Which of the rites of Hajj requires ritual purity?

The questioner : Which of the rites of Hajj requires ritual purity?

The Shaykh : 'Umar: Tawaf, sa'y, and standing at 'Arafah. Staying overnight at Muzdalifah and stoning the pillars. Tawaf requires it.

The questioner : What do you want, Fawwaz? How are you?

The Shaykh : There is a disagreement regarding the majority. Did anyone say that it is not required? Who said that? No, up to now you have not become one of the people.

The questioner : The Shaykh al-Islam.

The Shaykh : Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, said that ritual purity is not required, and that if a person performs tawaf without wudu, his tawaf is valid. But if it were said to Shaykh al-Islam that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prevented the menstruating woman from tawaf, he said, when he was informed that Safiyyah had started menstruating, "Is she our guest?" What is the answer?

The questioner : So, so, it was the house of the house.

The Shaykh : Meaning, he answered that preventing the menstruating woman from tawaf is not because she is in a state of minor ritual impurity, but because she is menstruating, and a menstruating woman does not stay in the mosque. It is correct that she passes through the mosque, there is no harm, she takes something from the mosque, but that she stays in the mosque, there is no harm. This is how they answered. On the assumption that this is valid evidence, we say we prevent the menstruating woman and the one in a state of major ritual impurity, unlike the one who has a minor ritual impurity, because the one in a state of major ritual impurity is also prevented from staying in the mosque except with wudu, and there is a disagreement on this too. Some scholars say it is not permissible to stay, even with wudu. If he performs wudu, the one in a state of major ritual impurity does not stay. And on this basis, he and the menstruating woman are on the same level. Meaning, if we said that the evidence in the case of the menstruating woman is valid, we would say we prevent the menstruating woman, the woman with post-natal bleeding, and the one in a state of major ritual impurity from tawaf. As for the one with a minor ritual impurity, he cannot be compared to them, because the minor ritual impurity is lighter than the major ritual impurity.
Now, did we mention in this issue that it is recommended for the mufti, when asked about such issues, to issue a ruling based on caution if possible? We said that. So if someone comes to us and asks, for example, that he performed tawaf without wudu and he is in Makkah, and the issue is that he only needs to go back and perform tawaf, we say, go back and perform tawaf so that your obligation is cleared with certainty and so that you have a reward, because you will have two rewards: the first reward for the first tawaf and the second reward for the second tawaf. You will not miss out on good. But if a man comes to us who has returned to his country and had intercourse with his wife, or has married, and he had performed tawaf without wudu, we say your tawaf is invalid, the marriage contract is invalid, and the intercourse requires expiation, and so on. We do not say that. And this is part of the wisdom of the mufti to distinguish between things where caution is easy and things where caution is not easy. Then we also mentioned that caution is not prescribed unless the cause is present and there is confusion. But if the cause is not present and the issue is just a delusion, it is not considered. Did you understand, people?
Meaning, for example, if the disagreement is very weak, we do not exercise caution. But if it is strong and the majority of scholars are on it, for example, then we should exercise caution. But we should not rule with caution and oblige the person to say that the majority of jurists are correct. Is the time up?