Islamic Fiqh > Penalties (hudud) > Khamr and discretionary penalties (ta'zir) > The Ruling on Treatment with Wine and with Prohibited Things
Contents
Updated on 25 September 2026 at 3:23 PM
This part belongs to the full section: All sections of this part.
Ahmad: "He does not uncover his armpits in any of the legal penalties", meaning he does not exaggerate in raising his hand when striking, for what is intended is his correction, not his death (al-Mughni 9/142, al-Lubab 2/311, al-Taj wa-l-Iklil 5/369, al-Sharh al-Kabir with al-Dasuqi's Hashiya 6/369, Tahbir al-Mukhtasar 5/402, al-Muhadhdhab 2/278, al-Bayan 12/527, Matalib Uli al-Nuha 6/163).
The Hanbalis said in the school: "If the imam or his deputy sees fit to strike, in the penalty for drinking an intoxicant, with dried palm fronds or with sandals, he may do so, and with hands as well, according to the preceding hadith of Abu Hurayra" (al-Mughni 9/142, Matalib Uli al-Nuha 6/163).
The ruling on treatment with wine and with prohibited things:
The jurists disagreed on the ruling of treatment with wine: is it permissible or not?
The majority of jurists, the Hanafis, the Malikis, the Shafi'is according to the sounder view, and the Hanbalis, held that treatment with wine is prohibited, based on what Muslim and others related from 'Alqama ibn Wa'il, from his father Wa'il al-Hadrami:
"Tariq ibn Suwayd al-Ju'fi asked the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, about wine, and he forbade him or disliked that he make it. He said: I only make it as a medicine. He said: It is not a medicine, but a disease."
Reported by Muslim (1984)
And from 'Asim, from Abu Wa'il: "A man among us fell ill, and an intoxicating drink was prescribed for him; we went to Abdallah, meaning Ibn Mas'ud, and asked him, and he said: Allah has not placed your cure in what He has forbidden you."
"Allah has not placed your cure in what He has forbidden you."
Saying of Ibn Mas'ud, reported by al-Tahawi in "Sharh Ma'ani al-Athar" (1/108) and by al-Hakim in "al-Mustadrak" (7509)
And because it is prohibited in itself, it was not permitted for treatment, like the flesh of swine; and because necessity is not warded off by it, it was not permitted, like treatment with it for what it is not suited; and because, even if it contains a bodily benefit, it contains a religious harm, and the Creator, the Most High, forbade it despite His knowledge of it.
The Malikis explicitly stated that it is not permitted even if one fears death (al-Taj wa-l-Iklil 5/369, Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil 8/109, al-Sharh al-Kabir with al-Dasuqi's Hashiya 6/369, Tahbir al-Mukhtasar 5/401, Ahkam al-Qur'an 1/211).
As for the Shafi'is, according to the sounder view, they said: the prohibition applies when one does not find anything to take its place, even if his condition does not reach perdition; if he has no recourse except it and finds nothing else, drinking it becomes determined as obligatory, just as eating carrion becomes determined for the one compelled to it. Al-Damiri said, may Allah have mercy on him: thus the Imam related it from the consensus of the companions. No legal penalty is due upon the one who treats himself with wine according to the Shafi'is (Sharh Sahih Muslim 13/153, al-Najm al-Wahhaj 9/227-228, Mughni al-Muhtaj 5/508-509, Tuhfat al-Muhtaj 11/96, Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/15), and the penalty is due upon him according to the Malikis and the Hanbalis (al-Mughni 9/137, al-Insaf 10/230-231, Sharh al-Zarkashi 3/269-270, al-Mubdi' 9/101-102, Kashshaf al-Qina' 6/148-149, Majmu' al-Fatawa 24/272).
Imam al-Sarakhsi said, may Allah have mercy on him: "Every prohibited drink: it is not permitted to drink it for treatment, to the point that it is related from Muhammad that a man came asking his permission to drink wine for treatment; he said: (If there is yellow bile in your belly, take sugar water, and if there is moistness in you, take honey water: it is more beneficial for you.) In this there is an indication that necessity is not realized in resorting to the unlawful, for there is found of its kind what is lawful, and the purpose is attained through it. And the words of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, indicate it:
"Allah has not placed cure in an impurity."
