We mentioned the error of a scholar who issued a ruling to a prince that when he had intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadan, he only had to fast and did not begin with the expiation.

The questioner : We mentioned the error of a scholar who issued a ruling to a prince that when he had intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadan, he only had to fast and did not begin with the expiation. He said it was for his upbringing and discipline. We mentioned his error. And just now, may Allah reward you, we mentioned that we have the right to discipline people by saying that whoever has intercourse during 'Umrah, then he must offer the blood sacrifice directly and we do not give him a choice. So what is the difference?

The Shaykh : The difference is clear, Glorified is Allah. The expiation for harm is based on choice; the person is given a choice. But there, it is based on sequence, and we cannot go beyond what Allah has ordered.

The questioner : And this, O Shaykh, is also a matter of choice?

The Shaykh : No, it is not a matter of choice.

The questioner : And here...

The Shaykh : It is a matter of choice because the expiation is originally based on choice. So we obligated him with the most severe of the three matters. Otherwise, all of them are permissible: this one, this one, and this one. But in the matter of freeing a slave and fasting, the person is not given a choice. Yes, Yahya.