Introduction
Despite the recent appearance of several studies on the menstrual laws in Islam,Footnote 1 some related topics yet await appropriate treatment. The laws pertaining to mustḥāḍa, for example—women who have dysfunctional uterine bleeding (istiḥāḍa)—have been overlooked in the research literature. The first scholar who addressed this matter, insofar as I can ascertain this, was Arent Jan Wensinck—who, however, dedicated only a few terse lines to the mustḥāḍa. According to Jewish law, says Wensinck, women who bleed due to menstruation or for some other reason are impure to the same degree. Islam, in contrast, he continues, defined a mustḥāḍa as only slightly impure. Islamic traditions in the matter, however, have long disagreed on this point and the laws concerning it vary to no small extent.Footnote 2 Wensinck's initial remarks above, however, contain an inaccuracy. The Mishnah, Tractate Kelīm 1:3–4 ranks the main sources of impurity (abōt ha-ṭūmʾah) in the order of their severity. According to this ranking, a zabah, a woman who bleeds for reasons other than menstruation, causes greater defilement than a menstruant (niddah) does. As for the disagreement among Islamic authorities, Wensinck has nothing specific to say.
Nearly seventy years after Wensinck, this issue received further treatment. Hava Lazarus-Yafeh made several statements about the mustḥāḍa: (1) Everything forbidden to a menstruant (ḥāʾiḍ) is permitted to a mustḥāḍa; she, too, offered no specifics. (2) There are no descending levels of impurity in Islam. (3) Islamic law treats her more leniently than does Judaism, yet Lazarus-Yafeh did not specify the dispensations involved.Footnote 3
I know of no scholarly work since Lazarus-Yafeh that has mentioned this topic. Oddly, neither the first nor the second edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam has an entry for istiḥāḍa. The term appears only once in the Encyclopedia of Islam, and even then tersely and almost parenthetically. G. H. Bousquet summarises this matter in a few lines: “A discharge which exceeds the legal duration fixed by the doctors of the Law for the menses is called istiḥāḍa; these irregular losses involve only minor impurity, ḥadath [q.v.]”.Footnote 4
To date, no scholarly attempt to study the subject further or develop it has been made. A comprehensive study of Sunnī legal sources and the ḥadīth literature demonstrates that the questions relating to haemorrhaging women are treated in several different discussions. Given that the Islamic legal sources treat the mustḥāḍa extensively and use a distinct terminology in regard to it, the topic entails study that focuses on it alone. I do not profess to investigate all the relevant laws in this article; instead, I will focus on the discussion of two related questions: permission for a mustḥāḍa to perform religious obligations and to have intercourse. I chose these two discussions because both help to examine and challenge previous scholars’ arguments on the subject and raise some points that have not appeared thus far in the research literature. In addition, the choice creates a platform for future research on the topic.
1. Definition of Istiḥāḍa
Before the legal discussions can be explored, the definition of istiḥāḍa should be clarified. Although the aforementioned scholars referred to the mustḥāḍa, none tried to define exactly how and why she acquires this status. Islamic sources claim that istiḥāḍa originates not from the bottom of the uterus (qaʿr al-raḥm), like menstrual blood, but from a place near it, and that it appears after arterial or venous bleeding.Footnote 5 The precedent for this perception is a ḥadīth in which ʿĀʾisha relates that Fāṭima bt. Ḥubaysh approached Muḥammad and told him: “O Allāh's messenger! I am mustḥāḍa and have not become pure [again]. Shall I refrain from praying?” Muḥammad said: “No, this is arterial blood, not menstrual blood. Refrain from praying during your days of menses, then perform ghusl and wuḍūʾ before each prayer, and then pray”.Footnote 6
The term istiḥāḍa applies in five situations: (1) when menstruation begins before the average age of menses, which Islamic law defines as nine;Footnote 7 (2) when bleeding occurs outside menses, which among most women occurs on regular days in the month (ʿāda);Footnote 8 (3) when bleeding is observed more than forty days after childbirth;Footnote 9 (4) when bleeding begins at the time of menstruation but lasts longer than the maximum duration of the menses (akthar muddat al-ḥayḍ); and (5) when bleeding begins at the time of menstruation but ceases too quickly to be considered menstrual (aqall muddat al-ḥayḍ).Footnote 10 In the last-mentioned case, a woman can realise only after the fact that she was mustḥāḍa and cannot apply the laws pertaining to that state.
