Menstruation and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa : A Study of Ibn Taymiyya’s Landmark Ruling of Permissibility

This article examines Ibn Taymiyya’s (d. 728/1328) unprecedented fatwas allowing menstruating female pilgrims to perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa , an essential rite of the hajj. In normative jurisprudential law, menstruating women are obliged to stay in Mecca and fulfil this rite only after returning to ritual purity. However, women in Ibn Taymiyya’s time found the prospect of staying in Mecca a difficult one, predominantly due to the risk of returning home without the protection of the hajj caravan. For modern pilgrims, bureaucratic and financial obstacles also make extending one’s stay in Mecca a difficult task. This paper examines how Ibn Taymiyya’s application of ḍarūra enabled him to provide legal recourse for the numerous female pilgrims affected by the consequences of menstruating while on the hajj. It also explores the extent to which contemporary scholars have engaged with his landmark ruling in order to assist Muslim women today.


Introduction
Circumambulation (ṭawāf) of the Kaʿba is an essential pillar (rukn) of the hajj, the annual pilgrimage to Mecca obligatory for every Muslim who is financially and physically capable. Female pilgrims who are menstruating cannot perform the hajj ṭawāf, known as the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa, as they are in a condition of 2 Nurgat HAWWA (2020) 1-20 major ritual impurity (al-ḥadath al-akbar).1 Instead, they are obliged to stay in Mecca and perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa once the menstruation has ceased, a point agreed upon by all jurists.2 In the time of the Prophet Muhammad's Companions (ṣaḥāba), the head of a pilgrimage party would wait with a woman on her menses until such time as she was able to perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa.3 However, the provision of this service in subsequent periods was intermittent, with pilgrim security a reoccurring problem under the Abbasids, the Mamluks and the Ottomans.4 Thus, for female pilgrims, there was a very real problem: How was a woman to perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa when her pilgrimage party could not wait for her menses to come to an end? If she went home without performing it, she would be in a state of iḥrām until she returned to Mecca to fulfil the due ṭāwāf, and as a muḥrim, she would be unable to engage in marital relations. An alternative was to perform the ṭawāf anyway, in a condition of ritual impurity, an act that would complete the hajj but which would require a large animal to be slaughtered as expiation, as mentioned by Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 150/767) and in one narration of Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855).5 Another alternative, put forward by some jurists, was that a menstruating woman could return home as a muḥsar, or one who was excused from the obligation of the hajj.6 This entailed a pilgrim forgoing the completion of the hajj despite 1 Ibn Rushd, Bidāyat al-mujtahid wa-nihāyat al-muqtaṣid, ed. Muḥammad Ṣubḥī Ḥasan Ḥallāq (Cairo: Maktaba Ibn Taymiyya, 1994), 1:147-48. There is no obligation on the one hiring her provisions to stay back with her in these times, due to the harm that may come upon him because of that". ' See Ibn Taymiyya,26:117. 5 This is a discouraged last resort for some contemporary Hanafis, according to which one can perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa whilst in a state of major ritual impurity and thereafter sacrifice a large animal to expiate. 6 For Maliki fatwas discouraging or prohibiting the hajj for Muslims in the Islamic West (al-Andalus, North Africa, and West Africa) between the eleventh and nineteenth centuries, see Jocelyn Hendrickson, "Prohibiting the pilgrimage: Politics and fiction in Mālikī fatwās," Islamic Law and Society 23 (2016), 161-238. expending time and wealth on making the journey to Mecca, and despite her fulfilment of all the other pilgrimage rituals.7 The ruling preventing a menstruating woman (ḥāʾiḍ) from performing the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa also poses a challenge for some female pilgrims today. Those seeking to extend their stay in Mecca face bureaucratic and financial complications, among them adjusting flight and hotel bookings, obtaining a visa extension and separating from one's travel group. Similar obstacles are faced by those who might choose to return to Mecca at a later date in order make up the missed ṭāwāf. (They would also have to abstain from marital relations in the meantime, as mentioned above.) This article examines whether there is any legal recourse for women in this situation, or if menstruating on the hajj truly represents a predicament for female pilgrims. I examine this question through the medium of the fatwas (legal opinions) of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), the controversial Ḥanbalī jurist of Mamluk Damascus. Specifically, four fatwas in his Kitāb al-Hajj ("Book of pilgrimage") focus on determining whether female ḥūjjāj can undertake the hajj ṭawāf whilst menstruating.8 I also explore modern interpretations of Ibn Taymiyya's judgements and the manner in which, if at all, they have been applied by contemporary scholars. The topic of female pilgrims and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa is one which encompasses different aspects of Islamic law. It is also a topic which affected, and continues to affect, the day-to-day lives of a multitude of Muslim women, making the views of an authority such as Ibn Taymiyya all the more significant. This is especially the case if and when he differs from the applied teachings of the established schools.

