The correct view is that she is like one who is traveling, because by entering into the state of ihram, she prevents him from having access to her; thus, she is like one who travels for her own needs, as we have mentioned. If she enters into ihram for a mandatory pilgrimage or mandatory minor pilgrimage during the obligatory time, from the Miqat, she is entitled to maintenance, because she performed what was incumbent upon her by the primary Law of Islam at its designated time, so her maintenance does not cease, just as if she were fasting during Ramadan. If she performs the ihram before the Miqat or before the time, the same opinion applies to her as to the woman in ihram for a voluntary pilgrimage, because she has caused him to lose access due to something unnecessary.

Section: If she performs i'tikaf (seclusion in the mosque), the analogy is that it is like her traveling; if it is without his permission, she is disobedient (nashiz) for leaving her husband's home without his permission for something that is not obligatory by the primary Law of Islam. If it is with his permission, she has no maintenance according to the statement of al-Khiraqi, although the Qadi said: She is entitled to maintenance. If she fasts during Ramadan, her maintenance does not cease because it is a fixed, obligatory act by the primary Law of Islam, and he has no power to prevent her from it; thus, her maintenance does not cease, just like in the case of prayer. Furthermore, he might be fasting with her, so enjoyment is prevented by a reason inherent to him. If it is a voluntary fast, her maintenance does not cease because she has not left his control and has not performed an act that prevents him from enjoying her; he could ask her to break her fast and have intercourse with her. If he desires that from her and she refuses, her maintenance ceases due to her refusal of the obligatory access. If it is a vowed fast tied to a specific time, the Qadi said: She is entitled to maintenance, because Ahmad explicitly stated that he has no right to prevent her from it. It is also possible that if her vow was made before the marriage, or if the vow was made with his permission, her maintenance does not cease, because it was an obligation upon her by a right preceding his marriage or an obligation for which he permitted the cause. If the vow was made during their marriage without his permission, she has no maintenance, because she caused him to lose his right of access by her own choice, through a vow that the Law of Islam did not make incumbent upon her, nor did it recommend it to her.