it resembles intercourse with a minor. Our evidence is the apparent meaning of the text, and that it is intercourse from a husband in a valid marriage, so it resembles that of an adult. It differs from the minor, for intercourse is impossible from him, and his "sweetness" cannot be tasted. The Qadi said: It is stipulated that he be twelve years old, because anyone younger than that is incapable of intercourse. There is no basis for this, for the disagreement concerns the one who has intercourse; once intercourse is possible for him, the intended purpose is realized. Therefore, there is no meaning in considering an age for which no legislation has been revealed, and estimating it is merely a matter of opinion and arbitrary determination. If she is a Dhimmi (protected non-Muslim), and her Dhimmi husband has intercourse with her, he renders her lawful for her Muslim divorcer. Ahmad stated this explicitly, saying: "He is a husband, and through him, li'an (imprecation) and the qasam (oath) become obligatory." This is also the view of al-Hasan, al-Zuhri, al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, Abu 'Ubayd, the people of reason (Ahl al-Ra'y), and Ibn al-Mundhir. Rabi'ah and Malik said: He does not render her lawful. Our evidence is the apparent meaning of the verse, and because it is intercourse from a husband in a valid, complete marriage, it resembles the intercourse of a Muslim. If both are insane, or one of them, and he has intercourse with her, he renders her lawful. Abu 'Abd Allah ibn Hamid said: He does not render her lawful, because he does not "taste the sweetness." Our evidence is the apparent meaning of the verse, and because it is permissible intercourse in a valid marriage, it resembles that of a sane person. His statement that "he does not taste the sweetness" is incorrect, for insanity is merely the veiling of the intellect, and the intellect is not a condition for desire and the attainment of pleasure, as evidenced by animals. However, if the insane person has lost sensation, such as one who is epileptic or unconscious, lawfulness is not achieved by his intercourse, nor by the intercourse of an insane woman in this state, because he does not "taste the sweetness" and he attains no pleasure. Perhaps Ibn Hamid only intended the insane person who is in this state, so there is no disagreement here. If he has intercourse with a woman who is unconscious or asleep such that she does not feel his intercourse, it is appropriate that she does not become lawful thereby, for the reason we have mentioned, and Ibn al-Mundhir has narrated this. It is possible that lawfulness is achieved in all of this, taking from the generality of the text. And Allah knows best.

Section: If he finds a woman on his bed and thinks she is a foreign woman or thinks she is his slave-woman, and has intercourse with her, and then discovers she is his wife, he renders her lawful because he encountered a valid marriage. If he has intercourse with her