Ibn Taymiyya and 'the People's Dire Need' (iḥtiyāj)
The founders of the major schools of Islamic law agreed unanimously that those in a condition of major ritual impurity could not perform ṭawāf. This remained the established view of later adherents of these schools, including in the Mamluk period. However, the question of whether men and women in a condition of minor ritual impurity (al-ḥadath al-aṣghar) could perform ṭawāf was a more contentious one. Mālik b. Anas (d. 179/796) and al-Shāfiʿī 4 Nurgat HAWWA (2020) 1-20 (d. 204/820) stipulated that ablution (wuḍūʾ) was necessary for a ṭawāf to be valid, whilst Abū Ḥanīfa held it to be unnecessary. The debate centred on whether the rulings (ḥukm; pl. aḥkām) of ṭawāf should be associated with the aḥkām of ritual prayer (ṣalāt), or be treated as independent from them. Ibn Rushd (d. 595/1198) explains that because the Prophet prohibited both ṭawāf and ṣalāt to menstruating woman, this led some traditions to categorise ṭawāf as a type of ṣalāt.9 Conversely, Abū Ḥanīfa argues that purification is not a condition for every ritual that is prohibited during menstruation, when the ritual is to be performed once menstruation has ceased. A prime example is fasting, which the majority agreed does not need ablution. Ibn Ḥanbal narrates two opinions, one of which concurs with the opinion of Mālik and al-Shāfiʿī and the other with Abū Ḥanīfa.10 Ibn Taymiyya disagrees that ablution is necessary for a sound ṭāwāf, wholly rejecting the correlation made by Mālik and al-Shāfiʿī (and one narration of Ibn Ḥanbal) between ṭawāf and ṣalāt. He argues that this analogy, based on a Qurʾanic verse and several hadiths, contradicts reason. In Q 22:26, the Prophet Abraham is ordered by God to 'purify My House [the Kaʿba] for those who circle around it [in ṭawāf], those who stand to pray, and those who bow and prostrate themselves [in ṣalāt]' .11 Some scholars held that this verse aligns ṭawāf and ṣalāt, thus mandating wuḍūʾ for the sound fulfilment of both. However, Ibn Taymiyya points to a similar verse in the second chapter, in which Abraham and his son, the Prophet Ishmael, are ordered by God to 'purify My House for those who walk round it [in ṭawāf], those who stay there [in iʿtikāf], and those who bow and prostrate themselves in worship [in ṣalāt]' .12 Here, the word ʿākifīn occurs, referring to those who perform ritual seclusion or retreat (iʿtikāf) in and around the Kaʿba. Ibn Taymiyya reasons that there is no doubt that those who perform ṣalāt need to have ablution, but there is also no doubt that those who perform iʿtikāf do not need to have ablution. Thus, this verse cannot serve as a basis for a ruling which stipulates ablution to be necessary for a sound ṭāwāf.
Ibn Taymiyya also argues that since ṭawāf is not invalidated by the same acts that invalidate ṣalāt -such as eating, drinking, or speaking words that are not from the supplications of ṣalāt -ṭawāf is fundamentally different from formal worship.13 In terms of the hadiths which appear to describe ṭawāf as a 9 Ibn Rushd,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19]. type of ṣalāt, Ibn Taymiyya accepts that ṭawāf resembles ṣalāt, but this resemblance is only in terms of the spiritual similarities between these two modes of prayer; both demand concentration from the supplicating worshipper.14 As a proof of this, he cites the hadith: 'A servant will be considered in a continuous ṣalāt, so long as he is bound by the manners of ṣalāt, waiting for the next ṣalāt, or heading towards ṣalāt' .15 Accordingly, Ibn Taymiyya invalidates the ruling that necessitates ablution for ṭāwāf, demonstrating that it does not originate from the Qurʾan, and that any analogy used to derive such a ruling goes against reason. Although this would have allowed pilgrims to circle the Kaʿba whilst in minor ritual impurity, the issue of those in major impurity was a different one altogether.
