Al-Shafi'i said regarding all of them: A damm (sacrifice) is due upon each one of them. From Ahmad, regarding an infidel who becomes Muslim, it is like his [Abu Hanifa's] statement. It may be inferred for a child and a slave likewise, by analogy to an infidel who becomes Muslim, because they passed the miqat without ihram and assumed it afterward, so the damm became incumbent upon them, just like a free adult Muslim. Our evidence is that they assumed ihram from the location from which ihram was obligatory upon them; therefore, they are like one from Makkah, or one whose village is closer than the miqat when he assumes ihram from it. This differs from one upon whom ihram is obligatory if he abandons it, because he abandoned an obligation upon him.

The third type: A legally responsible person (mukallaf) who enters for reasons other than battle or a recurring need. It is not permissible for him to pass the miqat without being in a state of ihram. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifa and some of the companions of al-Shafi'i. Others said: Ihram is not obligatory upon him. It is also narrated from Ahmad what indicates this. It has been narrated from Ibn Umar that he entered it without ihram. Furthermore, it is one of the two Harams, so ihram is not required for entry, like the Haram of Madinah. Moreover, obligation is derived from the Shari'ah, and it has not been transmitted from the Lawgiver that this is obligatory upon every person entering, so it remains upon the original principle (asl). The reasoning for the first view is that if he were to make a vow (nadhr) to enter it, ihram would become obligatory upon him, and if it were not an obligation, it would not become binding through a vow of entry, like other cities. Once this is established, whenever this person desires the ritual (nusuk) after passing the miqat, he must return and assume ihram from it; if he assumes ihram from a point closer than it, a damm is due upon him, like one intending the ritual.

Section: Whoever enters the Haram without ihram, while being someone for whom ihram is obligatory, no qada' (making up the ritual) is due upon him. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: It is obligatory upon him to perform a Hajj or an 'Umrah. If he performs the Hajj of Islam in that year, or a vowed Hajj, or an 'Umrah, it suffices him for the 'Umrah of entry by way of istihsan (juridical preference), because his passing the miqat while intending the Haram necessitates ihram, so if he does not fulfill it, its qada' becomes obligatory, just like a vow. Our evidence is that it is legislated as a greeting for the sacred site (tahiyyat al-buq'ah), so if he does not fulfill it, the obligation drops, like the greeting of the mosque (tahiyyat al-masjid). If it is said: The greeting of the mosque is not obligatory, we reply: