the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "The previously married for the previously married: lashing and stoning." And being previously married (thayyib) is attained by intercourse in the vagina, so it must be taken into account. There is no disagreement that a marriage contract devoid of intercourse does not result in Ihsan (the state of being married), regardless of whether there was seclusion, intercourse in a place other than the vagina, intercourse in the anus, or none of these occurred at all; because the woman does not become a thayyib through this, nor does she exit the status of virgins, whose prescribed penalty is one hundred lashes and banishment for a year, according to the requirement of the report. It is necessary that it be intercourse that involves the concealment of the glans in the vagina; for that is the limit of the intercourse to which the rulings of intercourse apply. Second: that it be within (27) a marriage, because marriage is called Ihsan, as evidenced by the saying of Allah Almighty: {And [also prohibited are] the Muhsanat (married women) among women} (28), meaning the married ones. There is no disagreement among the scholars that adultery and intercourse by error (shubha) do not make the one who performs them a Muhsan. We do not know of any disagreement that concubinage (tasarri) does not result in Ihsan for either of them, because it is not a marriage and its rulings do not apply to it. Third: that the marriage be valid. This is the opinion of most of the scholars, including 'Ata', Qatadah, Malik, Al-Shafi'i, and the scholars of opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). Abu Thawr said: Ihsan is attained by intercourse in an invalid marriage. This was also narrated from Al-Layth and Al-Awza'i, because the valid and the invalid are the same in most rulings, such as the obligation of the dowry and the waiting period (idda), the prohibition of the stepdaughter and the mother-in-law, and the legitimacy of the child, so it is the same regarding Ihsan. Our argument is that it is intercourse not involving a rightful ownership, so Ihsan is not attained by it, like intercourse by error. We do not concede the validity of (29) the rulings they mentioned; they only [became established through the act of intercourse] (30) in it, and this (31) is established in every act of intercourse and is not exclusive to marriage, [unless the marriage] (32) here has become a (source of) error, so the intercourse within it becomes the same as intercourse by error. Fourth: Freedom, which is a condition according to