The first is looking accompanied by lust; this is forbidden by consensus.
The second is looking that is known with certainty to involve no lust, such as a devout man looking at his handsome son, his beautiful daughter or his mother. Such looking is not accompanied by lust unless the man is among the most depraved of people. Whenever lust accompanies it, it becomes forbidden.
The same applies to those whose hearts feel no attraction towards beardless youths—as was the case with the Companions, and with peoples unfamiliar with this indecency. Such a person makes no distinction between looking at such a face and looking at his own son, his neighbour’s son or an unrelated boy. No lustful thought enters his heart, because he has not become accustomed to this and his heart is free of such inclinations.
In the time of the Companions, slave women would walk in the streets with their heads uncovered and serve men, while people’s hearts were free of such desires. Yet if a man were to allow beautiful Turkish slave women to walk among people in places and times such as these, just as those slave women used to walk, this would be a form of corruption.
Likewise, handsome beardless youths should not go out, except as needed, in places and at times where there is a fear that they will become a source of temptation. A handsome beardless youth should therefore not be allowed to flaunt his beauty, sit in the bathhouse among unrelated men, dance among men, or do similar things that tempt people. The same applies to looking at him.
The scholars’ disagreement concerns only the third category of looking, namely: