Assalaamu alaykum. A person performing Tamattu' Hajj from Pakistan performed 'Umrah and then went to Madinah. On returning from Madinah, he did not perform 'Umrah, nor did he assume the state of ihraam (ritual consecration). Is there any penalty for not performing 'Umrah on returning from Madinah as he went out of the meeqaat (places where the pilgrims living outside of Makkah assume ihraam) during Tamattu' Hajj? May Allaah reward you.

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah and that Muhammad, sallallaahu ʻalayhi wa sallam, is His slave and Messenger.

It would have been more prudent for this man to assume ihraam at the meeqaat of Thul-Hulayfah upon his return to Makkah so as to be safe regarding the scholarly difference of opinion. Muslim jurists held different views concerning the pilgrim who performs ʻUmrah during the months of Hajj and travels before the day of Tarwiyah (8th of Thul-Hijjah) for a distance equal to or more than that which allows shortening the prayers; as to whether he should end his Tamattu' and must assume the state of ihraam again upon returning to Makkah or that he would not need to assume state of ihraam again.

Some scholars said that his Tamattu' ends in this case and that he is not required to slaughter a sacrificial animal for Tamattu', then he is to assume his state of ihraam once again from the meeqaat. This is the opinion of the Hanbali scholars. While mentioning the conditions of Tamattu', Ibn Qudaamah said:

"That he does not travel for a distance equal to or more than the distance that allows shortening prayers; ʻUmar said, 'If a pilgrim performs ʻUmrah during the months of Hajj and remains there (in Makkah), he would be considered as performing the Tamattu’ Hajj. If he leaves Makkah and returns, then he would no longer be considered as performing the Tamattu’ Hajj. This is because if he travels, he would be required to assume the state of ihraam from the Meeqaat...'" [Al-Kaafi]

Other scholars said that he would retain his Tamattu’ and is not required to assume his state of ihraam from the Meeqaat. Rather, he should assume his state of ihraam for Hajj from Makkah on the day of Tarwiyah after he returns. This opinion was approved of by Shaykh Ibn ʻUthaymeen when he was asked about the pilgrim who visited the Mosque of the Prophet, sallallaahu ʻalayhi wa sallam, between ʻUmrah and Hajj or went to Taa'if and whether he had to assume his state of ihraam after returning to Makkah in Tamattu’ Hajj. He answered:

"Ihraam would not be obligatory on him; i.e. when a pilgrim who performed ʻUmrah during the months of Hajj traveled to Taa'if, Jeddah, or Madeenah, and then returned to Makkah, he would not be required to assume ihraam for Hajj, because he returned to his original place. Instead, he would assume his state of ihraam for Hajj on the day of Tarwiyah in Makkah as if he is one of its inhabitants who traveled to Madeenah during the months of Hajj and then returned from Madeenah with the intention to perform Hajj that year. He is not required to assume his state of ihraam for Hajj except from Makkah..."

This fatwa was also adopted by Shaykh Ibn Baaz who said:

"Whoever came for Hajj and performed ʻUmrah and then stayed in Jeddah or Taa'if, while he is not of their inhabitants, and then assumed his state of ihraam for Hajj would be considered performing Tamattu’ Hajj. His traveling to Taa'if, Jeddah, or Madeenah does not take him out of Tamattu’ Hajj because he came to perform them together and traveled to Jeddah or Taa'if for a need. The same ruling applies to the pilgrim who traveled to Madeenah to visit (the mosque of the Prophet ); this obviously does not cancel his state of performing Tamattu’ Hajj. This is the strong and preponderant view, and he is required to slaughter a hady (animal sacrifice) for Tamattu' Hajj..."

Allaah knows best.