Abu Dawud

Benefits and Issues:
Benefit: Nabidh is a lawful (halal) and pure (tayyib) beverage, but if intoxication develops in it, then its consumption becomes prohibited (haram).

Benefits and Issues:

➊ The boiling and frothing of nabidh is a sign of it becoming intoxicating; similarly, if its taste becomes bitter, then drinking it is prohibited.

➋ An unlawful (haram) beverage should be disposed of.

➌ The committing of major sins is a sign of deficient faith (iman).

(1) From this hadith, it is understood that it is necessary to destroy intoxicating food and drink, to the extent that if a person destroys an intoxicating item belonging to a Muslim, there is no liability or compensation upon him. No intoxicant should have any value or respect in the possession of a Muslim. All intoxicating substances and every kind of narcotic are prohibited (haram).

(2) Some actions are contrary to perfect faith (iman kamil), therefore one should avoid them.

(3) The intention of the Imam (rahimahullah) is that if it were permissible to drink a small amount of intoxicating nabidh, then he would have broken his fast with a single sip and returned the rest so that another person could also drink a little. However, he ordered all of it to be destroyed. This proves that even a single sip of an intoxicating beverage is not permissible, regardless of what the beverage is. And this is a completely correct deduction.

(4) "It was boiling"—that is, it had signs of intoxication.

(5) "Do not accept it"—meaning, this is a drink of the disbelievers, not of the Muslims. This does not mean that whoever drinks it becomes a disbeliever, just as has been mentioned regarding silk.

(6) "Deceivers" refers to the Hanafis. And the deception is that they drink wine under other names and think that they have not drunk wine.

(7) "Faraq" refers to three sa‘ (a measure). This is said by way of exaggeration, otherwise it is not possible to drink so much at once.

(8) "From the last sip"—the intention of the Imam is that it is self-deception to say, "Only that sip is prohibited from which intoxication occurred; the earlier sips were not intoxicating," whereas it is all one and the same. If the last sip is intoxicating, why not the first? Moreover, if he had not drunk the earlier sips, would intoxication have occurred from just that sip? Clearly, the entire beverage is intoxicating. The only thing is that the manifestation of intoxication occurred at the last sip, i.e., after drinking more, and wine (which the Hanafis also call khamr) is the same way. Intoxication is not felt from a single sip; it only occurs after drinking more. So, on what rational or legal (shar‘i) basis is a distinction made between wine and other intoxicating beverages?

(1) For the explanation of the hadith, see hadith: 5613.
(2) It is established that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would throw intoxicating nabidh against the wall. How could it be possible that he would mix water in it and then drink it himself? Rather, he declared it to be the drink of the disbelievers. Therefore, hadith 5706 is not correct because it is contrary to authentic narrations.