This covers the identification of the acts of this worship (hajj), namely its basic elements, as well as the discussion of acts to be avoided during the period of its performance. This worship, as we have said, is of two types: hajj and ^umra. Hajj itself is of three types: ifrdd, tamattuy and qirdn. All these consist of determined acts (to be performed) at determined locations and at determined times. Some of these are obligatory, while some are not, along with things to be avoided during these acts, each one of which has determined ahkam (to be applied) either at the time of a breach or on the occurrence of an obstacle.

This category is, therefore, divided first into a discussion of the acts (to be performed) and a discussion of the things to be avoided. The third category will include the discussion of the.ahkdm.

We begin, then, with the acts (of this worship). Some of these acts are stipulated for these four kinds of rites, that is, for the three types of hajj and for <umra while some are specific to individual y types. We begin the discussion with the acts common to them and will then move to what is specific to the individual types. We say: The first of the acts in hajj and <umra is the act known as the ihram.

The first condition for the ihram1* is that of location and time. The locations are what are called the mawaqit of hajj. We will begin the discussion with these. The jurist generally agree that the mawdqtt are where the ihram (intention to start the hajj as well as wearing the hajj attire) is to be formulated. For the people of Medina the location is Dhu al-Hulayfa, for the people of Syria it is al-Juhfa, for the people of Najd it is Qam, and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam, because all this is established from the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in the tradition of Ibn TJmar and others. They disagreed about the miqdt for the people of Iraq. The majority of the jurists of the provinces maintain that the miqdt for them is Dhat Irq. Al-ShaficT and al-Thawri said that if they adopt the ihram at al- c AqTq it would be preferable. They disagreed as to who had determined this location for them. A group of jurists said that it was TJmar ibn al-Khattab. Another group of jurists said that, in fact, it was the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) himself who determined the location for the people of Iraq to be Dhat <Irq or al-cAqTq. This has been related in traditions from Jabir, Ibn Abbas, and <A*isha. The majority of the jurists maintain that the person who misses these points, though he has in mind, to go through the ihram and does so after crossing them is liable for atonement by slaughtering (of an animal) (dam). Some of these jurists said that if he returns to the miqdt and performs the ihram there the liability for atonement is dropped. Al-ShafiT is one of these jurists. Some of them said that the liability for atonement is not dropped even if he returns. This was Malik’s opinion. One group said that there is no atonement for him. Another group said that if he does not return to the miqdt his hajj becomes invalid and that he should return and begin the rites of the ^umra. This is discussed fully in the chapter dealing with the ahkam.

The majority of the jurists maintain that the person whose residence is nearer (Mecca) than the miqdt, the miqdt for his ihram is his residence. They disagreed whether there is greater merit for the pilgrims to begin' the process of ihram from their residences or from the miqdt if their residences are nearer to Mecca than the miqdt. A group of jurists said that it is better for such a person to start from his residence, and that to start from the miqdt in their case is an exemption. This was the opinion of al-ShafiT, Abu HanTfa, al-ThawrT, and a group of jurists. Malik, Ishaq, and Ahmad said that to start from the the mawaqit is better. The reliance of these jurists is on the preceding traditions and (on the argument) that it is a sunna established by the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and is therefore better. The reliance of the other group is on the argument that the Companions—Ibn cAbbas, Ibn TJmar, Ibn Mas ud, and others—started c the process of the ihram from the miqdt. They said that they (the Companions) knew better the sunna of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). The principles of the Zahirites imply that it is not permitted to commence the ihram from any place other than the miqdt, unless an authentic consensus indicates the contrary.

They disagreed about the person who does not commence the ihram from the miqdt assigned to his region and starts instead from another miqdt, like a resident of Medina relinquishing Dhu al-Hulayfa and starting from al-Juhfa. A group of jurists said that he is liable for atonement by slaughtering an animal (dam). Those who held this opinion are Malik and some of his disciples. Abu HanTfa said that there is no liability for him. The reason for the disagreement is whether it is one of the rites the relinquishment of which makes a person liable for atonement by slaughtering an animal (dam).

There is no disagreement that it is binding upon a person who passes by these locations, when he intends to perform the hajj or the himra, to commence the ihram there. In the case of persons who do not intend to perform these rites, but pass by the locations, a group of jurists said that it is binding on them to adopt the ihram, except those who do so very frequently, like woodcutters and other similar people. This was Malik’s opinion. Another group of jurists said that this is not binding on any person except those who intend to perform the hajj or the ^umra. All this is in the case of persons who are not residents of Mecca.

The residents of Mecca adopt the ihram from their residences, in case of the hajj. In the case of the ^umra, they go outside the boundaries of the Haram (hill), and that is necessary. With respect to the time when the residents of Mecca are to adopt the ihram, it is said that they do so when they sight the new moon (of Dhu al-Hijja), and it is said when the pilgrims start moving toward Mina (on the eighth of Dhu al-Hijja). This is the (discussion of the) miqat with reference to location, which is stipulated for the different types of this worship.

The miqat of time is also determined for the the three types of hajj. It is the period comprising Shawwal, Dhu al-Qa^a, and the first nine days of Dhu al- Hijja, by agreement. Malik said that it is a total of three months. AI-ShaficT said that it consists of the two first months and the first nine days of Dhu al- Hijja. Abu HanTfa said that it is the two months plus the first ten days of Dhu al-Hijja. x The evidence for Malik’s opinion is the generality of the words of the Exalted, “The pilgrimage is (in) the well-known months”,247 implying that this applies to all the days of Dhu al-Hijja as it does to all the days of Shawwal and Dhu al-QaMa. The evidence of the second group is the termination of the ritual state of ihram before the completion of the third month by the completion of all its obligatory acts. The implication of the dispute is the (permissibility of) delaying of the of the tawaf al-ifada (the obligatory final circumambulation of the Ka'ba) till the end of the month.