Cited by al-Sarakhsi in "al-Mabsut" (24/9)
and he did not intend by it the negation of cure absolutely, for that is observed in reality, and it is not possible for the report of the Lawgiver, may the prayer and peace be upon him, to be contradicted; rather the meaning is that He has not appointed any impurity as a cure such that no lawful thing is found that does its work or is stronger than it" (al-Mabsut 24/9).
However, the Hanafi jurists said that seeking cure through the prohibited is only impermissible when one does not know that it contains a cure; as for one who knows that it contains a cure and has no other remedy besides it, seeking cure through it is permitted, for Muhammad, may Allah have mercy on him, mentioned in the book of drinks: if a man fears thirst for himself and finds wine, he drinks it if it wards off his thirst; but he drinks only the measure that quenches him and wards off his thirst, and does not drink beyond sufficiency.
As for the words of Ibn Mas'ud, may Allah be pleased with him: "Allah, the Most High, has not placed your cure in what He has forbidden you", Abdallah may have said this concerning a disease for which a remedy other than the prohibited one was known, for he then has no need of the unlawful given the lawful; and it may also be said: the prohibition is lifted in case of need, so the cure is not then in the unlawful, but in what has become lawful.
If a physician advises a sick person to drink wine, one looks: if he knows with certainty that it cures, it is lawful for him to take it, and according to one view, it is not lawful for him to take it (al-Muhit al-Burhani 5/240, al-'Inaya 14/302, Durar al-Hukkam 4/7).
Ibn Nujaym said, may Allah have mercy on him: "Disagreement occurred among our shaykhs regarding treatment with the prohibited. In 'al-Nihaya', from 'al-Dhakhira': seeking cure through the unlawful is permitted if it is known to contain a cure and no other remedy is known. End. And in the 'Fatawa Qadhikhan', attributed to Nasr ibn Salam: the meaning of his words, may the prayer and peace be upon him: 'Allah has not placed your cure in what He has forbidden you', is that he only said this of things that contain no cure; as for what contains a cure, there is no harm in it. Do you not see that the thirsty one may drink wine out of necessity. End. Likewise the author of 'al-Hidaya' chose it in 'al-Tajnis': he said: if blood flows from a man's nose, he writes the Fatiha of the Book with that blood on his forehead and nose: that is permitted for healing and treatment; and if he writes with urine, if he knows there is cure in it, there is no harm, though it has not been related. And this is because the prohibition falls away when seeking cure; do you not see that the thirsty one may drink wine and the hungry one may eat carrion" (al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 1/122).
It comes in "al-Durr al-Mukhtar": "There is disagreement regarding treatment with the prohibited, and the apparent position of the school is prohibition, as in the suckling [chapter] of 'al-Bahr'; but the author related there and here from 'al-Hawi': it is said: a dispensation is granted when the cure is known in it and no other remedy is known, just as wine was granted as a dispensation to the thirsty; and upon this the fatwa rests."
Imam Ibn Abidin said, may Allah have mercy on him: "An inquiry regarding treatment with the prohibited. His words: (there is disagreement regarding treatment with the prohibited): in 'al-Nihaya', from 'al-Dhakhira': it is permitted if the cure is known in it and no other remedy is known. And in 'al-Khaniyya', on the meaning of his words, may the prayer and peace be upon him: 'Allah has not placed your cure in what He has forbidden you', as al-Bukhari related it: what contains a cure is of no harm, just as wine becomes lawful for the thirsty in necessity. Likewise the author of 'al-Hidaya' chose it in 'al-Tajnis': he said: if he has a nosebleed and writes the Fatiha with the blood on his forehead and nose, it is permitted for healing; with urine as well, if he knows there is cure in it, there is no harm, though it has not been related. And this is because the prohibition falls away when seeking cure, like the lawfulness of wine and carrion for the thirsty and the hungry. End, from 'al-Bahr'. And my master Abd al-Ghani conveyed that the disagreement does not appear in their words, because of their agreement on permissibility in case of necessity; and the condition of knowledge set by the author of 'al-Nihaya' is not contradicted by the condition of cure set by those after him; hence my father said in 'Sharh al-Durar': his words 'not for