Section: As for intimacy (mubasharah) below the level of the private part, if it is without desire, it does not spread the prohibition, according to a consensus of which we are aware. If it is with desire, and it is with a foreign woman (ajnabiyyah), it also does not spread the prohibition. Al-Juzajani said: I asked Ahmad about a man who looked at his wife's mother with desire, or kissed her, or had intimate contact with her. He said: I say that nothing of that prohibits her except sexual intercourse. This was likewise reported by Ahmad ibn al-Qasim and Ishaq ibn Mansur. If the intimate contact is with a woman who is lawful to him, such as his wife or his slave-woman (31), her daughter is not prohibited to him. Ibn Abbas said: Nothing prohibits the step-daughter except sexual intercourse with her mother (32). Tawus, Amr ibn Dinar, and others said the same, because Allah the Almighty said: "But if you have not gone in unto them, then there is no sin upon you" (33). This [intimate contact] does not constitute "going in" (dukhul), so it is not permissible to abandon the explicit text of the Quran because of it. As for the prohibition of her mother, and her prohibition to the father of the person who had intimate contact with her and his son; in marriage, she is prohibited by the mere contract before any intimate contact, so the intimate contact has no apparent effect. As for the slave-woman, when he has intimate contact with her below the level of the private part with desire, does the prohibition of affinity (musaharah) become established? There are two narrations regarding this. The first is that it does spread it. This has been narrated from Ibn Umar, Abdullah ibn Amr, and Masruq. Al-Qasim [ibn Muhammad] (34), al-Hasan, Makhul, al-Nakha'i, al-Sha'bi, Malik, al-Awza'i, Abu Hanifah, and Ali ibn al-Madini held this view. It is also one of the two opinions of al-Shafi'i, because it is a type of sexual enjoyment, so the prohibition of affinity is attached to it, just like sexual intercourse in the private part, [and because it is a pleasure derived from intimate contact] (35), thus the prohibition attaches to it just as it does to sexual intercourse (37). The second is that the prohibition is not established by it, because it is a touching that does not necessitate ritual bathing (ghusl), so it does not...