m
mm
puted it ;—and with refpedt to the fécond quoted tradition, the intention
of it was merely to explain the l aw , or, in other words, to
fhew that all liquors extracted from either of the two trees mentioned,
being of an inebriating quality, are unlawful as well as
Khamr.
which is unlawful
iii atiy
quantity,
K hamr is in itfelf unlawful, whether it be ufed in fmall or great
quantities, the illegality not depending on drinking it to fuch a degree
as to produce intoxication. Some of loafer principles rcjedt the abfo-
lute illegality of Khamr, alleging that its ejfe&s only are the caufe of
its illegality ; becaufe the evil of it is, that it creates an inattention
towards the worfhip of G od ; and as this evil is occafioned only by intoxication,
it follows that where this does not take, place if is not unlawful.—
This, however, is grofe infidelity, and in direct contradiction
to the K or an, G O D having there termed fuch liquor filth , a
thing which is unlawful in its own nature. Befides, the prophet has
decreed Khamr to be unlawful, according to various traditions ; ' and
all the dodtors are unanimoufly of this opinion. It is to be obferved,
however, that although Khamr be unlawful, even in fo fmall a quantity
as may not be fufficient to intoxicate, yet the feme law does not
hold with refpect to other things of an inebriating quality; for a little
o f them, i f not fufficient to intoxicate, is not forbidden. Shafei,
indeed, is of opinion that thefe are likewife unlawful, in any
quantity.
I
extreme11 30 K hamr is filth in an extreme degree, in the feme manner as
urine; for the illegality of it is indilputably proved, as has been already
fhewrt.
W hosoever maintains Khamr to be lawful is an infidel*, for he
thereby rejedts inconteliable proof.
* And confequently becomes expofed to the penalties of apoftacy.
8 K hamr.
K hamr is not a valuable commodity with refpedt to Muffulmam.
I f therefore, it be dejiroyed or ufurped by any perfon, there is no re-
fponfibility. T h e fale o f it is moreover unlawful; for G od, in terming
it filth , manifefted a deteftation of i t ; whereas, i f it had been a
commodity of value, fome refpedt would have been ffiewn to it.—
Befides, it is recorded in the traditions, that “ he who prohibited the
“ drinking o f it, did likewife prohibit both the fale o f it and the ufe or
‘j enjoyment o f the price o f i t ”
If a MuJfulman be indebted to another, and wiffi to difcharge the
debt with the price of Khamr, in that cafe both the payment and receipt
is unlawful, becaufe fuch price is produced from an illicit fale,
and is eonfidered either as an ufurpation or a trull in the MuJfulman's
hands, according to the different opinions of the dodtors on this fub-
jedt; in the fame manner as in the cafe of the fale of carrion. If, on
the contrary, the debtor be a Zimmee, it is lawful for his MuJfulman
creditor to receive fuch payment; as the fale of Khamr is legal amongll
Zimmees.
I t is unlawful to derive any ufe from Khamr, either as a medicine,
or in any other manner; becaufe the ufe offilth is forbidden; and alfo,
becaufe abltinence from it is enjoined; and this injundtion could not
be obferved in cafe of its ufe being allowed.
W hoever drinks Khamr incurs punifhment, although he be not
intoxicated; for it is faid, in the traditions, “ L et him who drinks
“ Khamr be whipped;— and i f he drink, it again, let him be again in the
“ fame manner pumfhed.’ ’ The. whole of the companions are agreed
upon this point; and the number of {tripes prefcribed is eighty, as has
already been ffiewn in treating o fpunifhments.
I f a perfon boil Khamr until two thirds of. it evaporate, it is not
thereby rendered lawful. I f, however, a perfon drink of it after
fuch.
and cannot
conftitute
propertywith
a MuJfulman»
nor be employed
in the
difcharge of
his debts,
or ufed by
him,
and the-
drinking of
which, in any
quantity, induces
punifii—
ment,
(ünîefs-it ber
b o iled :).