treatment' apply to what is merely presumed; otherwise, its permissibility with certainty is agreed upon, as he explicitly stated in 'al-Musaffa'. End. I say: this is apparent and consistent with what has passed in the argumentation of the Imam; but you have learned that the words of physicians do not yield knowledge, and the apparent view is that experience yields preponderance of opinion rather than certainty, unless they mean by knowledge preponderance of opinion, which is widespread in their words; reflect. His words: (and the apparent position of the school is prohibition) apply to what is presumed, as you have learned. His words: (but the author related, and so on): the object of 'related' is his words: it is said: a dispensation is granted, and so on; and the exception is directed at the unrestricted prohibition; if it is conditioned by the presumed, there is no exception. And the text of what is in 'al-Hawi al-Qudsi': if blood flows from a man's nose and does not stop, to the point that death is feared for him, and he knows that if he writes the Fatiha of the Book or the Ikhlas with that blood on his forehead it stops: no dispensation is granted him for it, and it is said: a dispensation is granted, just as a dispensation was granted for drinking wine for the thirsty and eating carrion in famine; and this is the fatwa. End. His words: (and no other remedy is known): this is what is explicitly stated in the wording of 'al-Nihaya' as has passed, and it is not in the wording of 'al-Hawi'; however, it is conveyed in his words: 'just as a dispensation was granted', and so on, for the lawfulness of wine and carrion obtains where nothing is found to replace them; this was conveyed. He said: al-Hamawi related that the flesh of swine may not be used for treatment even if it becomes the only option. And Allah, the Most High, knows best" (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 1/210).
The Hanafis, according to one view as has preceded, and the Shafi'is according to the view opposite the sounder one, held that drinking wine for treatment is permitted, just as it is permitted to drink urine, blood and the other impurities for treatment (al-Najm al-Wahhaj 9/227-228, Mughni al-Muhtaj 5/508-509, Tuhfat al-Muhtaj 11/96, Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/15).
Only some of them belong to the species of stupefacients according to some, and to the species of harmful things according to others: their small quantity is not prohibited, whether eaten alone or consumed in food or in medicines.
Yes, eating the excessive amount through which the stupor-inducing effect occurs is not permitted, for the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade every stupefacient, and he did not say that whatever stupefies in large quantity has its small quantity prohibited. We proceed according to the wording he gave and introduce nothing on our own authority: the prohibition attaches to the stupor-inducing effect, not to the stupefacient itself; its small quantity, which does not induce stupor, is therefore permitted ('Awn al-Ma'bud 10/96).
Ibn al-Qayyim said, may Allah have mercy on him: "As for treatment through intercourse, the Law does not permit it in any way; and as for treatment through embracing and kissing, if cure is realized through it, it is like treatment with wine according to whoever permits it; more than that, this is lighter than treatment with wine, for drinking it is a major sin, while this act is a minor sin" (Rawdat al-Muhibbin 1/379-380).
The ruling on gradually leaving prohibited things:
The generality of the jurists of the 4 schools have stated that a person afflicted with opium and narcotics and the like, who would perish if he abandoned them, may give them up gradually and not abandon them all at once.
Ibn Abidin said, may Allah have mercy on him: "Conclusion: Ibn Hajar al-Makki was asked about one afflicted with eating the like of opium who would perish if he did not eat it? He answered: if he knows that for certain, it is lawful for him, more: it is obligatory, because of his need to preserve his life, like carrion for the one compelled; and gradual reduction is incumbent upon him, little by little, until the stomach's craving for it disappears without its noticing; if he abandons that, he is a sinful deviant. End, in summary." Al-Ramli said: "Our principles do not contradict it" (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 6/461).
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, may Allah be pleased with him, was asked about one afflicted with eating the like of opium who would perish if he did not eat it: is eating it then permissible for him or not?
