which forbid sexual intercourse, so his intentional [act] and his forgetfulness are treated equally, like the Hajj. Furthermore, the invalidation of the fast and the obligation of expiation are two legal rulings that pertain to intercourse, which doubt does not eliminate; therefore, both intentional and forgetful [acts] are equal regarding them, as is the case with the rest of its rulings.

Section: There is no difference whether the vagina is the front or the back, whether it is from a male or a female. Al-Shafi'i stated this. Abu Hanifah said, in the most famous of the two reports from him, that there is no expiation for intercourse in the anus, because neither legal dissolution of marriage (ihlal) nor marital immunity (ihsan) is attained through it, so it does not necessitate expiation, just like intercourse other than in the vagina. Our argument is that he invalidated the fast of Ramadan through intercourse in the vagina, thus he is obligated to perform expiation, just like [vaginal] intercourse. As for intercourse other than in the vagina, we have a prohibition against it; and even if we were to concede [that it does not require expiation], it is because intercourse other than in the vagina does not invalidate the fast by its mere occurrence, unlike intercourse in the anus.

Section: As for intercourse with the vagina of an animal, the Qadi mentioned that it necessitates expiation because it is intercourse in a vagina that necessitates a ritual bath (ghusl) and invalidates the fast, so it is similar to intercourse with a human female. There is another view that expiation is not mandatory for it, and Abu al-Khattab mentioned this because there is no text regarding it, nor is it in the meaning of the explicitly stated case, as it differs from intercourse with a human female in terms of the obligation of a legal penalty (hadd) according to one of the two reports, and in many of its other rulings. There is no difference whether the person engaged in intercourse is a wife, a stranger, an adult, or a minor; because if it is mandatory for intercourse with a wife, then it is more appropriate that it be mandatory for intercourse with a stranger.

Section: The woman’s fast is invalidated by intercourse without any disagreement that we know of in the school, because it is a type of invalidator [of the fast], so the man and the woman are equal in it, like eating. Does it require expiation from her? There are two reports: The first is that it is required of her, which is the preference of Abu Bakr, and the opinion of Malik, Abu Hanifah, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir. This is because she violated the fast of Ramadan through intercourse, so expiation is mandatory for her, like the man. The second [report] is that no expiation is required of her. Abu Dawud said: Ahmad was asked about one who had intercourse with his wife in Ramadan: Is there an expiation upon her? He said: "We have not heard that there is an expiation upon a woman." This is the opinion of al-Hasan, and there are two sayings for al-Shafi'i, like the two reports [in the school]. The basis for this is that the Prophet