The different schools had different views regarding the length of the last two-mentioned periods.Footnote 11 The Shāfiʿīs, Mālikīs, and Ḥanbalīs set the duration of akthar al-ḥayḍ at fifteen days, basing themselves on ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib's words: “The time exceeding [that of] menstruation, which lasted fifteen days, is istiḥāḍa.Footnote 12 The Ḥanafīs, in contrast, set akthar al-ḥayḍ at ten days and aqall al-ḥayḍ at three days. They relied on ḥadīth that reports Muḥammad as having said: “The duration of menses, of both a virgin girl and a non-virgin woman, should be three days and nights at the very least and ten days at the very most and what exceeds this is istiḥāḍa.”Footnote 13 To conclude, istiḥāḍa is in fact the discharge of blood outside the category of lochia and menses.Footnote 14
2. Allowing the mustḥāḍa to practice the faith: a concession, or an affirmation of her purity?
The earliest jurists were in consensus about allowing a mustḥāḍa to pray but disagreed about why. Is it because she is considered pure or is it due to a concession (rukhṣa) that allows her to pray even though her istiḥāḍa renders her impure?Footnote 15 On one side of the debate, affirming her ab initio purity, we find Saʿīd b. Jubayr, al-Muzanī, ʿAṭāʾ b. Abī Rabāḥ,Footnote 16 Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, and Qatāda.Footnote 17 On the other side, allowing purity only after the concession, we encounter Ibrāhīm al-Nakhaʿī, Sulaymān b. Yasār, al-Shaʿbī, Ibn Sīrīn, and al-Zuhrī. The latter based their argument on the impurity of a mustḥāḍa because they considered any flow of blood a source of harm (adhan). The word adhan is taken from the beginning of Q. 2:222, which refers to menstrual blood: “They will question thee concerning the monthly course. Say: It is adhan”.Footnote 18 Therefore, they draw no distinction between menstrual blood and istiḥāḍa. Yet, as an act of leniency, they allow a mustḥāḍa to pray.Footnote 19 Their reasoning was that istiḥāḍa is beyond the individual's control. In addition, since istiḥāḍa may persist for a long time, theoretically it may restrict some women from praying for so long that they may forget how to pray.
Al-Nakhaʿī differed from his colleagues in that he permitted a mustḥāḍa to pray but not to fast or to read the Qurʾān.Footnote 20 Al-Shaʿbī forbade fasting only.Footnote 21 Although the reasoning of al-Nakhaʿī and al-Shaʿbī does not appear in the texts, these authorities apparently perceived the mustḥāḍa as only somewhat impure. Al-Nakhaʿī’s and al-Shaʿbī’s opinions were not accepted. The later jurists assumed that a mustḥāḍa is permitted to perform all religious acts—fasting, reading the Qurʾān, praying, and circumambulating the Kaʿba (ṭawāf) as part of the pilgrimage to Mecca—except on her regular days of menses.Footnote 22 Before the last two of the aforementioned practices, she should perform ghusl and tie a piece of cloth between her thighs and hips. These jurists derived this teaching from a ḥadīth in which a woman who had endured a lengthy istiḥāḍa consulted ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar and received this instruction.Footnote 23
2.1. The actions that a mustḥāḍa must perform before prayer
One ḥadīth states that Umm Salama approached Muḥammad to ask him what a woman who sees “many bloods” should do. Muḥammad instructed Umm Salama to tell this woman to remember on what days she had been menstruant in the month before “what befell her befell her” (i.e., istiḥāḍa) and to refrain from praying on these days (since as a menstruant she may not pray). When the days of menses are over, Muḥammad continued, she should perform ghusl (as every post-menstruant must), then tie a piece of cloth between her thighs and hips, and then pray.Footnote 24
Many jurists adduced from this ḥadīth that a woman who has regular istiḥāḍa must perform several actions before praying.Footnote 25 First, she has to remember her regular days of menses during the preceding month. Then she must divide her month into two parts: that of menstruation (ḥayḍ) and that of istiḥāḍa. In the regular menstruation period, she should regard any blood that she sees as menstrual blood and must refrain from prayer (as well as other religious practices and intercourse). When these days are over, she performs ghusl, as every woman after the end of her menses must, to cleanse herself of her discharge. Afterwards, she must—not may—pray. Before every prayer, she must perform wuḍūʾ—a purification ritual that every Muslim must perform before every such devotion—and tie a piece of cloth between her thighs and hips, lest blood drip on her body or on her prayer rug, rendering her unable to pray once again. Due to this concern about residual bleeding, a mustḥāḍa must pray immediately after the wuḍūʾ so that no drop of blood has time to emerge. Thus, she cannot purify herself before the time of prayer arrives. If a mustḥāḍa nevertheless prepares for prayer so as to complete the preparations just as the time for prayer arrives, she may perform the wuḍūʾ before the prayer time and then pray as soon as prayer time comes. If she performs the purification ritual at that time but is delayed for a reason related to the prayer, she should not repeat the wuḍūʾ; otherwise, she should repeat it. All this demonstrates the importance of cleanliness for the worshipper.
3. Is a mustḥāḍa allowed to have intercourse?
According to Wensinck, the question of the mustḥāḍa was disputed and the rules varied considerably for much time.Footnote 26 The topic under discussion is a good example of this. The Islamic authorities disagree about whether a mustḥāḍa may have sexual intercourse. Their discussion is somewhat connected to the juridical discussion over whether she can pray. It seems that the early Islamic authorities had diverse opinions on the topic, ranging from prohibition to neutrality to permission.