He answered, may Allah, Blessed and Most High, forgive him, with his words: "If the afflicted one knows with certainty, by the words of physicians or by correct and truthful experience, that there is no means of warding off the fear of his perishing except eating, from the like of opium, the amount he is accustomed to or close to it, it is lawful for him to eat it, more: it is obligatory upon him, for he is compelled to it for the preservation of his life; he is then like carrion for the one specifically compelled to it, and a group have explicitly stated this despite its clarity. Yes, Shaykh al-Islam, the hadith master Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, indicated something good that must be relied upon: it is that it is incumbent upon the user of such a thing to strive to cut it off gradually, by reducing each day, from what he is accustomed to, the equivalent of a sesame seed, for its reduction certainly does not harm him; if he persists in this, only a short while passes before the stomach's craving for it disappears and it forgets it without noticing and without being harmed by its absence. Through this its disappearance and cessation become possible: it is a means toward the removal of that prohibited thing in itself, even if partaking of it is obligatory, for obligation by circumstance does not contradict intrinsic prohibition, just as the compelled person's partaking of carrion is obligatory in his case due to the arising of compulsion, while it remains, in itself, under the description of intrinsic prohibition; and whatever is a means toward the removal of a prohibited thing becomes obligatory: this gradual reduction is therefore obligatory, and whoever abandons it is disobedient, sinful, a deviant whose testimony is rejected; he has no excuse for continuing its use if we have made it obligatory upon him in the present state for the preservation of his life. Reflect well upon this, for many of those forsaken, afflicted with this vile and hideous trait, cling to the continuance of their state of contempt and moral disfigurement, claiming that they grew up in it and it took hold of them, so that its use has become obligatory upon them. The reply is that this is true speech used for a false purpose; for we say to them: even if we granted you what you say, that does not prevent it from being incumbent upon you to strive to cut it off and to remove its harm and its disfigurement from your bodies, your religions, your minds and your acquisitions. One of the knowers informed me that opium can be cut off in 7 days with a remedy a physician has proven; more than that, one of the righteous students of knowledge informed me that he was afflicted with it daily in large amount, so his condition deteriorated and his mind was suspended, and he realized that it is the greatest disfigurement, the greatest killer, the remover of every dignity, nobility, good manners and authority, and the procurer of every baseness, vice, abjection, filth and vileness. He said: I went to the noble al-Multazam and implored Allah, the Most High, with a sorrowful heart, with tears and groaning, with sincere burning and sincere repentance, and I asked Allah, Blessed and Most High, to ward off from me the harm of its absence; then I went to Zamzam and drank from it with the intention of abandoning it and of sufficiency against the harm of its absence: I never returned to it after that, and I experienced no harm whatsoever from its absence. End."
"He spoke truly in this and was truthful, for the eagerness of souls at its absence and the appearance of the signs of harm upon them are only due to the lack of purity of their growth, the corruption of their inner intentions and the persistence of their hidden yearning for it and their reliance upon it: they then find nothing to fill its place in the liver, and the harm of its absence becomes great in that case. As for the one who resolved sincerely to abandon it and drew near to Him, the Most High, in that with a sincere intention and a purified inner self: he finds no pain in abandoning it, by the strength and power of Allah, the Most High" (al-Fatawa al-Fiqiyya al-Kubra 4/259-260).
Al-Khattab said, may Allah have mercy on him: "It is permitted for one afflicted with eating opium who fears death for himself if he abandons it to consume of it the amount that does not affect his mind or his senses, and to strive to reduce it and cut it off; and it is incumbent upon him to repent and regret what has passed. And Allah knows best" (Mawahib al-Jalil 1/90).
Ibn al-Qayyim said, may Allah have mercy on him: "As for treatment through intercourse, the Law does not permit it in any way; and as for treatment through embracing and kissing, if cure is realized through it, it is like treatment with wine according to whoever permits it; more than that, this is lighter than treatment with wine, for drinking it is a major sin, while this act is a minor sin" (Rawdat al-Muhibbin 1/379-380).
The jurists disagreed on the ruling of mixing 2 kinds of things naturally suited to infusion (nabidh), such as infusing dates with raisins, or unripe dates with dates, or with fresh soft dates: is it prohibited, disliked or permissible?
The Malikis held that drinking the drink of 2 mixed ingredients, such as raisins and dates, or figs, or apricots or the like, is disliked, and this prohibition appears in 2 forms:
The first: that the 2 be mixed at the time of infusion, in that the dates and grapes, for example, are pressed, and after their crushing or pounding together, water is poured over them and they are left until the water becomes sweet.
The second form: that each be infused separately in a vessel, then, when the water of each has come out, they be mixed at the time of drinking.
The dislike applies where intoxication is possible but has not actually occurred, in that the infusion time grows long, such as a day and a night or more; otherwise, if the time is short, it is permitted; and if intoxication enters it, even by supposition, it is prohibited and impure.
