days of Dhi-l-Ḥijjah9 are particularly spoken of as months of ḥajj (2:197; Bu. 25:33), so that a man can enter into the state of iḥrām10 for ḥajj only in these months, while the actual devotions of ḥajj are limited from the 8th to the 13th Dhi-l-Ḥijjah. Secondly, the going to ‘Arafāt and the assembling there is dispensed with in the case of ‘umrah, while it is an essential part of ḥajj. Another difference is that the sacrifice of an animal as the concluding act is essential to ḥajj but not so in the case of ‘umrah. The ‘umrah may be performed separately, or along with ḥajj, when it is like a parallel devotion to the latter. Though ḥajj is spoken of oftener in the Holy Qur’ān, yet there is an express injunction to accomplish both: “And accomplish the ḥajj and the ‘umrah for Allāh” (2:196). Ḥadīth also speaks of wujūb al-‘umrah, or the obligatory nature of the ‘umrah, and Ibn ‘Umar is quoted as saying: “There is no man but on him rests the obligation of the ḥajj and the ‘umrah”, while Ibn ‘Abbās said that the ‘umrah is the companion of ḥajj in the Book of Allāh (Bu. 26:1). In one ḥadīth it is said that ‘umrah in Ramadzān is equivalent to ḥajj (Bu. 26:4). According to another, ‘umrah is not obligatory (Tr. 9 :86). But any one who performs the ḥajj can easily perform the ‘umrah.
There are two ways in which ḥajj may be combined with ‘umrah, tamattu‘ and qirān. Tamattu‘ (lit., profiting) consists in combining the ḥajj and the ‘umrah in such a manner that the pilgrim should enter a state of iḥrām in the months of ḥajj with the intention of performing an ‘umrah, and get out of that state after the performance of the ‘umrah, again entering into a state of iḥrām in the days of ḥajj. Thus between the ‘umrah and the ḥajj, the pilgrim profits by living in his ordinary condition and is not bound by the strict rules of iḥrām, and for this he is required to make a sacrifice, or fast for three days in the ḥajj and seven days after returning from ḥajj (2:196).11 “The qirān (lit., uniting together) consists in entering into a state of iḥrām in the months of ḥajj with the intention of performing both ḥajj and ‘umrah, and not getting out of that state until both have been performed, or entering into a state of iḥrām in the months of ḥajj with the intention of performing an ‘umrah, and remaining in the same state until the ḥajj is also performed. Thus the difference between tamattu‘ and qirān is that in tamattu‘ there is a break in the state of iḥrām, while in qirān that state is continuous. When ḥajj alone is performed, it is called
9 The lunar month in which Ḥajj is performed.
10 For a complete description of the state of iḥrām see page 372.
11 Snouck Hurgronje’s theory regarding tamattu‘ has been incorporated into the Encyclopaedia of Islām by A.J. Wensinck under the heading Iḥrām: “According to Snouck Hurgronje’s suggestion … the restrictions which were imposed by the iḥrām became too severe for Muḥammad, so that during his stay in Mecca before the hadjdj he conducted himself in a secular fashion. As his followers looked askance at him for this, the revelation in Sūrah 2:192 is said to have been given.” The authority referred to in the concluding words is not stated, but as a matter of fact there is no such early authority. It must have been some other critic of the same type. The Holy Prophet performed ḥajj, after coming to Madīnah, only once, and this was also his last ḥajj, and it was only about eighty days after this that he died. There is not the flimsiest ground for supposing that the verse speaking of tamattu‘ was revealed on that occasion. On the other hand, there is the clearest evidence that this verse had been revealed prior to the battle of Badr, more than eight years before the last Pilgrimage.
There is also evidence to show that the Holy Prophet did not on this occasion break the continuity of the iḥrām. Thus the long ḥadīth which speaks of the Holy Prophet having entered into a state of iḥrām for ‘umrah and ḥajj, says, after speaking of the performances of his ‘umrah: “Then nothing which was forbidden to him became lawful to him until he performed his ḥajj and sacrificed his offering (hady, or the animal brought for sacrifice) on the day of sacrifices, then he returned and made circuits of the House, then everything which was forbidden to him became lawful to him, and the people who had brought their offerings with them as the Holy Prophet had done, did the same as was done by the Holy Prophet”. (Bu. 25:104). The restrictions of iḥrām becoming too severe for the Holy Prophet, the looking askance of his Companions and the revelation of 2:192 (2:196, according to our computation) on this occasion, are all inventions of an ingenious brain, which, instead of being exposed by Wensinck have been gladly incorporated into a standard work like the Encyclopaedia of Islam, and yet the same learned writer in his index of Ḥadīth, Handbook of Tradition, admits, under the heading Iḥrām, that the Holy Prophet did not give up the state of iḥrām in combining ḥajj and ‘umrah: “Muḥammad makes use of tamattu‘ but does not abandon the sacred state at Makkah.”