This principle has already been noted.

Likewise, according to the great majority of jurists, an unqualified marriage contract requires that the husband be free from severance of the penis and impotence. According to the majority, it also requires that the wife be free from impediments to intercourse, such as closure of the vaginal opening, and from insanity, leprosy, and leukoderma. According to one of the two juristic opinions within Ahmad’s school and elsewhere, it likewise requires that both spouses be free from defects that prevent the full enjoyment of intercourse, such as discharges of impurities from either spouse and similar conditions. It does not, however, require beauty or similar qualities. It also requires that the husband be a suitable match, but nothing beyond that.

If either spouse stipulates that the other possess a desired quality, such as wealth, beauty, virginity, or the like, the stipulation is valid, and the spouse making it has the right to annul the marriage if that quality is absent. This is the sounder of the two reports from Ahmad, the stronger of the two positions in al-Shāfiʿī’s school, and the apparent position of Mālik’s school.

According to the other report, the right of annulment arises only when free status or religion has been stipulated. Under this report, there are two opinions concerning a stipulation about lineage. This applies whether the woman stipulates a quality in the man or the man stipulates a quality in the woman. Indeed, a woman’s stipulation concerning the man carries even greater force, by agreement of the jurists among Ahmad’s followers and others. What some of Ahmad’s followers have stated to the contrary has no basis.

Likewise, if a deficiency in a quality required by an unqualified contract is expressly stipulated—for example, if the husband stipulates that his penis has been severed or that he is impotent, or the woman that her vaginal opening is closed or that she is insane,