According to one view among the Malikis, mixing 2 drinks is absolutely prohibited, from among the things naturally suited to infusion, such as unripe dates, fresh soft dates, dates and raisins, even without intoxicating strength, based on what Muslim related in his Sahih from Jabir ibn Abdallah al-Ansari, may Allah be pleased with them both:
"The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade mixing raisins and dates, and unripe dates and dates." In one version: "He forbade infusing dates and raisins together, and forbade infusing fresh soft dates and unripe dates together." In one version: "Do not combine fresh soft dates and unripe dates, nor raisins and dates, into a nabidh." In one version: "He forbade infusing raisins and dates together, and forbade infusing unripe dates and fresh soft dates together."
Reported by Muslim (1986)
And from Abu Sa'id, may Allah be pleased with him: "The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade mixing dates and raisins, and mixing dates and unripe dates."
"The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade mixing dates and raisins, and mixing dates and unripe dates."
Reported by Muslim (1987)
And from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, may Allah be pleased with him, the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: "Whoever among you drinks nabidh, let him drink it of raisins alone, or dates alone, or unripe dates alone"; and in one version: "The Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade us to mix unripe dates with dates, or raisins with dates, or raisins with unripe dates" (Muslim 1987).
And from Abu Qatada, may Allah be pleased with him, the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: "Do not make an infusion of zahw, the dates beginning to ripen, and fresh soft dates together, nor of raisins and dates together; make the infusion of each of the 2 separately" (Muslim 1988).
There are 2 views in the school on the cause of this: is it a purely devistic rule, or is it because of intoxication? Ibn Rushd said: "The apparent meaning of the Muwatta' is that the prohibition in this is purely devotional, without a cause." Ibn al-'Arabi said: "This question, I know of no reason for it to this day; if the prohibited thing were intoxication, let him mix it with whatever he wishes and drink it immediately; other than that, there is nothing in it but following, to the point that I related on this 2 strange questions: the first, Ibn al-Qasim said that it is not permitted to infuse the unripe date whose base has begun to ripen, and he spoke truly, for it falls under the 2 mixed ingredients; the second, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Hakam ran the prohibition of the 2 mixed ingredients upon its generality, to the point of forbidding it in the perfume drink: this is great rigidity regarding the wordings. End of quote" (al-Istidhkar 8/18-19, al-Taj wa-l-Iklil 2/244, Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil 3/31, al-Fawakih al-Dawani 2/288, Tahbir al-Mukhtasar 2/330, Hashiyat al-Sawi 4/150, Manh al-Jalil 2/462-463).
The Hanafis held that there is no harm in the 2 mixed ingredients: that the water of dates and the water of raisins, or of fresh soft dates or unripe dates, once combined, be given a minimal cooking, and there is considered, in their cooking, the loss of 2 thirds; though cooking is not a requirement, based on what is related from Ibn Ziyad: he said: "Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, gave me to drink a drink such that I could hardly find my way home; the next morning I went to him and informed him of it, and he said: we gave you nothing but ajwa dates and raisins" (related by Muhammad ibn al-Hasan in "al-Athar" 1001).
And this is a type of the 2 mixed ingredients, and it was cooked; for what is related from him is the prohibition of the raw infusion of raisins, which is the raw form of it. And what is related, that he, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, "forbade combining dates and raisins, raisins and fresh soft dates, fresh soft dates and unripe dates", applies to the state of intoxicating strength, and that was at the beginning, at a time when there was among the Muslims tightness and hardship in the matter of food, so that one would not combine 2 foods and leave his neighbor hungry, but would eat one of the 2 and give the other in preference to his neighbor; then, when Allah expanded blessings upon His servants, He permitted the combination of the 2 blessings (al-Hidaya 4/111, al-'Inaya 14/365, al-Jawhara al-Nayyira 5/431, al-Lubab 2/341).
The Shafi'is and the Hanbalis held that the 2 mixed ingredients are disliked and not prohibited, such as the nabidh of dates with raisins, or unripe dates with dates, or with fresh soft dates, based on what Muslim related in his Sahih from Jabir ibn Abdallah al-Ansari, may Allah be pleased with them both:
"The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade mixing raisins and dates, and unripe dates and dates." In one version: "He forbade infusing dates and raisins together, and forbade infusing fresh soft dates and unripe dates together." In one version: "Do not combine fresh soft dates and unripe dates, nor raisins and dates, into a nabidh." In one version: "He forbade infusing raisins and dates together, and forbade infusing unripe dates and fresh soft dates together."
