Qiran: the conditions in detail

Qiran consists of entering ihram for the umra and the hajj together, in a single state of ihram. The schools laid down several conditions for this combination to be valid, concerning both the timing of the ihram and the performance of the rites of the umra. This page presents these conditions as treated in the classical manuals of the four schools, with their references and their points of disagreement.

Second Condition: Entering Ihram for the Hajj Before the Umra Becomes Invalid

Adding the umra on top of the hajj benefits from nothing beyond what the first contract had already produced; it is therefore not valid, like a man hired for a task and then hired a second time within the same period. The reverse case is the addition of the hajj on top of the umra (1).

The Hanafis, the Shafi'is of the earlier school (al-qadim) and Ahmad, according to one narration, held this ihram to be valid: it is one of the two rites, so it is permitted to combine the one with the other by analogy with adding the hajj to the umra, and the act thereby becomes qiran, though disliked (makruh) (2).

Hence the stipulation: whoever enters ihram for the umra and then wishes to enter ihram for the hajj on top of it, the majority of jurists, the Hanafis, the Malikis and the Shafi'is, made the validity of this addition (irdaf) conditional upon the umra itself being valid.

• Note 1: "Al-Mudawwana al-Kubra" (2/375), "Al-Tamhid" (15/217, 219), "Sharh Ibn Battal" (4/379, 462), "Tafsir al-Qurtubi" (2/398), "Bidayat al-Mujtahid" (1/460), "Al-Umm" (2/135, 137), "Al-Majmu'" (7/133, 136, 156), "Tarh al-Tathrib" (5/19), "Al-Mughni" (5/115), "Zad al-Ma'ad" (2/153), "Sharh al-Zarkashi" (1/556), "Matalib Uli al-Nuha" (2/310), "Al-Insaf" (3/438), "Sharh Muslim" (8/137).
• Note 2: "Al-'Inaya, Sharh al-Hidaya" (4/237), "Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-'Ulama'" by al-Tahawi (2/101), "Al-Majmu'" (7/133, 136, 156), "Sharh Muslim" (8/137), "Tarh al-Tathrib" (5/19), "Al-Mughni" (5/115), "Zad al-Ma'ad" (2/153), "Sharh al-Zarkashi" (1/556), "Al-Insaf" (3/438).

Third Condition: Performing the Umra Tawaf Entirely or for the Most Part During the Months of Hajj

The Hanafis said: the absence of any invalidation of the umra is a condition for the validity of qiran (1).

Al-Dasuqi, may Allah have mercy on him, said: if the umra becomes invalid, the hajj can no longer be appended to it according to Ibn al-Qasim; his ihram for the hajj is not concluded, nor is any making up (qada) owed on its account, as Sunad said. He therefore remains upon his umra and does not perform the hajj until he has made it up. If he enters ihram for the hajj after completing it but before making it up, his hajj is valid. And if it becomes invalid during the months of hajj and he nevertheless performs the hajj of that same year before making it up, his tamattu' and his hajj are both complete, and he must make up his umra (2).

The Shafi'is added the stipulation that adding the hajj to the umra take place during the months of hajj (3). Such is the meaning of the condition: that the tawaf of the umra, in whole or in its greater part, be performed during the months of hajj, according to the Hanafis and others.

• Note 1: "Al-Maslak al-Mutaqassit", p. 171.
• Note 2: "Hashiyat al-Dasuqi" (2/240); see "Mawahib al-Jalil" (3/51), "Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil" (2/310), "Bilghat al-Salik" (2/28).
• Note 3: "Al-Majmu'" (7/163, 166), "Nihayat al-Muhtaj" (2/42).

Fourth Condition: That the Addition Take Place Before Starting the Umra Tawaf

The jurists differed: must the addition of the hajj to the umra precede the start of the umra tawaf, or is it permitted once the tawaf has begun?

The Shafi'is, together with Ashhab and Ibn Abd al-Barr among the Malikis, held that adding the hajj to the umra, during the months of hajj, must precede the start of the umra tawaf.

The Shafi'is said: adding the hajj to the umra is valid only before starting the tawaf; if he has embarked upon the tawaf, even by a single step, his ihram for the hajj is no longer valid. Ibn Abd al-Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, reported that Ashhab declared: whoever has performed the tawaf of his umra, even a single circuit, can no longer add the hajj to it. This is the correct view, Allah willing (1).

• Note 1: "Al-Tamhid" (15/217).

The Hanafis, the Malikis and the Hanbalis said: if he adds the hajj to the umra having already covered a small part of the tawaf, without exceeding the minimum number of circuits of the umra tawaf, namely three circuits or fewer, this addition is valid and becomes qiran; he continues upon it, and the umra merges into the hajj. The Hanafis, however, restricted this to the one coming from beyond the miqat (afaqi), not the resident of Mecca (makki).

If he adds the hajj to the umra after completing the tawaf of the umra but before leaving ihram (tahallul), the Hanafis said: it is valid for the afaqi and becomes qiran; if he is a makki (that is, one who entered ihram from the miqat), it becomes obligatory for him to abandon one of the two rites, while they differed over which of the two abandonments is preferable.