As mentioned, Ibn Taymiyya eliminated the requirement of ablution as a possible reason for preventing those in major ritual impurity, such as a woman on her menses, from performing ṭāwāf. He reinforces this by observing that the Prophet made a point of doing two things: making it known to all pilgrims that circling the Kaʿba whilst naked was not allowed, and ordering all Muslims to perform ablution before engaging in ṣalāt.16 Ibn Taymiyya's objective in this comparison is to illustrate that the Prophet did not explicitly order Muslims to perform ablution before circling the Kaʿba. Thus, he points to two potential reasons for prohibiting a woman on her menses from performing ṭāwāf. The first is that a person in a state of major ritual impurity ( junūb) is not allowed to stay in (labth) or pass by (murūr) a mosque, which means that a menstruating woman or a man who has had a seminal discharge cannot perform ṭāwāf. 17 The second is that just as she is not obliged to pray or fast and is not to touch the Qurʾan or recite it, a menstruating woman is not to perform ṭawāf in her condition.18 Ibn Taymiyya did not feel it was the latter reason, analogising between ṭawāf and iʿtikāf; a woman on her menses, unless in an extraordinary situation, cannot do iʿtikāf in a mosque, not because iʿtikāf is forbidden to her, but because she is not allowed in the mosque.19 Thus, Ibn Taymiyya asserts 14  that a woman on her menses is prohibited from circling the Kaʿba for the same reason that a junūb is not allowed to stay in a mosque.
To find a solution, Ibn Taymiyya returns to the root cause of the ruling preventing menstruating women from performing ṭāwāf -that of a junūb not being allowed to stay in or pass by a mosque. First, he agrees with al-Shāfiʿī and Ibn Ḥanbal that murūr and labth are two separate things.20 He then describes how a menstruating woman may stay in a mosque in cases of grave necessity (ḍarūra), for example if there is severe cold weather, if there is a threat to her safety, if she has no other shelter, or in any other extreme circumstance.21 A woman with continual or irregular menstruation (mustaḥāḍa), or a man with an illness which means that he cannot come out of a condition of major impurity, are also excused. Ibn Taymiyya argues that here, just as in the above examples, the need (ḥāja) exceeds the severity of the impediment (mafsada).22 Therefore, if a menstruating woman's stay in Mecca beyond the stay of the other pilgrims in her party cannot be facilitated, then the principle of ḍarūra is applicable, and the woman is permitted to perform the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa whilst in major ritual impurity and without any penalty.23 This was an unprecedented opinion, representing a clean break from the two opinions narrated by the founder of the Hanbali school and his principal students.

The Precarious Journeys of Pre-Modern Female Pilgrims
Ibn Taymiyya had been on the hajj himself, so he was familiar with the conditions of the pilgrimage and the various problems faced by both male and female pilgrims. Even for the senior wife of the Mamluk sultan (khawand al-kubrā), the hajj journey was a difficult and potentially dangerous undertaking pre-empted by months of preparation.24 Women faced similar challenges in the Ottoman period, as Faroqhi explains: 'All pilgrims, both male and female, 20 Ibid.,26:97. 21 Ibid.,26:96. 22 See Yossef Rapoport, "Ibn Taymiyya's radical legal thought: Rationalism, pluralism and the primacy of intention," in Ibn Taymiyya  were responsible for their own sustenance … sometimes we also encounter the complaints of women who had been abandoned en route.'25 It was these considerations which motivated Ibn Taymiyya's pragmatic ruling on the subject. In fact, they were the dominant factor in his thought, with the salaf (the first three generations of the Muslim community) barely in his considerations. The fact that he addresses the question on at least four separate occasions shows the importance of the question of women who are on their menses or in a state of postnatal bleeding (nifās) performing the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa. On one of these occasions, he was asked about the 'plight of menstruation which affects half of the women on the hajj in many different ways' .26 Ibn Taymiyya insists that because the conditions faced by the people of his time were never faced by the early founders of the schools of law (imām; pl. a ʾimma), a precedent to his landmark ruling can also not be found amongst them.27 Certainly, the a ʾimma would have been familiar with the hajj as a thriving institution, well attended thanks to the sponsorship of prosperous caliphs who were often eager to show their legitimacy and gain popularity.28 The caliph Ḥārūn al-Rashīd (r. 170-93/786-809) was perhaps an exception in terms of his piety, providing unprecedented levels of security and assistance to pilgrims and personally leading the hajj party from Baghdad no less than nine times.29 Ibn Taymiyya describes how, under such circumstances, a woman was easily able to stay in Mecca until her cycle of menstruation was complete and then perform her ṭawāf accordingly.