Reported by Muslim (1986)
And from Abu Sa'id, may Allah be pleased with him: "The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade mixing dates and raisins, and mixing dates and unripe dates" (Muslim 1987). And from Abu Qatada, may Allah be pleased with him, the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: "Do not make an infusion of zahw and fresh soft dates together, nor of raisins and dates together; make the infusion of each of the 2 separately" (Muslim 1988).
Imam al-Nawawi said, may Allah have mercy on him: "These hadiths concern the prohibition of infusing the 2 mixed ingredients and drinking them: dates and raisins, or dates and fresh soft dates, or dates and unripe dates, or fresh soft dates and unripe dates, or zahw and one of the mentioned items and the like. Our companions and others among the scholars said: the cause of the dislike is that intoxication hastens toward it because of the mixing before its taste changes, so that the drinker thinks it is not intoxicating while it is. Our school and that of the majority: this prohibition is one of desirability, and it is not prohibited so long as it has not become intoxicating; and thus said the vast majority of the scholars. Some Malikis said: it is prohibited. Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf, according to one narration from him, said: there is no dislike in it and no harm, for what is lawful alone is lawful mixed; the majority censured them and said: this is opposition to the bearer of the Law, for the authentic and explicit hadiths on its prohibition are established; if it is not prohibited, then it is disliked. The companions of Malik disagreed as to whether the prohibition is specific to drinking or extends to it and other than it; the sounder is the general application; as for mixing the 2 in the infusion, indeed in a fruit paste and the like, there is no harm in it. And Allah knows best" (Sharh Sahih Muslim 13/154-156).
Imam Ibn Qudama said, may Allah have mercy on him: "The 2 mixed ingredients are disliked: that is, that 2 things be infused in water, for the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade the 2 mixed ingredients. Ahmad said: the 2 mixed ingredients are prohibited. And he said, concerning a man who steeps raisins, tamarind and jujubes and the like, steeping them in the morning and drinking in the evening as a medicine: I dislike it, for it is a nabidh; but let him cook it and drink it on the spot. Abu Dawud related, by his chain, from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, that he 'forbade infusing unripe dates and fresh soft dates together, and forbade infusing raisins and dates together'; and in one version: 'make the infusion of each separately.' And from Abu Qatada: 'The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade combining dates and zahw, and dates and raisins; let the infusion of each of the 2 be made separately': agreed upon. The judge said: Ahmad means, by his words 'it is prohibited', when it gains strength and intoxicates; if it does not intoxicate, it is not prohibited, and this is the correct view, if Allah, the Most High, wills. The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, only forbade it on account of its hastening toward prohibited drunkenness; if that does not exist, the prohibition is not established, just as he, may the prayer and peace be upon him, forbade infusion in the mentioned vessels for this cause, then ordered them to drink from them so long as the reality of intoxication is not present. Indicating the validity of this is what is related from Aisha:
"We used to make an infusion for the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him: we would take a handful of dates and a handful of raisins, throw them into it, then pour water over it; we infused it in the morning and he drank it in the evening, and we infused it in the evening and he drank it in the morning."
Authentic hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (3708) and Ibn Majah (3398)
related by Ibn Majah and Abu Dawud. Since the infusion period was short, a day and a night, in which intoxication is not to be feared, it was not disliked; were it disliked, it would not have been done in the house of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, for him. On this basis: what is done within a short period is not disliked, and what is done within a period in which it may lead to intoxication is disliked; and the prohibition is not established unless it is boiled or 3 days have passed over it" (al-Mughni 9/145, al-Kafi 4/333, al-Mubdi' 9/107, al-Insaf 10/237, Kashshaf al-Qina' 6/153, Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat 6/222-223).
Imam Ibn Qudama said, may Allah have mercy on him: "Issue: he said: ('And juice, when 3 days have passed over it, has become prohibited; if it is boiled before that, it becomes prohibited.')
