intercourse with her remain forbidden after she returns to her family, and continue to be forbidden until she comes back to Mecca. This, too, is among the gravest hardships, the like of which Allah does not impose, for it is more burdensome than requiring two pilgrimages, whereas Allah Most High has required only one. Those obliged to make up their Hajj, such as someone who invalidates it, are required to do so only because of their negligence in invalidating it. Hence, according to the stronger of the two scholarly opinions, someone prevented from completing Hajj is not required to make it up, since there has been no negligence. Those who require someone who misses Hajj to make it up do so because they consider that person negligent.

If it is said concerning this woman, “Rather, she should leave ihram just as someone prevented from completing Hajj does,” this does not discharge her obligation. She would therefore still need to perform a second Hajj, during which she would fear the same thing she feared during the first. Moreover, someone prevented from completing Hajj may leave ihram only because of a tangible impediment, whether an enemy, illness, poverty, or imprisonment.

A legal prohibition alone, however, does not make anyone a person prevented from completing Hajj. Anyone able to reach the House is not considered prevented under the Sharia. These, then, are the possible courses of action: she must either remain in Mecca, return home while still in ihram, or leave ihram. Yet the Sharia rules out all these options for someone in her circumstances.

If it is said that Hajj is waived for a woman in these circumstances, just as it is waived for a woman who can perform Hajj only with someone who would engage in illicit intercourse with her, because circumambulating while menstruating is forbidden just as illicit intercourse is forbidden,