According to one source, ʿĀʾisha considered intercourse by a mustḥāḍa detestable (makrūh) but did not specifically forbid it.Footnote 27 According to another source, she claimed it is forbidden.Footnote 28 She was followed in the latter view by al-Nakhaʿī, Sulaymān b. Yasār, al-Shaʿbī, Ibn Sīrīn and al-Zuhrī,Footnote 29 who, as noted above, considered any flow of blood a source of harm. Ibn ʿAbbās, when asked whether a man may have intercourse with his wife while she is mustḥāḍa, said that he saw no problem in doing so.Footnote 30 ʿIkrima reported that the husbands of Umm Ḥabība and Ḥamna bt. Jaḥsh, two important women who are considered authorities on the marital laws, had intercourse with them when they were mustḥāḍāt.Footnote 31 Many tābiʿūn, such as Saʿīd b. Jubayr, Saʿīd b. al-Musayyab, ʿAṭāʾ b. Abī Rabāḥ,Footnote 32 and Qatāda,Footnote 33 followed this opinion. As we have seen, these are the jurists who believed that a mustḥāḍa may recite the prayers because she is ritually pure; this explains why they allow her to engage in intercourse.
One tradition may explain the logic behind Saʿīd b. Jubayr's opinion. Asked whether a mustḥāḍa is allowed to have intercourse, he replied: “Prayer is greater than intercourse”,Footnote 34 i.e., prayer requires more stringent conditions of purity than intercourse does. Thus, if a mustḥāḍa may pray, a fortiori she may have intercourse. An expression of Saʿīd b. Jubayr's lenience on this issue is that he allows a mustḥāḍa to have intercourse even if she bleeds vigorously.Footnote 35 By implication, he considers a mustḥāḍa pure.
The disagreement recurred in later periods. Ibn Ḥanbal forbade intercourse with a mustḥāḍa unless her istiḥāḍa lasts a long time, in which case it is permitted.Footnote 36 He did not define how long this must be. According to al-ʿAynī, Ibn Ḥanbal permitted intercourse for a mustḥāḍa if she were “afraid of the sin” but did not explain what sin was at issue.Footnote 37 By implication, the sin was probably intercourse during the regular menses days; after all, Ibn Ḥanbal permitted intercourse to a mustḥāḍa if her bleeding lasted long. Apparently, Ibn Ḥanbal feared that if much time passed, the mustḥāḍa and her husband would have intercourse due to lack of self-restraint. Worse still, their self-restraint might give way on the mustḥāḍa’s regular days of menses, and since she is a long-term mustḥāḍa she would not distinguish between one form of discharge and another. Believing it impractical to prohibit intercourse with a long-term mustḥāḍa and thus using istiḥsān,Footnote 38 Ibn Ḥanbal adopted a lenient approach toward the topic under discussion.Footnote 39
Mālik argued that it is permitted to have intercourse with a mustḥāḍa, basing himself on a ḥadīth according to which a woman named Fāṭima bt. Abī Ḥubaysh experienced istiḥāḍa and Muḥammad told her: “This blood comes from one of the arteries and is not menstrual blood”.Footnote 40 Mālik's logic is that only menstrual blood enjoins a woman against having intercourse. According to Ibn Rushd, the jurists of the garrison towns (amṣār) concurred.Footnote 41 Al-ʿAynī reports that the majority of the scholars (jumhūr al-ʿulamāʾ) did the same.Footnote 42
Conclusion
By probing and investigating Islamic legal sources, one finds that scholars’ assertions about istiḥāḍa thus far require circumscription and reexamination. For example, Lazarus-Yafeh's sweeping claim that everything forbidden to a menstruant is permitted to a mustḥāḍa is overly general, since some jurists permitted her to pray only. She also finds no declining degrees of impurity among different sources of bleeding in Islam. Yet we see that a mustḥāḍa is permitted to pray, suggesting that she is less impure than a menstruant, for whom prayer is forbidden.Footnote 43
Furthermore, Lazarus-Yafeh argues that the Islamic laws of istiḥāḍa are more lenient than their Jewish counterparts. Here too, circumscription is needed; her claim is valid only regarding permission to have intercourse. Where rituals are concerned, it is not true because a passage in Tōseftā Berakhōt 2:12 reads: “Men who had a flow (zabīn), women who had a flow (zabōt), menstruants (niddōt), and women who have given birth (yōldōt) are permitted to read the Torah and to learn Mishnah, Midrash, laws, and Aggadot. Men who have had a seminal emission (baʿalei qerayīn) are forbidden [to partake in] all of them”. If so, Islamic and Jewish laws are not of one mind about participation in rituals.
This article shows that, between the lines, Muslim jurists disagreed about whether a mustḥāḍa is impure or not. Those who answered in the negative—that she is not impure—permitted to her to pray and have intercourse. Those who considered her (somewhat) impure let her pray as an act of leniency but considered the possibility of her having intercourse indecent. This suggests that both sides sought to establish a different and more lenient status, i.e., a less severe degree of impurity, for her than for the menstruant. The reason is that even those who frowned on intercourse by a mustḥāḍa were not as vehement as they were in the case of a menstruant, for whom the prohibition was supported by consensus.