As for juice that has been boiled like the boiling of a pot and has thrown off its froth, there is no disagreement on its prohibition. And if 3 days have passed over it without its being boiled, our companions said: it is prohibited. Ahmad said: 'Drink it for 3 [days] so long as it is not boiled; when more than 3 days have passed over it, do not drink it.' Most of the people of knowledge say: it is permitted so long as it is not boiled and does not intoxicate, according to the words of the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him:
"Drink from every vessel, and do not drink what intoxicates."
Authentic hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (201)
and because the cause of its prohibition is the rapturous strength, which concerns only the intoxicant specifically.
Our proof: Abu Dawud related, by his chain, from Ibn Abbas:
"The Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, had raisins infused for him; he drank it that day, the next day and the day after, until the evening of the third day; then he would order that it be given to the servants to drink or poured out."
Reported by Muslim (2004) and Abu Dawud (3713)
And al-Shalanji related, by his chain, from the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that he said: 'Drink juice for 3 [days] so long as it is not boiled.' And Ibn Umar said: 'Drink it so long as its devil has not seized it. He was asked: in how long does its devil seize it? He said: in 3' (authentic hadith, reported by Abd al-Razzaq in "al-Musannaf" 16990 and by Ibn Abi Shayba in "al-Musannaf" 24334).
And because the intoxicating strength occurs within the 3 [days] usually, and it is hidden, requiring a standard: it was therefore permissible to make the 3 [days] a standard for it."
The Hanafis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, in the second narration, hold that no hadd applies to him: he may have been coerced, or he may not have known that it intoxicates, and the hadd is averted by doubt (Bada'i' as-Sana'i' 5/113, al-Hawi al-Kabir 13/409, Mughni al-Muhtaj 5/511, al-Mughni 9/138, 139).
The jurists differed on the manner of beating the one subjected to the hadd for khamr: is he struck with the hands, with sandals and with the ends of garments, or is he flogged?
The Shafi'is, in the position retained by their school, along with some of the Hanbalis, hold that he is struck with sandals, hands and the ends of garments, based on the hadith of Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him), according to which:
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was brought a man who had drunk, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Beat him." He said: so among us, some struck him with their hand, some with their sandal, and some with their garment. When he had turned away, some of the people said: may Allah disgrace you. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Do not speak like this. Do not help Satan against him. Rather say: may Allah have mercy on you."reported by al-Bukhari 3695, Abu Dawud 4476, Ahmad 7973 and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih 5730
And because the hadd for khamr, being lighter than the others in number, had to be lighter than the others in its manner as well (al-Muhadhdhab 2/278, al-Bayan 12/527, Matalib Uli an-Nuha 6/163).
The majority of jurists, the Hanafis, the Malikis, the Shafi'is in one of their views and the Hanbalis in the position retained by their school, hold that the hadd for khamr is carried out by flogging with the whip. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "If he drinks khamr, flog him," and beating with the whip is what is understood from his unqualified use of the word flogging. He also commanded that he be flogged just as Allah, the Exalted, commanded that the fornicator be flogged, so that it was carried out with the whip, as for the other. The Rightly-Guided Caliphs beat with whips, and so did those after them, and it was thus a matter of consensus.
As for the hadith of Abu Hurayra, it belongs to the beginning of the matter; then the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) flogged, and the practice became settled. It is authentically established that "the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) flogged with 40, Abu Bakr flogged with 40, Umar flogged with 80, and Ali flogged al-Walid ibn Uqba with 40." And in the account of the flogging of Qudama when he drank, Umar said: "Bring me a whip." Aslam, his freed slave, brought him a thin, small whip. Umar took it, passed his hand over it, then said to Aslam: I tell you, you have remembered his kinship with your family. Bring me a whip other than this one. He brought him a complete one, and Umar ordered that Qudama be flogged.
Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: once this is established, the whip is to be a medium one: not so new that it wounds, nor so worn out that the pain it inflicts is slight. For it is reported:
A man confessed zina before the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) called for a whip for him. He was brought a broken whip. He said: more than this. He was brought a new whip whose tip had not been broken. He said: between these 2.reported by Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam as a mursal report, and also reported from Abu Hurayra as a musnad report
It is also reported from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "A beating between 2 beatings, and a whip between 2 whips." Such is the beating: it is to be moderate, not so severe that it kills, nor so weak that it no longer deters; the arm is not raised to its full height, nor lowered to the point of no longer causing pain.