Early jurists such as Mālik had ordered those in positions of responsibility, among them the camel-man (al-mukārī) and those in charge of water provision and security (ahl al-siqāya wa-l-riʿāya), to stay in Mecca with the menstruating women until they had performed the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa.30 However, Ibn Taymiyya points out that it was the very followers of Mālik who had now reversed the ruling of the head of their school, and ruled that those responsible were not obliged to stay, because of the 'delay and harm that may afflict them' .31 This was because the heights of pilgrim assistance provided by Ḥārūn al-Rashīd were never reached again, with no Abbasid caliph personally leading the hajj after him.32 Abbasid defences against Bedouin attacks on the hajj first failed after the assassination of the caliph al-Mutawakkil (r. 232-47/847-61), and only six years after the death of the last of the four a ʾimma, Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal.33 The Bedouin were most likely to attack the hajj on the return journey because there were rich pickings to be had from the luxury items purchased in Mecca by pilgrims.34 Furthermore, by the time of the return journey, it might have become clearer to the Bedouin that they were not going to be paid off by the amir of the hajj, a tribute which would otherwise stay their hand.35 For pilgrims returning to Ibn Taymiyya's city, Damascus, their caravan was greeted by the jirda, a heavily armed relief escort, for the last part of their journey.36 Conscious of the Bedouin threat, the jirda was specially equipped with supplies and extra security.37 Thus, it was of especially great importance for Ibn Taymiyya's countrymen to return home with the Damascene hajj caravan. A similar convoy would also meet Egyptian pilgrims returning to Cairo.38 The Abbasids' inability to protect pilgrims from the Qarāmiṭa in the early fourth/tenth century was the final nail in the coffin, and showed that the caliphs were now powerless to protect the hajj caravan and the holy places.39 The hajj was no longer a secure affair as it had been in the time of the a ʾimma.
By the time Ibn Taymiyya embarked on his own hajj, Mecca had become, to a degree, autonomous. In control were the Musāwīs, a family claiming to  Menstruation and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa HAWWA (2020) 1-20 be descended from ʿAlī, who took the title of Sharīf.40 The Sharīfs looked to pilgrims, rich and poor alike, to maintain their uncertain prosperity, since the gifts and pensions previously sent to inhabitants of Mecca had dried up.41 Nonetheless, the new Mamluk sultanate in Egypt and Syria, which had come to power eight years before Ibn Taymiyya's birth, was able to provide a degree of security, and in 664/1266, a hajj caravan was once more able to set out from Egypt, in contrast to the last years of Ayyubid rule.42 The concentration of the Islamic world's power in Cairo helped the Egyptian caravan to receive an unprecedented level of political and economic support.43 For instance, when the sultan al-Ẓāhir Baybars i (r. 658-76/1260-77) visited Mecca in 667/1269, he was the most powerful leader in the Muslim world.44 However, the level of stability in and around the Holy City fluctuated throughout the rest of the Mamluk era due to constant power struggles involving different factions of the Sharīfs and their overlords in Cairo. A reoccurring feature of internal disputes between the Meccan Sharīfs was the raiding of caravans. In addition, the desert route continued to be subject to attacks from the Bedouin. Mamluk Qusair was an important town along the hajj route, yet insecurity along the desert route led to its abandonment.45 Even beyond the Mamluk period, the potential dangers faced by women pilgrims remained, and continued until the twentieth century. The Portuguese attacked and sank pilgrim ships in the 1500s, and Bedouin attacks on Ottoman hajj caravans increased in the 1700s. In 1757, twenty thousand pilgrims died from Bedouin attacks, as well as from heat and lack of water.46 The perils of the return journey meant that hajj caravans wasted no time in returning home upon its completion; after concluding hajj on the twelfth of the month, some pilgrims would leave Mecca as soon as on the thirteenth, whilst others would leave on the fourteenth and fifteenth.47 This left menstruating women who had not yet performed the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa, as well as their companions, in a difficult position. A woman's companions were unlikely to stay with her until she was able to complete her hajj, as this would mean 40  returning alone, without the company of the pilgrimage caravan. This was no small concession; the hajj caravans themselves were like 'small towns on the move' , with professional Bedouin guides, familiar with the desert routes at their head, providing direction, and water carriers and military men providing sustenance and security.48 If a woman's companions stayed, there was the fear, in Ibn Taymiyya's words, that 'they may be exposed to any danger that affects their lives and wealth' .49 Thus, women were caught in a dilemma: If a woman's companions were unwilling to wait with her, and she had no wealth of her own, there was no real way for her to stay in Mecca until she was ritually pure. Ibn Taymiyya argues that in addition to the fact that a woman placed in this situation would have to face being separated from the hajj caravan, she might not have enough wealth to support herself or to find shelter in Mecca, thus leaving her and her wealth exposed to criminals.50 This is what motivated Ibn Taymiyya to issue his landmark opinion on this subject, a subject which he insists he would never have concerned himself with but for 'the people's dire need for it' (ḍarūrat al-nās wa-iḥtiyājuhum ilayhā).51 Ibn Taymiyya's ruling would have applied in the above situations as well as any of a similar nature, since his main motivation was preserving the life and material wealth of female pilgrims, and indeed their companions too.
