he entered into ihram for it, then it is like the one who did not give permission. And if we say: [he has the right to force her to exit], then her ruling is the ruling of the one who is prevented from performing Hajj (muhsar); the sacrificial animal (hady) becomes binding upon her, and if she does not find it, she must fast, then she may exit from it.

Section: If she enters into ihram for an obligatory act, and her husband swears by the triple divorce that she shall not perform Hajj this year, she does not have the right to exit from it; because divorce is permissible, and she does not have the right to abandon the religious obligation (faridah) of Allah out of fear of falling into it. Muhanna narrated from Ahmad that he was asked about this issue, and he said: 'Ata' said: Divorce is destruction; she is in the position of one who is prevented (muhsar).' Ibn Mansur narrated from him that he issued a fatwa to the inquirer that she is in the position of one who is prevented. He argued using the statement of Ata'. You see, and Allah knows best, that he inclined toward this because the harm of divorce is great, due to what it entails of her leaving her house, and separating from her husband and child, and perhaps that is greater to her than the loss of her wealth and the ruin of the rest of her family; for this reason, Ata' called it destruction. If an enemy prevented her from Hajj unless she paid him her wealth, that would be an act of obstruction (hasr), so this is even more deserving of that status. And Allah knows best.

Section: A father does not have the right to prevent his child from performing the obligatory Hajj, nor to force him to exit from his ihram, and the child does not have to obey him in abandoning it; because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no obedience to a created being in disobedience to Allah the Exalted." He does have the right to prevent him from going out for a supererogatory act, for he has the right to prevent him from