His statement, “even if he does not ejaculate”: the subject is the husband—that is, even if no ejaculation takes place, whether he does not ejaculate at all or ejaculates outside the vagina, this does not matter.

His statement, “even if he does not ejaculate,” indicates a point of scholarly disagreement. Some scholars maintain that ejaculation is necessary, since the tasting of sweetness is not complete without it; complete pleasure is attained only through ejaculation, whereas intercourse alone does not bring about complete pleasure. They cite the Prophet’s saying: “Not until you taste his sweetness and he tastes your sweetness.” (1) However, the majority of scholars do not stipulate this. Thus, the correct view in this matter lies midway between two extremes: the first position is that the mere marriage contract suffices, while the second is that ejaculation is indispensable. The middle position is that the contract alone is insufficient, but ejaculation is not a condition. Thus, it is the middle course.

If you reflect upon the views of the scholars, you will find that the middle view is most often correct. This is because those who went to one extreme considered the evidence from one angle, while those who went to the other extreme considered it from the other angle; whereas those who adopted the middle position considered it from both angles. Their view was therefore balanced, and it was the correct one. If you examine the disagreements among people, whether concerning matters of creed or matters of practice, you will find that the middle position is, in most cases, the correct one.

Benefit: Some people have said that the Prophet’s statement, “Not until you taste his sweetness and he tastes your sweetness,” provides a basis for what is called the honeymoon. Is this correct?

Yes, it is correct. But sweetness should not be confined to a single month; if it endures with one’s wife, then the sweetness should last a lifetime, not merely a month.