Overall, having deconstructed the analogies of Mālik and al-Shāfiʿī by illustrating them to be beyond reason and without divine basis, Ibn Taymiyya then deploys ḍarūra as a flexible analogical tool in order to open a way for a ḥāʾiḍ to circumambulate the Kaʿba with no penalty. His novel solution allowed women in an impossible situation to simply do the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa and go home. Ibn Taymiyya felt that not even the unlearned should be placed under the restriction of having to follow a single school or its imam, and that laypeople could practice individual independent reasoning (ijtihād) without fear of punishment.52 There is no doubt that female pilgrims, both in the time of Ibn Taymiyya and today, if given the choice, would choose Ibn Taymiyya's ruling on this particular issue.

Ibn Taymiyya's Application of ḍarūra: Legacy and Interpretation
In an age when many Muslims look to the World Wide Web for answers to their everyday questions and problems, the modern impact of Ibn Taymiyya can be found online on various specialist websites. Run by religious institutes and individual scholars, these websites operate as online centres of law, issuing legal opinions to Muslim laypeople with questions and queries from around the world. In her study of contemporary debates between Sufis and Salafis over the Prophet's birthday festival (mawlid), Raquel Ukeles finds that all the groups that fit within these two broad categories recognise Ibn Taymiyya 'as a force to be reckoned with' .53 The same is true for our subject matter. Scholars from non-Salafi backgrounds may not necessarily accept his ruling, but they do recognise it. Independent scholars from Salafi backgrounds engage with and adopt Ibn Taymiyya's fatwas, whereas the official body of Saudi scholars seem more reluctant to do so, at least on online platforms.
Alifta.net is the official website for the publication of Islamic legal rulings in Saudi Arabia. Launched in 2007 by the government, it operates in Arabic, English and French. It hosts two sets of fatwas. One set is authored by the scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima lil-Buḥūth al-ʿIlmiyya wa-l-Iftāʾ ("Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Legal Counsel"). They answer queries on various topics on the site. The other set was authored by the late former grand mufti of Saudi Arabia ʿAbd al-Azīz b. Bāz (d. 1999), whose volumes of legal rulings have been broken down so users of the website can browse them individually. The scholars who feature on this website generally adhere to the Hanbali school, though their loyalty to its founder can vary.
Ibn Bāz uses the precedent set by Ibn Taymiyya to make a pragmatic ruling on whether a woman who menstruates prior to the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa is allowed to perform it in her condition.54 He describes that it is wājib (necessary) for a woman to wait until she becomes ritually pure and then to perform this integral rite of hajj.55 If her male companion cannot wait with her, she is allowed 'to travel and then return to perform ṭāwāf' .56 After making these rulings based on established opinions from the Hanbali school, Ibn Bāz then states that 'if a woman is from a far country such as Indonesia, or Morocco, and if she travels, she cannot return, it is permissible for her to perform ṭāwāf … and it will serve as sufficient' .57 Thus, Ibn Bāz agrees with the application of ḍarūra by Ibn Taymiyya and his student Ibn al-Qayyim, which he describes as the soundest opinion of a group of scholars led by these two authorities. He also breaks from the opinion of Ibn Ḥanbal, who, in one of his two opinions, stipulates that a woman who circumambulates the Kaʿba whilst menstruating is obliged to slaughter a large animal. This fatwa was issued after the use of aeroplanes to travel to the hajj became standardised in the 1950s. Considering that Ibn Bāz was appointed chairman of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima in 1975 and was appointed grand mufti in 1992, it is clear that he felt Ibn Taymiyya's ruling could be applied in the modern era to female pilgrims from countries beyond a certain distance from Mecca.
Surprisingly, the scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima do not follow Ibn Bāz in this regard, despite his standing as a senior authority in the scholarly landscape of Saudi Arabia, and even though they rely upon him greatly in other fatwas. Remarkably, at the time of writing, no less than five queries had been made to the scholars of the committee by women who had encountered the same problem -namely, that their menstruation cycle had begun before they had had a chance of performing the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa.
