of these hadiths were narrated in a later incident, and nothing subsequent to it came to abrogate them. Whoever claims abrogation must bring his proof. Indeed, there is evidence that positively rules out abrogation: when someone said to the Prophet ﷺ, “Is this ʿUmrah of ours only for this year or forever?” he answered, “No, it is for all eternity; ʿUmrah has been joined to Hajj until the Day of Resurrection.”
The majority’s assertion of abrogation on the strength of the report of Bilal ibn al-Harith is extremely remote. Imam Ahmad said regarding that narration: “In my judgment the hadith of Bilal ibn al-Harith is not sound, and I do not act upon it. One of its transmitters, al-Harith ibn Bilal, is unknown.” He also remarked, “Even if al-Harith ibn Bilal were known, there are eleven Companions of the Prophet ﷺ who hold the view of dissolution—where does al-Harith ibn Bilal stand in comparison with them?”
As for the statement attributed to Abu Dharr, it is merely his personal opinion, contradicted by other Companions; therefore it cannot serve as proof, especially when it conflicts with authentic hadiths.
Among those who adopted the view of dissolution are Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah—may Allah sanctify his soul—and his student Ibn al-Qayyim. Ibn al-Qayyim devoted a lengthy discussion to the matter in his Zad al-Maʿad, setting out the proofs for both sides, championing dissolution with forceful, lucid argumentation, rebutting the opposing view, and dismantling its evidence with his compelling and powerful style.
The scholars who accept dissolution then differed: is it obligatory or merely recommended?
Imam Ahmad held it to be recommended. Shaykh al-Islam said: “The people of Mecca, the Banu Hashim, and the hadith scholars deem it recommended. Consequently, the scholars of his school, his followers, and the people of his own city—so near to the sacred rites—regard it as recommended; these are the people most closely connected to him.”
Perhaps Imam Ahmad’s restricting the Prophet’s emphatic commands to dissolve to the level of recommendation is what led the Companions not to hasten in carrying it out.
Ibn ʿAbbas, as implied by his words, regarded it as obligatory for anyone who has not brought a sacrificial animal for tamattuʿ. He said, “Whoever arrives in ihram for Hajj, the very circumambulation of the House converts it into ʿUmrah, whether he wishes or not.”
Ibn Hazm took the same position as Ibn ʿAbbas, stating in his al-Muhalla: “Whoever intends Hajj, then when he reaches the miqat, if he is not bringing a sacrificial animal, it is obligatory upon him to enter ihram for ʿUmrah.”