Malik disapproves a person’s commencing the ihram before the months of hajj, but such commencing of the ihram is valid in his view. Other jurists maintain that the ihram of this person is not valid. Al-ShafiT said that his ihram is to be converted to the ihram for 'umra. Those who held this to be similar to the time for prayer said that it is not effective before time. Those who relied upon the general implication of the words of the Exalted, “Complete the performance of the pilgrimage and the himra for Allah”,248 said that whenever he starts the ihram it takes effect, for he is commanded to complete (the pilgrimage). Perhaps, they held hajj in this context to be similar to himra and held the miqat of time to be similar to those of ^umra. Al- Shafi Fs c opinion is based upon the argument that whoever undertakes an act of worship in a time that pertains to an identical worship the worship is converted to the identical form, like one fasting after a vow during Ramadan. There is disagreement over this principle in the School (Malik’s).

The jurists agreed that himra is permissible at any time of the year, as in the days of jahiliyya it was not performed during the days of hajj (but during the rest of the year), which is the meaning of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), "*Umra stands merged in the hajj up to the Day of Judgment”. Abu Hanifa said that it is permitted throughout the year, except on the day of ^Arafa, the day of sacrifice, and the days of tashriq when it is considered disapproved.

They disagreed about its repetition in a single year. Malik considered one ^umra as desirable every year but disapproved the performance of two or three in one year. Al-Shafi T and Abu Hanifa held that there is no abomination in this.

c This, then, is the discussion of the conditions of the ihram pertaining to time and location. It is necessary after this to move to the discussion of the ihram, but before that it is essential to talk about the things to be avoided by the person in the ritual state of the ihram. Thereafter, we will talk about the specific acts of the person in a ritual state of the ihram until he is released from it and these are all the acts that are to be observed or are to be shunned relinquishments of hajj. We shall then take up the ahkam of vitiation due to the commission of a prohibited act or the relinquishment and abuse of a required act. We, therefore, begin with the relinquishments.

These are ordinarily permissible acts that are not permitted to a person in the ritual state of ihram. The source for this topic is what is established through the tradition of Malik from Nafi< from <Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar “that a man asked the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), ‘What kind of clothes does a person in a ritual state of ihram wear?’ The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘You should neither wear shirts, nor turbans, nor trousers, nor hooded cloaks, nor shoes, unless a person does not find sandals for then he may wear shoes after cutting them below the ankles. And do not wear any clothing which has been touched (dyed) by saffron or wars (yellow dye)’”. the ritual state of ihrdm should not wear a shirt or any other thing mentioned in this tradition nor anything that is similar, that is, stitched: clothing. This is specific for men, that is, wearing stitched clothing, and there is no harm if a woman wears a shirt, coat, trousers, shoes, and a head-cover.

They differed about the person who does not find anything other than trousers. Is he to wear them? Malik and Abu Hamfa held that he is not permitted to wear trousers and if he does so he atones for it. Al-ShaficT, al- ThawrT, Ahmad. Abu Thawr, and Dawud said that there is no liability upon him if he cannot find a loin-cloth. The reliance in Malik’s opinion is upon the apparent meaning of the preceding tradition of Ibn Umar. He said that had there been some exemption in this the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and* blessings be upon him) would have expressed it as he did in the case of shoes. The reliance of the other group is upon the tradition of cAmr ibn Dinar from Jabir and Ibn Abbas, who said, “I heard the Messenger c of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) saying, ‘Trousers are for the person who does not find a loin-cloth and shoes for one who cannot find sandals’”.

The majority of the jurists permit the wearing of shoes that have been cut down for a person who cannot find sandals. Ahmad said that it is permitted to a person who cannot find sandals to wear shoes that have not been cut, and this by relying upon the unqualified implication in the tradition of Ibn c Abbas. cAta> said that in cutting them down there is waste and Allah does not like waste. They differed about the person who wears cut down shoes when sandals are available. Malik said that he has to make atonement, and this was also the opinion of Abu Thawr. Abu Hamfa said that there is no atonement for him. Both views are related from al-ShafiT, and we shall mention this in the discussion of the ahkam.

The jurists agreed unanimously that the person in the state of ihrdm is not to wear clothing that is dyed with wars or saffron, because of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in the tradition of Ibn Umar, “And do not wear any clothing which has been touched [dyed] by saffron or wars [yellow dye]”. They disagreed about clothing dyed with safflower. Malik said that there is no harm in that as it is not a perfume. Abu HanTfa and al-ThawrT said that it is a perfume and there is ransom (fidya) for using it. The evidence for Abu HanTfa is what Malik has recorded from C A1T “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited the wearing of qassly (a silk striped garment) and a garment dyed with safflower”.

The persons in the ritual state of ihrdm either perform the <umra separately and the hajj separately (mufrid) or they combine the hajj and the <umra. He who intends to do both may begin with the hajj, in which case he is called a mufrid, or with the himra, in which case he is a mutamatti\ or he may combine both, and then he is known as a qdrin. It is necessary, initially, to separate the three types of these rites and then to discuss what the tnuhritn does in each .one of these, and discuss what is specific to each of these types, if there is something specific to them. We shall do the same thing after discussing the ihrdm with the acts of hajj.

