That's an inaccurate translation.
:salam2: True , mostly the word has been translated as TOUCHED, and imam shafii(rh) has taken the Dhahiri meaning of the word.
As-salaamu'alaikum.
I brought foreward evidence from Qur'an, Sunnah and consenus of the Scholars, so far everyone who opposes that view has brought nothing foreward except their own opinions - and Islam is built on evidence and proof, not on whims or desires.
AKhi none has opposed the view which you present. one brother adviced not to say others proof as "extreme" allthough they have evidence on their side, and another brother said that the word accurate is TOUCHED and not getting CONTACT with wife. and here is your evidence of scholar making islam extreme, though i dont follow shafii school of fiqh.
“O ye who believe! when ye prepare for prayer, wash your faces, and your hands (and arms) to the elbows; Rub your heads (with water); and (wash) your feet to the ankles. If ye are in a state of ceremonial impurity, bathe your whole body. But if ye are ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from offices of nature, or ye have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand or earth, and rub therewith your faces and hands, Allah doth not wish to place you in a difficulty, but to make you clean, and to complete his favour to you, that ye may be grateful.” [5:7 Yusuf Ali translation]
The key words in this verse used by the Shafi’i school are:
أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاء
“…or ye have been in contact with women…”
They maintain that the word “lamastum”, translated here as ‘contact’ is touching by the hand. Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī stated in Al-Umm, “Lams (touching/contact) is done by the hand.” Their opponents disagree and argue that it is reference to coitus. That however is not our discussion. What is their proof that “lamastum – contact” means with the hand? Firstly, the Shafi’is recite this without the elongation of the Alif after the lam. So it is recited as: لمستم (lamastum). The literal meaning alludes to the touch that is less than coitus. Both recitations are reported authentically.
Their supporting proof is the authentic statement of Ibn ‘Umar that is reported by Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī in his “Al-Umm” that states,
أَخْبَرَنَا مَالِكٌ عَنْ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ أَبِيهِ قَالَ قُبْلَةُ الرَّجُلِ امْرَأَتَهُ وَجَسُّهَا بِيَدِهِ مِنْ الْمُلَامَسَةِ فَمَنْ قَبَّلَ امْرَأَتَهُ أَوْ جَسَّهَا بِيَدِهِ فَعَلَيْهِ الْوُضُوءُ
Imām Ash-Shāfi’ī reports the following narration: Mālik reported from Ibn Shihāb from Sālim ibn Abdullah ibn Umar from his father (Abdullah ibn Umar) that he said,
“The man kissing his wife or touching her (note: the word is jass. ‘Aisha Bewley translates it as “fondles”. Indeed that is a probably meaning, but the Qāmūs also says “touch” is synonymous wallahu ‘alim) with his hand is from “the one who touches (lams), and so whoever kisses or touches his woman with his hand then upon him is wudhu’.”1
Imām Al-Bayhaqi states after this report, “In the report of Ibn Bukayr it states,
فَقَدْ وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ الْوُضُوءُ
“…Then wudhu’ is obligatory upon him…”2
Imām Al-Bayhaqī reports in his Sunan Al-Kubrā the report from Ibn Mas’ūd that he said,
القبلة من اللمس وفيها الوضوء، واللمس ما دون الجماع
“Kissing is from touching (lams), and regarding it is wudhu’. And Lams (touching) is whatever is less than sexual intercourse.”3
In another narration:
أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ وَأَبُو سَعِيدِ بْنُ أَبِى عَمْرٍو قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ : مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ مَرْزُوقٍ حَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ عُمَرَ عَنْ شُعْبَةَ عَنْ مُخَارِقٍ عَنْ طَارِقِ بْنِ شِهَابٍ أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ يَعْنِى ابْنَ مَسْعُودٍ قَالَ فِى قَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى (أَوْ لاَمَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ) قَوْلاً مَعْنَاهُ مَا دُونَ الْجِمَاعِ.
“Ibn Mas’ūd said regarding the words of Allah “…Or coming into contact with women…” ‘It is what is less than sexual intercourse.’”4
Imām Al-Bayhaqī used as proof the hadīth of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) that is found in Sahīh Muslim,
اليد زناها اللمس
“The hands zinā (fornication) is touching.”
[The entire hadīth is: Abu Hurairah (radhiya allāhu ‘anhu) said: The Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) said, "Allah has written the very portion of Zina which a man will indulge in. There will be no escape from it. The Zina of the eye is the (lustful) look, the Zina of the ears is the listening (to voluptuous songs or talk), the Zina of the tongue is (the licentious) speech, the Zina of the hand is the touch, the Zina of the feet is the walking (to the place where he intends to commit Zina), the heart yearns and desires and the private parts approve all that or disapprove it.” (Bukhārī and Muslim)]
The proof is that sexual intercourse is actually distinguished from the “lams / touching” of the hand. Therefore the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) made a distinction between intercourse and ‘touching’ of the hands.
Another proof used by Imām Al-Bayhaqī in his Al-Kubrā is the story of the companion Mā’iz ibn Mālik that fornicated and came to the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa ‘alā Ālihi wa sallam) and told him that he committed adultery. The Prophet turned away from several times, and finally asked him,
لَعَلَّكَ قَبَّلْتَ أَوْ لَمَسْتَ
“Maybe you kissed her or just touched her (lams).”5
This is proof that lams (touching) is what is less than sexual intercourse.
Imām Al-Bayhaqī also quotes the following narration from ‘Umar ibn Al Khattāb (radhiya allāhu ‘anhu wa ‘alayhis salām):
أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَافِظُ أَخْبَرَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْفَضْلِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ الشَّعْرَانِىُّ حَدَّثَنَا جَدِّى حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ حَمْزَةَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ يَعْنِى ابْنَ عَمْرِو بْنِ عُثْمَانَ عَنِ الزُّهْرِىِّ عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِىَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ : إِنَّ الْقُبْلَةَ مِنَ اللَّمْسِ فَتَوَضَّئُوا مِنْهَا.
‘Umar said, “Verily, kissing is from touching, so make wudhu’ from it.”6
akhi i didn´t post imam shafii(rh) post to convienced you, cause i am with your opinion in this matter. i posted his opinion to tell you that they hadn´t any wish to make Islam extreme, but its cause of evidences.