Section: If he contemplates (fakkara) and then ejaculates, nothing is obligatory upon him. For contemplation occurs to a person without will or choice, so no legal ruling attaches to it, as is the case in fasting. The Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) said: "Indeed, God has pardoned [for my nation] what their souls whisper to them, as long as they do not act upon it or speak of it." Agreed upon.

Section: Intentionality and forgetfulness in sexual intercourse (wat') are the same. Ahmad stipulated this, stating: If he has intercourse with his wife, his Hajj is invalidated. This is because it is a matter he cannot reverse. Similarly, if he shaves his hair, it is gone and he cannot restore it, and if he kills game, it is gone and he cannot restore it. Thus, regarding these three, intentionality and forgetfulness are the same. Al-Khiraqi did not mention forgetfulness here, but he mentioned it in the context of fasting, and he clarified that for intercourse in the vagina or otherwise with ejaculation, its intentional act and its mistake are equal. As for other acts like kissing, touching, and the emission of madhy through repeated gazing, their rulings differ between intentional and accidental acts. Thus, it is appropriate here that it be the same, because intercourse is almost never subject to forgetfulness like other acts, and because intercourse is a nullifier of fasting unlike other things, so its intentional and accidental acts are equal, like the "fawat" (missing the Hajj), unlike that which is less than it. One who is ignorant of the prohibition or is under duress is in the ruling of one who has forgotten, because he is excused. Among those who said that the intentional act of intercourse and its forgetfulness are the same are Abu Hanifa, Malik, and al-Shafi'i in the older of his two opinions. In the new opinion, he said: It does not invalidate the Hajj, and nothing is obligatory upon him due to forgetfulness or ignorance; because it is an act of worship for which a kaffara (expiation) is required upon its invalidation, so the intercourse of the intentional actor and the one who forgot are distinct, like in fasting. Our position is that it is a cause to which the obligation of making up the Hajj attaches, so its intentional and accidental acts are equal, like fawat, and [the analogy to] fasting is restricted. Furthermore, kaffara is not obligatory in fasting by [mere] invalidation, because its invalidation by everything other than intercourse does not necessitate a kaffara; it is only obligated by the specific act of intercourse, so the two cases are distinct.