We say: ifrad (the method by which the pilgrim begins with hajj) is the type stripped of the characteristics of tamattu^ and'qirdn. It is, therefore, necessary that we first begin with a description of tamattu^ and then follow it up with the description of qiran.

We say: The jurists agreed that this is the kind of rite that is implied in the words of the Exalted, “Then whosoever enjoyed freedom from the restriction of the ihrdm by commencing with the ^umra before the hajj, (shall give) such gifts as can be had with ease”. This means that the pilgrim pronounces the talbiya for the himra from the appointed locations during the-months of hajj. This is the case if his residence is beyond the Haram (otherwise he does so from his residence). He moves from there until he reaches the House (the Sacred Mosque) and makes the circuits around' the Ka^ba, performs the say, and then has his hair shaved (or shortened) within these months. He is then no longer in the state of ihrdm though he is in Mecca. He will begin his hajj in the very same year and in these appointed-1 months without going back to his homeland, except what is related from akHasan. He said that he is to be considered a mutamatti*- even if he goes back to his homeland without performing he. hajj, that is, he is liable for the sacrifice of the mutamatti^ that is mentioned in the words of the Exalted, “such blood sacrifice as can be had with ease”.252 * 254 He (ai-Hasan) used to maintain that a ^umra during the days of hajj amounts to tamattifi. Tawus maintained that the person who performs ^umra before the months of hajj and then stays on (in Mecca) till the hajj and performs it in the same year is also to be considered a mutamatti\ The jurists agreed that a person who is not residing (permanently) in the (vicinity of) al-Masjid al-Haram is eligible for being a mutamattP. They disagreed about the resident of Mecca whether he is eligible for tamattu*-. Those who maintained that he is eligible agreed that there is no (obligation of) atonement , because of the words of the Exalted, “That is for him whose folk are not present in the vicinity of al-Masjid al-Haram” They disagreed as to who is resident in al-Masjid al-Hardm. Malik said that they are the residents of the town of Mecca and those of Dhu Tuwa, as well as others whose residence is as far from Mecca as Dhu Tuwa. Abu Harnfa said that they are the persons who live withing the mawdqit and within Mecca. Al-ShaficT said, at Egypt, that these are the persons who live up to a distance of two nights travel from Mecca, and this is the maximum distance of the mawaqit. The Zahirites said that they are those who live within the boundaries of the Haram, while al- Thawri said that they are the residents of Mecca alone.

Abu HanTfa said that tamattu^ does not apply to the persons present at al- Masjid al-Haram. Malik considered this to be disapproved. The reason for their disagreement stems from their dispute over the minimum and maximum implication of “those present at al-Masjid al-Hardm”, therefore, there is no doubt that the.residents of Mecca are among “those present at al-Masjid al- Hardm”, just as there is no doubt that those living outside the mawdqit are not among them.

This then is the well-known form of the method known as tamattifi. The meaning of tamattu^ is that the pilgrim benefited from the removal of the prohibitions of ihrdm between the two rites and by the elimination of the need for making another journey for the hajj.

Qirdn is the pronouncing of the ihrdm (intention) for performing the hajj and the <umra together, or it is the pronouncing of the ihrdm for the htmra during the hajj months and then commencing with the hajj before his release258 from the ihrdm. The disciples of Malik differed about the time when the pilgrim can do this (i.e. combining hajj with Hcmra). It is said that he has a right to do this as long as he has not commenced the circumambulation (of the ^umra), not even a single circuit. It is also said that as long as he has not completed the circuits and bowed (offered the post-taw^f sunna prayer) after that. It is considered disapproved after the circumambulation and even before the Hd tawdf prayer, but if he does so it becomes binding upon him. It is also said that he has a right to do this as. long as some part of the himra is still left, either the circuits or the safy. They agreed, however, that if he pronounces -the ihrdm (intention) of hajj and none of the acts of the ^umra is left, except the clipping of the hair, he cannot be considered a qarin.

The qarin on whom the same sacrifice as the mutamattiPs is binding is not one of those who are permanently resident in the vicinity of al-Masjid al- Haram. Ibn al-Majishun, one of the disciples of Malik, said that a qarin, even on* who is a resident of Mecca, is in his view under an obligation for the sacrifice.

Ifrdd is a kind (of hajj) that is devoid of these attributes and is performed by one who? is neither a mutamattfi nor a qarin, and, he begins by pronouncing the ihrdm (the intention) of hajj alone.

The jurists disagreed over which form is better: ifrdd, qiran, or tamattuP The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute over the form of hajj performed by the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). It is related about him that he performed it as a mufrid, as a mutamattiS, and as a qarin. Malik chose ifrdd, and for this he relied upon what is related from <A>isha that she said, “We accompanied the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) on the Farewell Pilgrimage and with us were those who began with the ^umra, those who combined hajj and <umra, and the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) started with hajj”. This tradition has been related from ‘A^sha through many channels. Abu TJmar ibn (Abd al-Barr said: “Ifrdd as performed by the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was reported by Jabir ibn cAbd Allah through various channels that are mutawdtir and authentic”. This (the greater merit of ifrdd) was also the opinion of Abu Bakr, TJmar, TJthman, c A*isha, and Jabir.