One questioner described that, despite taking pills to prevent her menstruation, she menstruated before the hajj circumambulation.58 Thus, she did not perform it, and returned home, where she had relations with her husband. A second woman described how she began menstruating just before performing the hajj ṭawāf and 'could not remain in Mecca because she had to stay with her group' .59 She then asked if it would 'have been permissible for her to perform ṭawāf while she was in a state of menstruation or not, considering that remaining behind would be extremely difficult and costly for her' .60 A third case was outlined by another woman, who described how 'she menstruated on the tenth of Dhū l-Ḥijja' and how, because she 'feared missing her group if she 57 Ibid. 58

13
Menstruation and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa HAWWA (2020) 1-20 performed ṭawāf al-ḥajj at the end of hajj before leaving' , she circumambulated the Kaʿba in her condition 'because she could not stay in Mecca' . 61 The scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima ruled along similar lines for each query. For the woman who returned home without performing the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa and then cohabited with her husband: 'It is obligatory for her to return to Mecca to make up' for it, and 'to slaughter a sheep … in Mecca and distribute its meat among the poor for having intercourse before ṭawāf al-ḥajj.'62 For the second woman, who wondered if her difficult circumstances would allow her to perform ṭawāf whilst in a state of menstruation: 'A menstruating woman is not permitted to circumambulate the Kaʿba because ṭahāra is a condition of validity of ṭāwāf.'63 Thus, she was advised that if she was forced to leave Mecca without performing the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa, 'due to her inability to remain behind alone without her group, she is allowed to leave and then return to Mecca after her menstruation ends.'64 She could then perform this integral hajj rite upon her return, but until then 'her husband must not have sexual intercourse with her. '65 The woman who outlined the third case was told that the ṭawāf she performed whilst menstruating was invalid, since 'among the conditions of the validity of ṭawāf is being pure of the major and minor ḥadath.'66 She was directed to return to Mecca and perform it again, and told that if 'her husband had sexual intercourse with her during the time between the first and the last ṭāwāf, she Nurgat HAWWA (2020) 1-20 is required to slaughter a sheep … because she fell into one of the prohibitions of iḥrām' .67 Overall, the scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima appear not to agree with Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Bāz's application of ḍarūra. Instead, the scholars choose to follow the opinion of Ibn Ḥanbal, which holds purity from minor ḥadath to be necessary for a valid ṭāwāf. It is worth mentioning that another of his opinions states that a ṭawāf performed whilst impure is valid -though expiation, in the form of the sacrifice of an animal, is due. This opinion could have been used by the scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima since it finds a precedent in the Hanbali school, as well as the Hanafi school. However, they rule instead that such a ṭawāf is invalid, which is the most difficult opinion from the female questioners' point of view. This is unlike the scholar of the Salafi website Islamqa.info, an independent website based in Saudi Arabia but not affiliated to the Saudi establishment. It issues legal rulings in eleven languages. The site was banned inside Saudi Arabia in 2010 in an effort to drive Muslims towards using the official Alifta site instead.68 Questions are answered by Muḥammad al-Munajjid, whose rulings are also mostly in line with the Hanbali school. Al-Munajjid rules along similar lines to Ibn Bāz, likewise following the precedent set by Ibn Taymiyya. When asked regarding a woman who 'came for hajj and got her period after she entered iḥrām' , and her 'maḥram [guardian] had to leave straightaway and she has no one else in Mecca' , al-Munajjid rules that the woman should leave with her husband and return when pure, staying in the restricted state of iḥrām.69 However, he says that this only applies if the woman 'lives in the land of the Two Holy Places, because it is easy to come back and does not involve a great deal of trouble or need a passport' .70 On the other hand, if 'she is a foreigner and it is difficult for her to come back' , she is allowed to perform the ṭawāf alifāḍa, 'because in this case, her ṭawāf has become necessary, and in cases of necessity, things that are ordinarily forbidden are allowed' .71 Thus, al-Munajjid draws heavily on the ruling of Ibn Taymiyya, who similarly asserted that 'a forbidden act may be permitted in case of necessity' .72 67 Ibid. 68  The Hanafi jurist Muḥammad b. Ādam remains true to the ruling of the founder of his school on Sunnipath.com, a website established in 2003 for the purpose of issuing fatwas about Islamic law, belief, and religious practice. Its featured scholars, all of whom can be described as Sufi to some degree, adhere to the Hanafi or Shafiʿi legal schools of thought. Ibn Ādam rules, 'If a menstruating woman did not perform the ṭawāf, then her hajj will not be complete, and she will have to perform it later … until she does not perform it, sexual relations with her husband will be unlawful.'73 This is something agreed upon by all jurists, including Ibn Taymiyya, although the latter, at this point, stipulated a ruling that allowed a woman to avoid this predicament, as discussed above. Ibn Ādam then proceeds to explain that if a woman performs her hajj circumambulation in the state of menstruation due to lack of knowledge, 'then she must repent and seek forgiveness from Allah for committing this mistake although the ṭawāf will be valid, and she will have to pay the penalty of performing the ṭawāf in this state by sacrificing a camel or cow' . 