the insane person regaining sanity, the disbeliever accepting Islam, and the sick person who had broken his fast becoming healthy, there are two narrations regarding them. One of them is that they are required to abstain for the remainder of the day. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifah, Al-Thawri, Al-Awza'i, Al-Hasan ibn Salih, and Al-'Anbari; because it is a factor that, if found before dawn, would have necessitated fasting, so if it occurs after dawn, it necessitates abstention, like the establishment of evidence of the moon-sighting. The second [narration] is that they are not required to abstain. This is the opinion of Malik and Al-Shafi'i. This has also been narrated from Jabir ibn Zayd. It has also been narrated from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: "Whoever eats at the beginning of the day, let him eat at its end." This is because he was permitted to break his fast at the beginning of the day both outwardly and inwardly, and since he had broken it, he was permitted to continue doing so until the end of the day, just as if the excuse had persisted. If one of these people engages in sexual intercourse after their excuse has ceased, the ruling depends upon the two narrations regarding the obligation of abstention. If we say he is required to abstain, his ruling is the same as that of one for whom the evidence of the sighting is established if he engages in intercourse. If we say he is not required to abstain, then nothing is incumbent upon him. If one of the two spouses is among these people and the other has no excuse, each has the ruling applicable to themselves, as has already passed. If they are both excused, their ruling is what we have mentioned, regardless of whether their excuses coincide, such as if they both arrive from a journey or both recover from an illness, or if they differ, such as if the husband arrives from a journey and the wife becomes clean from menstruation, and he has intercourse with her. It has been narrated from Jabir ibn Yazid that he arrived from a journey and found his wife had become clean from menstruation, and he had intercourse with her. As for one who intended to fast while on his journey, illness, or during his childhood, then his excuse ceases during the day, he is not permitted to break his fast, according to a single narration, and he is liable for expiation if he has intercourse. Some of the companions of Al-Shafi'i stated, specifically regarding the traveler, that there are two views: one of them is that he may break the fast because he was permitted to break the fast at the beginning of the day both outwardly and inwardly, so he could maintain it, just as if he had arrived while having already broken his fast. This is not correct; for the cause of the concession ceased before he made use of it, so he is not entitled to it, just as if a ship had arrived with him before the shortening of prayer, or like a sick person who recovers or a child who reaches puberty. This contradicts what they have mentioned. And if the child knew