The people of Kufa brought forward reports that are defective (ma'lulah), which we have mentioned along with their causes of defect. Al-Athram mentioned the reports they use as evidence from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the Companions, and he weakened them all and explained their defects. It has been said that the report of Ibn Abbas is mawquf (attributed) to him, although it is possible that he intended by 'intoxicant' the intoxicant from every beverage, for he and others narrate from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) that he said: "Every intoxicant is prohibited."

Section Two: It is obligatory to carry out the hadd (prescribed punishment) on one who has consumed a small or large amount of an intoxicant. We are not aware of any disagreement among them regarding this concerning unboiled grape juice, but they disagreed regarding other types. Our Imam adopted the position of equating grape juice with every intoxicant. This is the opinion of al-Hasan, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, Qatada, al-Awza'i, Malik, and al-Shafi'i. A group said: The hadd is not to be carried out unless it causes intoxication; among them are Abu Wa'il, al-Nakha'i, many of the people of Kufa, and the companions of opinion (ashab al-ra'y). Abu Thawr said: Whoever drinks it while believing in its prohibition is to be punished with hadd. Whoever drinks it while interpreting the law (ta'wil) is not subject to the hadd, because it is a matter of disagreement, thus it is similar to marriage without a guardian. As for us, our evidence is what was narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) that he said: "Whoever drinks khamr, whip him." Recorded by Abu Dawud and others. It has been established that every intoxicant is khamr, so the hadith applies to its small and large quantities. Furthermore, because it is a beverage containing an intoxicating strength, the hadd is mandatory for even a small amount of it, just as with khamr, and disagreement regarding it does not prevent the obligation of the hadd, as evidenced by the case of one who believes in its prohibition. Thus, it differs from marriage without a guardian and similar matters of disagreement. Umar punished Qudama ibn Maz'un and his companions with the hadd, despite their belief in the permissibility of what they had consumed. The distinction between this and other matters of disagreement is twofold: