• peace and blessings of Allah be upon him - ordered the one who had intercourse during Ramadan to free a slave, but he did not order anything regarding the woman, despite his knowledge of the occurrence of that from her. Furthermore, it is a financial right related to intercourse specifically, so it is upon the man like the dower (mahr).

Section: If a woman is compelled into intercourse, there is no expiation upon her, according to one single report, though she must perform the compensatory fast (qada'). Muhanna said: I asked Ahmad about a woman whom a man forced against her will and had intercourse with her; does she have to perform the compensatory fast? He said: Yes. I said: And is there an expiation upon her? He said: No. This is the opinion of al-Hasan, and similar to this is the opinion of al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, and the scholars of reason (Ashab al-Ra'i). According to this analogy, the same applies if he has intercourse with her while she is asleep. Malik said regarding the one asleep: She must perform the compensatory fast without expiation, and the one compelled must perform the compensatory fast and expiation. Al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir said: If the compulsion was by threat until she did it, it is like our statement. But if it was by physical force (ilja'), she does not break her fast. The same applies if he has intercourse with her while she is asleep. It is inferred from the statement of Ahmad - in the report of Ibn al-Qasim -: Any matter over which the fasting person is overcome does not require a compensatory fast or anything else. This implies there is no compensatory fast upon her if she was physically forced or asleep, because no action was found from her, so she did not break her fast, just as if water was poured into her throat against her will. The basis for the first [opinion] is that it is intercourse in the vagina, so it invalidates the fast, just as if she were compelled by threat, and because fasting is an act of worship that is invalidated by intercourse, so it is invalidated by it in any case, like prayer and Hajj. This differs from eating, for one is excused in that case due to forgetfulness, unlike intercourse.

Section: If two women engage in friction (musahaqa) and they do not ejaculate, there is nothing upon them. If they do ejaculate, their fast is invalidated. Is their ruling the same as the ruling of one who engages in intercourse without the vagina and ejaculates, or is no expiation required of them under any circumstances? There are two views, based on the question: Does intercourse by the woman necessitate expiation? There are two reports, and the most correct of the two views is that there is no expiation upon them, because that is not