and the one incapable of facing the qibla if he prays toward another direction (20), and the one incapable of standing if he prays sitting. Abu Hanifa's analogy to the menstruating woman regarding delaying fasting is invalid, because fasting allows for delay, unlike prayer, evidenced by the fact that the traveler may delay fasting but not prayer. Furthermore, if the lack of water stood in the place of menstruation, it would have dropped the prayer entirely. Moreover, drawing an analogy from prayer to prayer is more appropriate than drawing an analogy from prayer to fasting. As for Malik's analogy, it is invalid because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "If I command you to do a matter, perform from it what you are able (21)." Drawing an analogy from purification to the other conditions of prayer is more appropriate than drawing an analogy from it to the menstruating woman; for menstruation is a habitual affair that customarily recurs, whereas incapacity here is a rare excuse that is not habitual, so it is not valid to draw an analogy between it and menstruation. Additionally, this is a rare excuse, so it does not drop the obligation, like forgetting the prayer and the absence of other conditions. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

69 - Issue: He said: (And he intends with it the obligatory prayer.)

We are not aware of any disagreement that tayammum is not valid except with an intention, other than what was narrated from al-Awza'i and al-Hasan ibn Salih (1) that it is valid without an intention. All other scholars of knowledge are upon the obligation of intention for it. Among those who said this are Rabi'ah, Malik, al-Layth, al-Shafi'i, Abu Ubayd, Abu Thawr, Ibn al-Mundhir, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). This is for the reasons we mentioned regarding wudu'. He intends the permissibility of the prayer. If he intends the removal of the hadath (state of ritual impurity), it is not valid because it does not remove the hadath. Ibn Abd al-Barr (2) said: The scholars have reached consensus that the purification of tayammum does not remove the hadath when one finds water; rather, whenever one finds it, he must repeat the purification, whether he was junub (in a state of major ritual impurity) or had a minor hadath. This is the school of Malik, al-Shafi'i, and others. It was narrated from Abu Hanifa that it does remove the hadath, because it is a purification from hadath that permits prayer, so it removes the hadath, like the purification with water. For us, the argument is that if he finds water, he is obligated to use it to remove the hadath which