As for those who disagreed about the exception, they did not consider the believer or the animal, whether it is an animal or a believer, it is according to what this exception considered, and the ruling applies with it, and the details regarding it are long. Rather, we stipulated the believer rather than the human being alone, since faith gives knowledge of God what the animal and the human give it. And in addition to what a person does not comprehend in terms of his humanity or animality, but rather in terms of his being a believer, this is why we said the question of a believer, for he is more complete in knowledge.