74 Women of the Hanafi school who are unable to perform the ṭawāf can make use of this ruling, though it differs from Ibn Taymiyya's ruling in two important regards: (1) a woman would not be sinning if she were forced to circumambulate the Kaʿba in Ibn Taymiyya's view, and (2) there is no expiation due on her, which can be more financially costly for some than others. Another Sufi jurist of the Hanafi school, Ebrahim Desai, similarly rules, on jamiat.org.za, that if a woman does not repeat the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa which she had performed while menstruating, 'the ṭawāf will still be valid, but a penalty of one camel or one cow will now have to be given' , and she should seek forgiveness 'for entering Masjid al-Ḥarām and doing ṭawāf' in this condition ' .75 Another scholar of the Hanafi school, Qamruz Zaman, is unwilling to offer this way out for women, on the website muftisays.com. A questioner asks for a ruling regarding a woman 'who has to return back to her home, but she has not performed Tawaf Ziyarah [ṭawāf al-ziyāra] due to her being on her monthly course' ,76 in light of the fact that 'nowadays, especially in England, [the] majority of people go to Saudi to perform hajj with a group or tour. Due to this they are usually on a tight schedule especially on the return date' .77 The scholar replies that a woman who menstruates before the hajj circumambulation, Nurgat HAWWA (2020) 1-20 'and the flight time is due, then she would have to change the flight time' .78 Furthermore, 'if a menstruating woman leaves without performing Tawaf -al-Ifadha [ṭawāf al-ifāḍa] then she would still be in iḥrām and sexual relations with her husband will be unlawful until she returned to Mecca and made up the Tawaf-al-Ifadha without renewing the iḥrām' .79 Thus, Zaman rules along similar lines to the Salafi scholars of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima. Acknowledging that the ruling is perhaps inconvenient for women who encounter this problem on the hajj, Zaman then points out that 'some scholars like Ibn Taymiyya say that the woman will perform ṭawāf even in this state without giving damm [a sacrifice given as compensation]' .80 Though he does not endorse this view, it appears that he feels this is the more appropriate of the ways out for women in this predicament, rather than the ruling offered by the Hanafi school, which can be described as something of a loophole. This is in light of the fact that Abū Ḥanīfa would not have intended his ruling that a menstruating woman's ṭawāf is valid if compensation is paid, to be used by women intentionally circumambulating the Kaʿba in this condition. Conversely, Ibn Taymiyya's usage of ḍarūra allows women to do so without guilt or a need to expiate for it.
The examined online rulings show the extent of Ibn Taymiyya's impact on modern Islamic jurisprudential discourse. However, the actual nature of this impact is more complex. Scholars from non-Salafi backgrounds seem to only cite Ibn Taymiyya as an authority, without necessarily accepting his legal rulings. This is evident from the rulings of Zaman, who in many ways shows his respect for the Taymiyyan method by making reference to Ibn Taymiyya's views. For instance, his ruling allows women in genuine need to complete their hajj, as does the Hanafi school, but without a need for repentance or compensation. In this case, Zaman seems to agree that Ibn Taymiyya's crucial application of ḍarūra allows for a ruling that is more rational than that of his own school. This is reinforced by the fact that he does not offer the questioner a legal loophole in the same way as his Hanafi peers.
Scholars from Salafi backgrounds who are not affiliated to group, or official, establishments of Saudi Arabia, engage with and adopt Ibn Taymiyya's opinions. However, the official Saudi committee seems reluctant to do so. The queries from women pilgrims to al-Lajna al-Dāʾima show that the problem of performing ṭawāf al-hajj whilst menstruating still exists for them, and the frequency of such queries means that the committee is bound to be aware of this 78 Ibid. 79 Ibid. 80 Ibid. legal question. Bearing in mind that Alifta.net features Ibn Bāz's contrasting fatwas on its own website, and Ibn Bāz is indeed a signatory on many of al-Lajna al-Dāʾima's fatwas, the question arises as to why the committee clearly ignores Ibn Taymiyya's ruling on women pilgrims and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa when a scholar of Ibn Bāz's importance has adopted it wholesale.