Those who maintained that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) performed it as a mutamatt? argued on the basis of what is related by al- Layth from TJqayl from Ibn Shihab from Salim from Ibn TJmar, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) performed tamattuS during the Farewell Pilgrimage by commencing with the ^umra and [later] moving on to hajj. He drove the sacrificial animals with him from Dhu al-Hulayfa”. This was the view of cAbd Allah ibn TJmar, Ibn cAbbas, Ibn al-Zubayr, and the report from A>isha varies between ifrdd and tamattifi. Those who maintain that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) performed as qdrin rely on a large number of traditions, including the tradition of Ibn ‘Abbas from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) saying when he was at the valley of al-‘AqTq, ‘The previous night a revelation came to me from my Lord instructing me: “Proclaim the ihram in this blessed valley, and let the himra be included in the hajj” ’ It has been recorded by al-BukharT. There is also the tradition of Marwan ibn al-Hakam, who said, “I witnessed ‘Uthman and ‘AIT, when ‘Uthman was prohibiting the mut'-a or to combine the two {hajj and ^umra). When ‘AIT saw this he pronounced the. talbiya for both: labbayk for the himra and hajj. He said, ‘I was not about to give up the sunna of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) for anyone’s opinion’”. It has been recorded by al-BukharT. Moreover, in the tradition of Anas, which has also been recorded by al-BukharT, he also said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) saying: labbayk, ^umra and hajj\ And in the tradition of Malik from Ibn Shihab from °Urwa from ‘A’isha, she said, “We accompanied the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) on the Farewell Pilgrimage and we pronounced the talbiya for the himra. The Messenger of Allah then said, ‘The person who has his sacrificial animal with him should pronounce the talbiya for hajj with the hirnra, and he will not be released from the ihram until he has completed both’”. They argued saying that it is known that he (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) had the sacrificial animals with him, and it is unlikely that he should order the person who had his sacrificial animal to perform qirdn, and then not perform qirdn himself when he had the sacrificial animals. In another tradition of Malik also from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar from Hafsa.from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), he said, “I have garlanded my sacrificial animal and matted my hair, so I will not take off my ihram until I sacrifice my animal”. Ahmad said: “I have no doubt that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was a qdrin, but tamattuS is dearer to me. He argued for choosing tamattu^ on the basis of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), ‘If I were to start off again, I would not drive the sacrificial animals, and I would change it to hirnra’”.

The majority of the jurists agreed that bathing is a sunna for commencing with the ihram, and it is one of the acts of the muhrim, so much so that Ibn Nawaz said: Bathing for the ihram has greater significance, for Malik, than bathing for the Friday prayer. The Zahirites said that it is obligatory. Abu Hanlfa and alT ThawrT said that performing the ablution is sufficient.

The evidence of the Zahirites is the mursal report by Malik in the tradition of Asma* bint TJmays “that she gave birth to Muhammad ibn Abf Bakr at al- Bayda*. Abu Bakr mentioned this to the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), who said, ‘Tell her to bathe and then wear the ihram* The command in their view implies an obligation. The reliance of the majority is upon the principle that the original rule is freedom from liability until an obligation is established by an irrefutable command.

Further, cAbd Allah ibn <Umar used to bathe for his ihram before commencing it, and for entering Mecca, and on the evening prior to the his stationing at Arafa. Malik held these three baths to be the acts of the muhrim.

c They agreed that (the ritual state of) ihram cannot be assumed without forming an intention. They disagreed on whether the intention is enough without the pronouncement of the talbiya. Malik and al-ShaficT said that intention without the talbiya is sufficient. Abu Hanifa said that talbiya in hajj is like the initial takbir in prayers, except that any words used as a substitute for the talbiya are sufficient, just as all words used in the place of the takbir on the commencement of prayer are enough, when they indicate exaltedness.

The jurists agreed that, the words of the talbiya of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) were “labbayk Allahumma labbayk, labbayka Id sharika laka labbayk, inna >l-hamda wa 'n-nfmata laka wa mulk, Id sharika lak (At Your command, O Allah, at Your, command; at Your command, You have no partner, at Your command; all praise and grace are Yours, and Yours the dominion; You have no partner). It is the narration of Malik from Nafi< from Ibn TJmar from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and it. carries the highest degree of authenticity. They disagreed on whether the.talbiya has to be in these words. The Zahirites said that it. is obligatory that it be said in these words. There is no disagreement among the majority of the jurists about the desirability of these words, but they differed about the additions to them or about substitutions. The Zahirites also considered the raising of the voice with the talbiya as obligatory, which is desirable according to the majority, because of what is related by Malik “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Jibril came to me and directed me to order my companions and those who are with me that they should raise their voices with the talbiya and in forming the intention’”. The jurists agreed that (the manner of) a woman’s talbiya, as related by abu TJmar, is that she should be able to hear herself pronouncing it.

This discussion is about the circumambulation of the House, its description, its conditions, the hukm of its obligation or recommendation, and about the number of the circuits.

The majority agree unanimously that the form of the circumambulation, whether obligatory or recommended, is that the worshipper begins at al-hajar al-aswad (the Black Stone). If he is able to kiss the stone he should do so, or touch it with his hand if possible and then kiss it. He then turns, with the House on his left, and he walks around it. He makes seven circuits, adopting the ramal (rythmic trot while shrugging the shoulders; marking time but moving ahead) for the first three circuits. He then walks in the remaining four circuits. This is for the circumambulation of greeting (tawdf al-quditm) on entering Mecca and it is for those performing hajj or himra (as well as those who are simply visiting the House of Allah) to the exclusion of the mutamattf. There is no ramal for women. The worshipper is to make a salutation to al- rukn al-yamdnt. which is the corner (of the House) before al-rukn al-aswad (the corner with the Black Stone) (by raising both hands toward it), because this has been established as an act of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him).

