The intentional act of intercourse and its forgetfulness are the same. This is the position of 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 (missing the Hajj), 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.

600 - Issue: He said: "And the muhrim (one in the state of ihram) may trade, engage in crafts, and return to his wife (raj'ah)."

There is another narration from Abu 'Abd Allah—may God have mercy upon him—regarding the return to one's wife, which is that he should not do so. As for trade and craft, we know of no disagreement regarding their permissibility. Ibn Abbas reported that Dhu al-Majaz and 'Ukaz were places where people traded during the Pre-Islamic period (Jahiliyyah). When Islam came, they seemed to dislike that, until it was revealed: {There is no sin upon you for seeking bounty from your Lord} [Quran 2:198] during the Hajj seasons. As for the return (raj'ah), it is famously permitted, and this is the opinion of most scholars. There is a second narration that it is not permitted; because it is the making lawful of an intimate part intended by a contract, so it is not permitted for the muhrim, like marriage. The evidence for the correct narration is that the raj'iyyah (a woman in the revocable waiting period) is a wife, and the return is a retention, as evidenced by His saying—the Almighty: {Retain them with kindness} [Quran 2:231]. Thus, it is permitted like retention before divorce. We do not concede that the return is a "making lawful," for the raj'iyyah is already lawful. Even if we concede that it is a making lawful,