The answer may lie in the committee's official nature, which can be described as a group emerging from a new concept of group ijtihād, where ijtihād is issued from councils and academies of ʿulamāʾ to 'overcome the impotence of individual ijtihād' .81 The committee seems to follow very much in the footsteps of its Wahhabi forebears, who 'preached ijtihād more consistently than they practiced it' and 'rarely deviated' from the late Hanbali school's views.82 As mentioned by the son of Ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, ʿAbdallāh, when the Wahhabis state that they follow the Hanbali school, they mean that they endorse the five uṣūl al-fiqh (principles, or foundations, of Islamic jurisprudence) of Ibn Ḥanbal.83 The position of the committee can thus be understood as a reluctance to break from these five uṣūl al-fiqh, something which Ibn Taymiyya clearly does in reaching his judgements. Hence the committee implicitly rejects Ibn Taymiyya's use of ḍarūra, and it plainly rejects his ruling that ṭawāf only requires purity from major ḥadath. On the other hand, al-Munajjid and Ibn Bāz, both scholars acting in an individual capacity (the latter less so when acting as part of the committee), do see fit to apply Ibn Taymiyya's ruling on women today; they rule that ḍarūra is applicable to women not living in or around the holy places.

Conclusion
Ibn Taymiyya's landmark fatwas show that menstruating on the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa need not be a predicament for female pilgrims. Ibn Taymiyya relied on sound legal principles and a concern for the unique problems of his time, which he understood required novel solutions. For Ibn Taymiyya, the ḥāja of contemporary women was significant enough to overturn a ruling based on the sunna, analogy (qiyās) and consensus (ijmāʿ). A combination of reason and pragmatism is what underpins the majority of Ibn Taymiyya's differences with the Hanbali school in which he was trained.
81 Frank E. Vogel, Islamic law and legal system: Studies of Saudi Arabia (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 79. 82 Ibid.,[75][76]73. Nurgat HAWWA (2020) 1-20 Often, Ibn Taymiyya's legal reasoning takes place in the context of him unravelling what he sees to be the erroneous analogies of the head of his school and other distinguished jurists, for instance, when he nullifies the ruling which necessitates a pilgrim to be free from minor ritual impurity in order to circulate the Kaʿba. The former is integral to Ibn Taymiyya's overall ruling on women being allowed to perform the hajj circumambulation whilst menstruating, demonstrating the multifaceted nature of his legal method.
If Ibn Taymiyya finds previous analogies to be legally unsound, he is not afraid to use reason and construct his own analogies to make a judgment on a legal question. It is on this basis that he concludes that women on their menses were prohibited from circling the Kaʿba for no reason other than because a person in major ritual impurity is not allowed to stay in a mosque. Though these processes take Ibn Taymiyya away from the rulings of the Hanbali school, there is no doubt that Ibn Taymiyya felt that the end results would be closer to the practices of the salaf, the early generations of Islam. This is what is likely to have motivated him to break with his traditionalist Hanbali training. Undoubtedly, his judgement in this case represented a legal watershed.
Ibn Taymiyya's motivations are a mixture of elements of his social, political and intellectual surroundings. The hajj ruling was motivated by a combination of social and political factors: the security and prosperity of the hajj was historically linked to that of the caliphate or ruling power, and with a weak caliphate and an unstable leadership in Mecca, conditions for pilgrims from the third/ninth to the seventh/thirteenth centuries were uncertain and often hazardous. Ibn Taymiyya would have seen this first-hand on his solitary pilgrimage, and he would have observed the central importance of the caravan to a hajj pilgrim's safety and security. Some scholars ruled that hajj was no longer obligatory due to its perils, and consequently Ibn Taymiyya's fatwas also served as an answer to them.
Modern fatwas issued by online iftāʾ sites of different backgrounds illustrate the extent of Ibn Taymiyya's modern impact. The frequency of queries from women pilgrims shows that, for them, the problem of menstruation and the ṭawāf al-ifāḍa still exists, despite medical advances which allow women to delay their menses.84 Thus, we know for sure that Ibn Taymiyya's fatwas remain relevant in the twenty-first century. Certain Salafi scholars show their support for Ibn Taymiyya and his legal method by voting with their pens; they follow him even when he disagrees with the a ʾimma or makes an unprecedented ruling. In the case of the hajj, concerns over flights, visas and problems of bureaucracy motivate certain scholars to follow Ibn Taymiyya in applying ḍarūra to female pilgrims whose menstrual cycle prevents them from performing the integral hajj circumambulation.
The official scholars of the Saudi government are surprisingly unsympathetic in this regard, offering no alternative solution to women in this predicament. Other scholars, from a broadly Sufi background, and who are more strictly inclined to a single school of thought, also show a significant level of recognition and respect for Ibn Taymiyya's writing, though most remain unaffected by his arguments. Overall, Ibn Taymiyya's landmark ruling on women pilgrims and the hajj continues to represent the most ease for women today, which is remarkable for an eighth/fourteenth-century scholar.