They disagreed about the hukm of ramal in the first three circuits for the person coming into Mecca, whether this is a sunna or an act of merit. Ibn c Abbas said that it is a sunna. and this was the opinion of al-ShaficT, Abu HanTfa, Ishaq, Ahmad, and Abu Thawr. The opinions of Malik and those of his disciples vary on the point. The difference between the two opinions is that * I those who deem it to be a sunna made its relinquishment liable to atonement (dam). while those who did not consider it a sunna did not impose any duty. Those who did not consider ramal to be a sunna argued on the basis of the tradition of Ibn al-Tufayl from Ibn <Abbas that he said, “I said , to Ibn Abbas c that some people are under the impression that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) adopted ramal when he made the circumambulation of the House, and that this is a sunna. He said, ‘They spoke in truth and they lied’. I said, ‘What was the truth and what was the lie?’ He said, ‘They were truthful about the ramal adopted by the Messenger of Allah when he circumambulated the House, and they lied about saying it is a sunna.

The Quraysh, during the time of Hudaybiya, while they were stationed on the Qu'ayqiyan (mountain) watching the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) and his Companions, said, ‘He and his companions are emaciated’. When this was communicated to the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) he said to his Companions, ‘Adopt the ramal and let them see that you have strength’. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) adopted the ramal from the Black Stone to al-rukn al-yamani. but when he was concealed from their view he walked”. The evidence of the majority is based upon the tradition of Jabir “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) adopted the ramal in the (first) three circuits during the Farewell Pilgrimage and walked in (the remaining) four”. It is an authentic tradition related by Malik and others. The majority maintained that the versions related by Abu al-Tufayl from Ibn 'Abbas have varied; thus it is related from him “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) adopted the ramal from the Black Stone up to the Black Stone”, which is different from the first narration. Ramal is obligatory in accordance with the principles of the Zahirites, because of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Acquire your rites from me”, and that was their opinion or it is the opinion of some of them now, as far as I know.

Its conditions include the delineation of its boundary. The majority of the jurists maintain that the hijr (northern wall) is part of the House, and whoever circumambulates the House is bound to include the hijr in it, and that it is a condition for the tawaf al-ifdda (the post-cArafat circumambulation, after throwing the pebbles). Abu Harnfa and his disciples said that it is a sunna. The evidence of the majority is what is related by Malik from cA>isha that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Were it not for the fact that disbelief is a recent memory of your people I would have demolished the Ka^a and erected it on the foundations laid -by Ibrahim”. They had left seven dhirfr of the hijr due to shortage of funds and wood. This was the opinion of Ibn cAbbas. He argued relying on the words of the Exalted, “And go around the ancient House”,260 and said that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) made the circumambulation beyond the hijr. The evidence for Abu HanTfa is the apparent meaning of the verse.

They disagreed about the time of its permissibility holding three opinions. The first is the permissibility of circumambulation after the morning prayer and after and its prohibition at the time of sunrise and sunset. This is the opinion of TJmar ibn al-Khattab and Abu SacTd al-Khudri. This was upheld by Malik, his disciples, and a group of jurists. The second opinion is about its abomination after the morning prayer and W, and its prohibition at sunrise and sunset. This was the opinion of SacTd ibn Jubayr, Mujahid and a group. The third opinion permits it at all times. This was upheld by al-ShaficT and a group of jurists.

The roots of their disagreement can be found in the prohibition or permissibility of prayer during these times. The traditions are unanimous about the prohibition of prayer at sunrise and sunset. Whether circumambula­ tion is linked to prayer for this purpose is a matter of dispute. The evidence relied upon by the Shaficites is the tradition of Jubayr ibn Mutfim that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “O sons of cAbd Manaf—or he said O sons of cAbd al-Muttalib-^if you come to supervise anything from this affair do not prevent anyone circumambulating this House from praying at any hour of the day or night”. It is related by al-ShaficT and others from Ibn TJyayna with its chain reaching up to Jubayr ibn Mut im.

c They disagreed about the permissibility of circumambulation without purification after their agreement that purification is a sunna for it. Malik and al-ShafiT said that it is not valid to circumambulate without purification, whether it is done intentionally or due to forgetfulness. Abu HanTfa said that this is valid and he considered its repetition desirable. He also held the person liable for atonement (dam). Abu Thawr said that if he performs the circumambulation without ablution his act is to be considered valid if he was not aware of it, but it is not valid if he did know. Al-ShaficT stipulates the purification of the dress of the person making the circumambulation, as he does for one praying.

The jurists agreed that circumambulation is of three types: the circumambula- tion of greeting (tawaf al-qudum) on arrival in Mecca, tawaf al-ijdda after throwing pebbles at the first pillar (Jamrat al-^Aqaba) on the day of sacrifice, and the farewell circumambulation (before departure from Mecca). They agreed that the obligatory circumambulation among these, without which the hajj is lost, is the tawaf al-ijada, and that is the one intended in the words of the Exalted, “Then let them make an end of their unkemptness and pay their vows and go around the ancient House”.261 Further, no atonement is acceptable in its place. The majority also maintain that the initial circumambulation is not a valid substitute for the tawaf al-ifdda if the pilgrim forgets the latter, because of its being before the day of sacrifice. One group, from among the disciples of Malik, maintained that the initial circumambula­ tion is a valid substitute for the tawaf al-ifada, and it appears that they considered the obligation to be for only one type of circumambulation. The majority of the jurists maintain, however, that the farewell circumambulation is a valid substitute for the tawaf al-ifada, if the pilgrim has not performed the latter, as the former is a circumambulation performed during the period of the obligatory circumambulation, which is the tawaf al-ifdda, as against the initial circumambulation that is performed before the time of the tawaf al-ifada.

