And “the second” is looking that is known with certainty to involve no desire, such as a scrupulously pious man looking at his handsome son, his beautiful daughter, or his beautiful mother. Such looking is not accompanied by desire unless the man is among the most depraved of people. Whenever desire accompanies it, it becomes forbidden.

The same applies to someone whose heart is not inclined towards beardless youths, as was the case with the Companions and with peoples unfamiliar with this indecency. In this respect, such a person makes no distinction between looking at his own son, his neighbour’s son, or an unrelated boy. No desire enters his heart, for he has not become accustomed to such things, and his heart was free of them to begin with.

In the time of the Companions, slave women used to walk along the streets with their heads uncovered and serve men, while people’s hearts remained sound. But if a man wished to let beautiful Turkish slave women walk among people in places and times such as these, as those slave women once did, this would be a source of corruption.

The same applies to handsome beardless youths. They should not go out into places and alleyways where there is reason to fear that they will become a source of temptation, except as needed. A handsome beardless youth must therefore not be allowed to display his beauty, sit in the bathhouse among unrelated men, dance among men, or engage in similar things that tempt people. The same applies to looking at him.

The scholars’ disagreement concerns only “the third category” of looking: looking at him without desire, but with fear that it may be aroused. On this there are two views within