Section: If the dawn breaks while he is engaged in intercourse, and he continues the intercourse, he is obligated to perform the compensatory fast (qada') and the expiation (kaffara). This is the view of Malik and al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: The compensatory fast is obligatory, but not the expiation, because his intercourse did not coincide with a valid fast, so it does not necessitate expiation, just as if he had omitted the intention and then engaged in intercourse. Our evidence is that he abandoned the fast of Ramadan through an act of intercourse for which he is sinful due to the sanctity of the fast, therefore expiation is required for it, just as if he had engaged in intercourse after the break of dawn. The opposite case, if he did not form the intention, is that he abandons the fast due to the lack of intention, not due to the intercourse; and we also have a rebuttal regarding this. As for if he withdraws immediately at the first moment of the break of dawn, Ibn Hamid and al-Qadi said: He is also obligated to perform expiation, because withdrawal is an act of intercourse from which pleasure is derived, so that which relates to continuation relates to it, like the act of penetration. Abu Hafs said: There is neither a compensatory fast nor an expiation upon him. This is the view of Abu Hanifa and al-Shafi'i, because it is an abandonment of intercourse, so that which relates to intercourse does not relate to it, just as if one swore not to enter a house while being inside it, then exited it; the same applies here. Malik said: His fast is invalidated, but there is no expiation upon him, because he cannot do more than what he did to cease the intercourse, so he is like one who is compelled. This issue borders on the impossible, as one can hardly know the exact moment the dawn breaks in a way that is immediately followed by withdrawal without there having been any intercourse prior to it; thus, there is no need to postulate it or discuss it.

Section: Whoever engages in intercourse thinking that the dawn has not yet broken, then it becomes clear that it had already broken, he must perform the compensatory fast and pay the expiation. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: There is no expiation upon him. If he learns of it during the act of intercourse and continues, there is also no expiation upon him, because if he did not know, he is not sinful, and thus no expiation is required, similar to the intercourse of one who is forgetful. If he learns and continues, the intercourse for which he is sinful has occurred during a state of non-fasting. Our evidence is the hadith of the man who engaged in intercourse, as the Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered him to pay the expiation without distinction or qualification. Furthermore, because he invalidated a fast of Ramadan through a complete act of intercourse, the expiation became obligatory upon him, just as if...