They agreed, according to what has been related from Abu TJmar ibn c Abd al-Barr, that the initial and the farewell circumambulation are part of the sunan for the pilgrim, except for the person who fears losing the hajj (due to shortage of time), for in his case the tawaf al-ifada is sufficient. A group of the jurists considered it desirable for a person faced with such a situation to adopt the ramal in the first three circuits of the tawaf al-ifada, in accordance with the practice in the initial circumambulation.

They agreed that a resident of Mecca is only obliged to perform the tawaf al-ifada, just as they agreed that for the person performing the himra the only obligation is for the initial circumambulation. They also agreed that the person who has benefited from the performance of the himra (in the tamattu* form of hajj) before beginning the hajj is under the obligation to perform two circumambulations, one for the <umra and another for hajj on the day of sacrifice, in accordance with the well-known tradition of cA5isha. The person performing hajj as a mufrid is obliged for only one circumambulation, as we have said, on the day of the sacrifice. They disagreed about the qarin. Malik, al-Shafi T, Ahmad, c and Abu Thawr maintained that one circumambulation and one saty are sufficient for the qarin, which was also the opinion of <Abd Allah ibn TJmar and Jabir. Their reliance for this is on the tradition of <A*isha that has preceded. Al-Thawri, al-AwzacT, Abu HanTfa, and Ibn AbT Layla maintain that the qarin is under an obligation of performing two circumambulations and two satys. They related this from Ibn Masffid, as they are two rites with each having a condition, if performed separately, that the circumambulation be performed with the sa<y\ thus, it is necessary that it be the same when they are performed together.

The discussion of the saty covers its hukm, its description, conditions, and its order.

Malik and al-ShafiT said that it is obligatory by its hukm, and if the pilgrim does not perform it, hajj would (still) be obligatory upon him in the next season. This was also the opinion of Ahmad and Ishaq. The Kufis said that it is a sunna, and if he returns to his homeland without performing it he is liable to atonement by slaughtering an animal. Some of the jurists said that it is voluntary and there is no obligation upon the person who relinquishes it.

The reliance of those who made it obligatory is upon the report “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to perform the sa<y and say, ‘Perform the safy for Allah has prescribed the saty for you’”. This tradition has been related by al-ShafiT from cAbd Allah ibn al- Mu’mil. Further, the principle is that the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in this worship are to be construed as conveying obligation, except those excluded by a transmitted evidence, consensus, or analogy in the view of those who uphold analogy to be a valid principle. Those who did not consider it obligatory relied on the words of the Exalted, “Lo! (the mountains) as-Safa and al-Marwa are among the indications of Allah. It is therefore no sin for him who is on pilgrimage to the House (of God) or visiteth it, to go around them”. They said that the meaning here is that he may “not go round them”, which is the (variant) reading of Ibn Mascud, just as the words of the Exalted, “Allah expoundeth unto you, so that ye err (not)”,262 263 mean “lest ye err”. They also considered the tradition of Ibn al-Mu’mil to be weak. ‘A’isha said that the verse is to be understood in its obvious meaning, and it was revealed in the case of the Ansar who shunned running between al- Safa and al-Marwa in the way they used to during the period of the jahiliyya as it served as a place for the slaughtering of animals for the polytheists. It is also said that they used not to run between al-Safa and al-Marwa out of veneration for some of the idols (Manat). They inquired about this, and the verse was revealed validating their hesitation.

The majority decided that it is one of the acts of the hajj, because it is described as an act of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) by way of tawdtur in these traditions, I mean the linking of with circumambulation.

In describing it, the majority of the jurists maintained that a sunna of the saty between al-Safa and al-Marwa is that the worshipper having ascended al-Safa is to go down its slope after completing the supplication. He is then to walk at his normal pace till he reaches the bottom of the masil (valley, bed of the stream).264 He is (now) to adopt the ramal through it until he traverses it getting closer to al-Marwa from where he moves at his normal gait till he arrives at al-Marwa. He ascends it until he can see the House, then he makes a supplication and pronounces the takbir in a manner similar to what he said at al-Safa. If he stops at the base of al-Marwa (and does not climb it) it is considered valid in their collective view. He then descends from al-Marwa and proceeds at. his normal pace until he reaches the bottom of the valley. When he reaches it he is to adopt the ramal until he crosses over to the side of al-Safa. He is to do this seven times, beginning at al-Safa and ending at al-Marwa. If he begins at al-Marwa before going to al-Safa, that journey is annulled, because of the saying of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “We begin with that with which Allah began, so we begin with al- Safa”, and by this he meant the words of the Exalted, “Lol (the mountains) as- Safa and al-Marwa are among the indications of Allah. It is therefore no sin for him who is on pilgrimage to the House (of God) or visiteth it, to go around them”.265 cAta> said that if he does not know and begins at al-Marwa, his act is to be considered as valid.

They agreed unanimously that there is no determined opinion about the time for the sa^y, as it is a case of supplication. It is established in the tradition of Jabir “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), when he stood at al-Safa, pronounced the takbir three times and said, ‘There is no god but Allah alone, and He has no partner, His is the dominion and for Him is all praise, and He has power over all things’. He did this three times, and he made a supplication at al-Marwa and did the same thing”.

