And these [people] want them to persist in disbelief and abandon their religion. This is because the one who is coerced into uttering a word [of disbelief] and then is released suffers no harm thereby, whereas this one residing among them commits himself to responding to their demand for the disbelief he is being held upon, the deeming of prohibitions as lawful, the abandonment of obligations and duties, and the commission of forbidden acts and abominations. Even if it is a woman, they marry her and have children with her [who are disbelievers] (33). The same applies to the man, and their apparent state is a transformation into actual disbelief and an apostasy from the upright religion.

1550 - Issue: He said: "And whoever apostatizes while he is intoxicated shall not be killed until he becomes sober and three days have passed from the time of his apostasy. If he dies in his state of intoxication, he dies a disbeliever."

There is a difference of opinion in the narrations from Ahmad regarding the apostasy of the intoxicated person; it is narrated from him that it is valid. Abu al-Khattab said: This is the more apparent of the two narrations from him, and it is the school of al-Shafi'i. According to another narration, it is not valid. This is the position of Abu Hanifah, because that relates to belief and intent, and the intoxicated person's contract [and his intent] (1) are not valid; thus he is similar to the mentally deficient (ma'tuh). Also, because he is devoid of intellect, his apostasy is not valid, like that of a sleeping person, and because he is not legally responsible (mukallaf), his apostasy is not valid, like that of an insane person. The evidence that he is not legally responsible is that the intellect is a condition for legal responsibility, and it is non-existent in his case; this is why his [being requested to] repent is not valid. Our position is that the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, said concerning the intoxicated person: "When he is intoxicated, he talks nonsense; and when he talks nonsense, he slanders; so inflict upon him the punishment of a slanderer" (2). Thus, they made mandatory upon him the punishment for the slander he committed while intoxicated, placing its likely occurrence in the position of the act itself. Furthermore, his divorce is valid, so his apostasy is valid, like that of a sober person. Their claim that he is not legally responsible is invalid, for prayer is obligatory upon him, as are the rest of the pillars of Islam, and he is sinful for performing prohibited acts. This is the meaning of legal responsibility. Moreover, the intellect of an intoxicated person is not removed in its entirety; this is why he avoids forbidden matters and rejoices in what...