it is an istibra' that forbids intercourse, so it forbids deriving pleasure [from her], like the 'iddah (waiting period). Also, because one cannot be secure from the possibility that she is pregnant by her seller, in which case she would be an umm walad, and the sale would be void, meaning he would be deriving pleasure from the umm walad of another. In this, it differs from the prohibition of intercourse during menstruation. As for a captive woman (sabiyya), the apparent meaning of al-Khiraqi’s words is the prohibition of touching her for pleasure in anything other than the vagina. This is the apparent view from Ahmad, because every istibra' that forbids intercourse forbids its preludes, like the 'iddah, and because it is an incitement to forbidden intercourse due to the mixing of fluids and the confusion of lineages, so she is analogous to the sold woman. It was narrated from Ahmad that it is not forbidden, based on what was narrated from Ibn Umar that he said: "A slave girl fell to my lot on the day of Jalula', as if her neck were a silver pitcher; I could not restrain myself, so I stood up and kissed her while the people were watching." Also, because there is no text regarding the captive woman, and it is not valid to analogize her to the sold woman; for it is possible that the sold woman is an umm walad to the seller, in which case he would be deriving pleasure from the umm walad of another and touching the slave woman of another. The captive woman, however, is his slave in any case, and intercourse with her was only forbidden so that he does not water another's field with his seed. Al-Khiraqi’s statement: "after the completion of his ownership of her," means that the istibra' only occurs after the buyer has ownership of her entirely. If he owned part of her, then later acquired the rest, the istibra' is not counted except from the time he acquired the rest. If he owned her through a sale containing an option (khiyar), it depends on the transfer of ownership during its period; if we say it transfers, then the start of the istibra' is from the time of the sale, and if we say it does not transfer, its start is from the time the option ends. If the item sold was defective, the start of the istibra' is from the time of the sale because the defect does not prevent the transfer of ownership by any disagreement. Is the istibra' started from the time of the sale before possession, or from the time of possession? There are two views: one of them is from the time of the sale because ownership transfers through it. The second is from the time of possession.