They agreed that one of its conditions is purity from menstruation, as is the case with the circumambulation, because of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in the tradition of cA*isha, “Do what all the pilgrims do, but do not circumambulate the House and do not perform the saty between al-Safa and al-Marwa”. Yahya was alone in relating this addition from Malik as compared to the others who have related this tradition from him. There is no dispute among them that ablution is not one of its conditions, except for al-Hasan as he held it to be similar to the circumambulation.

The jurists agreed that in the order of performance the sa<y comes after the circumambulation, and that the person who performs the sa y circuiting the House is to go back and perform the circumambulation even if he has moved out of Mecca. If he did not realize this, in the case of the <umra or the hajj, until he has cohabited with women, he is under the obligation for hajj in the next season and for the sacrifice or for <umra (as the case may be). Al-Thawri said that if he does this he is not liable for anything. Abu Hanifa said that if he leaves Mecca he is not obliged to return, but he is liable for atonement. This was the discussion of the hukm of sa'y, its description, well-known conditions, and the order (of performance).

The act of the pilgrim that follows this act (wty) is moving out on the Day of Tarwiya (eighth of Dhu al-Hijja) to Mina and staying there the eve of cArafa. They agreed that the imam leads the people in prayer on the eighth of Dhu al- Hijja at Mina, and zuhr and (asr and maghrib and <ish& are curtailed over there. They agreed, however, that this act is not a condition for the validity of hajj for the person who is short of time. When the sun rises on the Day of c Arafa (ninth Dhu al-Hijja) the imam walks with the people from Mina up to <Arafa, and they take up station there.

The discussion of this act includes the identification of its hukm, its description, and its conditions. The jurists agreed about the hukm of stopping at cArafa that it is one of the essential elements (arkan) of hajj. In the opinion of the majority of the jurists the person who misses this is under an obligation to perform hajj in the next season and to make the sacrifice, because of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “The hajj is c Arafa”.

Its description is that the imam leads the people in prayer at cArafa on the Day of cArafa (ninth Dhu al-Hijja) before the declining of the sun. If the sun has declined he is to address the people and then combine zuhr and <asr in the first timing of zwAr, and thereafter they stay stationed there until the sun goes down.

They agreed upon this as this is the description that is agreed upon unanimously in the acts of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). There is no dispute among them that the establishing of the hajj (leading the prayer) is the right of the sultan with the highest authority, or of a person whom the sultan has appointed, and also that the people are to pray behind him whether he is pious, sinful, or and innovator. The sunna for this is that he should come to the mosque at cArafa on the Day of cArafa along with the people. When the sun has declined he should address the people, as we have said, and he should combine the zuhr and <asr prayers.They disagreed about the time for the call to the prayer by the mu>adhdhin for the zuhr and <asr prayers. Malik said that the imam is to address the people and when the major part of his sermon is over the mifadhdhin should make the call for prayer while he (the imam) is addressing the people. Al- ShafFT said that he is to make the call when the imam begins the second sermon. Abu HanTfa said that when the imam ascends the pulpit he should order the mu*adhdhin to make the call, who is to make the call as is the case in the Friday congregational prayer. When the mtfadhdhin has finished making the call the imam is to begin his sermon, after which he is to descend and the mu>adhdhin will announce the iqama (the call for the commencement of prayer). This was also the opinion of Abu Thawr, who held it to be similar to the Friday prayer. Ibn al-Mundhir has related from Malik that he said: “The call for prayer is to be made after the imam sits down for the sermon. The words in the tradition of Jabir are ‘that when the sun had declined the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered al-Qasw? to be brought and riding on it he reached the middle of the valley and addressed the people. Bilal then made the call for prayer. After this he stood up and prayed zuhr. He then rose up and prayed <asr without anything intervening between the two prayers. He then returned to where he was stationed’”.

They disagreed whether these two prayers are to be combined with two calls for prayer and two calls for commencement, or with one call for prayer and two calls for commencement. Malik said that they are to be combined with two calls for prayer and two calls for the commencement. Al-ShaficT, Abu Hamfa, al-Thawn, Abu Thawr, and a group of jurists said that they are to be combined with one call for prayer and two calls for commencement. An opinion like theirs has also been related from Malik. It is also related from Ahmad that they are to be combined with two calls for commencement. The evidence for al-ShafiT is the lengthy tradition of Jabir about the description of the hajj of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), in which he says, “He observed zuhr and W with one call for prayer and with two calls for commencement”, as we have said. The opinion of Malik has been related from Ibn Mas ud, and hie c evidence is the principle that each prayer is to be individually preceded by a call for prayer and a call for commencement. There is no dispute among the learned that if the imam does not deliver the sermon the prayer is valid, as against the Friday prayer. They also agreed that the recitation in this prayer is inaudible, and the prayer is curtailed if the imam has travelled (to this place). They disagreed when the imam is a resident of Mecca, whether he is to curtail -the prayer on the eighth of Dhu al-Hijja at Mina, at Arafa on the Day of Arafa, and at Muzdalifa on the eve of the day c c of sacrifice, if he is a resident of one of these places. Malik, al-AwzaT, and a group of jurists said the sunna for occasions is curtailment whether or not he is a resident. Al-Thawri, Abu HanTfa, al-Shafi‘T, Abu Thawr, and Dawud said that it is not permitted to curtail the prayer if he is a resident of one these places. The evidence for Malik is that no one has related that some person completed his prayer while praying with the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), after he had made the salutation. The argument of the other group is the retention of the well-known principle that curtailment of prayer is not permitted to anyone other than a traveller, unless another evidence restricts it.