The Malikis set out a further detailed classification and said:

• Adding the hajj to the umra after its tawaf but before the two rak'ahs of the tawaf is disliked (makruh); if he does it, it is valid and he must abide by it, he becomes a qarin, and the blood offering of qiran is due from him.
• Adding the hajj to the umra after the tawaf and the two rak'ahs of the tawaf, before the sa'y, is disliked and is not valid; he does not become a qarin.

The same applies to an addition made during the sa'y: if he has performed part of the sa'y and then adds the hajj to the umra, this is disliked for him; if he does it all the same, let him complete his sa'y, then leave ihram, and then resume the hajj, whether he is a resident of Mecca or not.

And since the addition is not valid after the two rak'ahs of the tawaf before the sa'y, nor during it, no making up of the ihram so added is due, according to the well-known position.

Adding the hajj to the umra after the sa'y of the umra but before the shaving (halq) is not permissible from the outset, because it entails postponing the shaving. If he nevertheless enters into this addition, his ihram is valid: it is a resumed hajj, the shaving of the umra becomes prohibited for him because he has violated his ihram for the hajj, and a sacrificial offering (hady) becomes obligatory for him because of the postponement of the umra's shaving, made obligatory by his ihram for the hajj. He becomes neither a qarin nor a mutamatti' if he completes his umra before the months of hajj: he is then performing ifrad; if he performs one of its pillars during the time of hajj, he becomes a mutamatti'.

If he brings forward the shaving after entering ihram for the hajj and before completing the acts of the hajj, this does not exempt him from the offering, and he additionally owes a ransom (fidya), which, according to the well-known Maliki position, is the fidya for removing harm (1).

• Note 1: "Mawahib al-Jalil" (3/53, 55), "Al-Sharh al-Kabir" and its gloss by al-Dasuqi (2/240, 241), "Sharh al-Zarqani" and the gloss of al-Bannani (2/259, 260), "Al-Tamhid" (5/2161).

Seventh Condition: Not Being Among the Residents of al-Masjid al-Haram

If qiran is broken, it obliges its author, according to the Hanafis and Ahmad in one narration, to what necessitates invalidation; but if he has intercourse after completing four circuits of the tawaf of his umra, his hajj is invalidated without his umra: the blood offering of qiran falls away and he owes what necessitates the invalidation of the hajj, according to the Hanafis, in keeping with their doctrine on the pillars of qiran.

But the well-known position among the Hanbalis is that if the qarin or the mutamatti' invalidates his rite, the blood offering does not fall away. Ibn Qudama, may Allah have mercy on him, said: Malik and al-Shafi'i said the same, for what is obligatory in a valid rite is likewise obligatory in an invalid one (1).

The majority of jurists, the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, held tamattu' and qiran valid for the resident of Mecca (makki) and his like, that is, the one residing at al-Masjid al-Haram: the act is not disliked for him, and neither the blood offering of qiran nor that of tamattu' is due from him, as seen earlier. For what is an act of devotion and obedience for the one who is not of Mecca is so for the resident of Mecca, as with ifrad. And since two journeys are not in principle imposed upon him, one of the two falls away, and this is the basis of the obligation of the offering.

"This is for whoever's family members are not present in al-Masjid al-Haram"

Surah al-Baqarah, 196

They said: the demonstrative pronoun ("this") in the words of Allah, the Most High, in the verse above refers to His words: "whatever offering is easy for him". The meaning is: this ruling, namely the obligation of the offering (hady) upon the one performing tamattu', a ruling which also covers qiran, applies to whoever is not among the residents of al-Masjid al-Haram. If he is among them, no offering is due from him, and his qiran and his tamattu' are both valid (1).

• Note 1: "Ahkam al-Qur'an" by Ibn al-'Arabi (1/182), "Tafsir al-Qurtubi" (7/403), "Al-Majmu'" (7/143), "Al-Ifsah" (1/464), "Al-Mughni" (5/99).

The Hanafis, for their part, held that the resident of Mecca and his like should perform ifrad only: if he performs qiran or tamattu', it is permitted but blameworthy, and a compensation offering (dam jabr) is due from him which fasting does not replace. This is why they stipulated that the qarin and the mutamatti' not be among the residents of al-Masjid al-Haram. In their view, what is meant by "this" in the verse cited above is the tamattu' from the umra to the hajj, which covers both qiran and tamattu' for whoever is not among the residents of al-Masjid al-Haram; the verse therefore indicates that he has neither qiran nor tamattu'. Had the intended meaning been the offering, it would have read: "this is upon whoever's family members are not present in al-Masjid al-Haram".

This is because Allah legislated tamattu' and qiran for ease, namely dropping one of the two journeys, and this applies only to the one coming from beyond the miqat (afaqi). Whoever is within the miqat is in the position of the resident of Mecca and has therefore neither tamattu' nor qiran.