A general discussion of this too is covered by the identification of its hukm, description, and time.

The existence of this act as one of the constituent elements of hajj is based on the words of the Exalted, “But, when ye press on in the multitude from hath guided you, although before this you were astray”. They agreed that the person who after stationing at ‘Arafa spends the eve of the day of sacrifice at Muzdalifa, combining the maghrib and <ish$ prayers that night with the imam, and stays up to the morning light, his hajj is complete. They also argued that this was the description of the act of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). They disagreed, however, as to whether staying at Muzdalifa till after the morning prayers and spending the night there is a sunna of hajj or one of its obligations. Al-Awza‘1 and a group of the Tabi‘un said that it is an obligation of hajj, and the person who misses this is under an obligation to perform hajj in the next season and along with the sacrifice. The jurists of the provinces maintain that it is not an obligation of hajj, and the person who misses the stay at Muzdalifa during the night is liable for atonement by sacrifice. Al-Shafi T said that c the person who spends the first half of the night there and then leaves not spending the whole night is liable to atonement.

The reliance of the majority is upon the authentic tradition from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he sent the weak members of his family during the night and they did not stay to witness the morning there with him. The reliance of the first group is on the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in the tradition of TJrwa ibn Mudarris, which is agreed upon (by al-BukharT and Muslim) for its authenticity, that “the person who observes this prayer with us”, that is, the morning prayer at Muzdalifa, “and stops at this station and he arose and moved before this from ‘Arafat, by night or by day, has completed his hajj and has done away with the dirt on his body”. They also rely on the words of the Exalted, “But, when ye press on in the multitude from ‘Arafat, remember Allah by the sacred monument. Remember Him as He hath guided you, although before this you were astray”.266 267 The other group argue that the Muslim jurists agreed unanimously on relinquishing the adoption of all .that is in this tradition. Thus, most of them maintain that the person who stops at Muzdalifa during the night and leaves before the morning prayer his hajj is complete, and so also the person who stays the night there and kept on sleeping without praying. They also agreed that the person who stays at Muzdalifa without engaging in the remembrance of Allah his hajj is complete. Their reliance upon the verse is also weak in the light of its apparent meaning.

Muzdalifa and Jam‘ are the two names for this place and the sunna of hajj for it, as we have said, is that the person spend the night there combining maghrib and 'isha? in the early part of the time for 'isha*, and then stay up to the morning there

The act that follows it (the stay at Muzdalifa) is the throwing of pebbles at the pillars (pWr), because the Muslim jurists agreed that “the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) stopped at al-mashfar al-haram, which is Muzdalifa, till after he had observed the morning prayer. He then departed from there before sunrise toward Mina. It was on this day, which was the day of sacrifice, that he threw stones at the Jamrat al-^Aqaba after sunrise”. The Muslim jurists also agreed that the person who throws stones at it on this day at this time, that is, after sunrise up to the declining of the sun, has thrown them during the prescribed time. They agreed that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) did not throw pebbles at the other jamarat besides it on the day of the sacrifice.

They disagreed about the case of the person who throws pebbles at the Jamrat al-'Aqaba before sunrise. Malik said: “No report has reached us that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) made an exemption for anyone to throw the pebbles before sunrise, and this is not permitted. If he throws the pebbles before dawn he is to repeat the act”. This was also the opinion of Abu Hamfa, Sufyan, and Ahmad. Al-Shafi T said there € is no harm in this, although it is desirable that he do it after sunrise.

The evidence of those who prohibited this is the act of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) along with his saying, “Acquire your rites from me”. Further, it is related from Ibn cAbbas “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) sent the weak among his family members (from Muzdalifa) and said, ‘Do not throw pebbles at the jamra until the sun rises’”. The reliance of those who permitted stoning before dawn is the tradition about Umm Salama, which has been recorded by Abu Dawud and others, “that cA5isha said, ‘The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) sent Umm Salama on the day of sacrifice and she threw pebbles before dawn, after which she hastened on and performed the tawdf al- ifada'. This was a day when the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was with her”. There is also the tradition of Asma5 that she threw pebbles at the jamra during the night and said: “We used to do this during the days of the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him)”.

The jurists agreed that the desirable time for throwing pebbles at the Jamrat al-^Aqaba is from the rising of the sun up to its decline, but if a pilgrim throws the pebbles before the setting of the sun on the day of sacrifice his act is valid and does not incur a liability (for atonement). Malik, however, said that it is desirable for such a person to atone by sacrifice. They disagreed about the case of a person who does not throw the pebbles till after the setting of the sun, and does it during the night, or on the next day. Malik said that he is liable for atonement by slaughtering an animal. Abu HanTfa said that if fie throws the pebbles during the night he does not incur any liability, but if he delays it till the next day he is liable to atonement by slaughtering an animal. Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, and al-Shafi T said that c there is no liability for him if he delays it till the night or up to .the next day. Their evidence is “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) made an exemption for those tending the camels to throw the pebbles during the night”, and also the tradition of Ibn cAbbas “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was asked by a questioner, ‘O Messenger of Allah, I threw the pebbles after sundown.’ He said to him, ‘No harm done’”. Malik’s reliance is on the argument that this time, which is agreed upon, during which the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) threw the pebbles is the sunna, and the person who violates one of the sunan of hajj is liable for atonement by slaughtering an animal, in accordance with what is related from Ibn cAbbas. This opinion was adopted by the majority.