He said, 'I detected the odor of drink from Ubaydullah,' so he confessed that he had drunk al-tila'. Umar said, 'I shall inquire about it; if it intoxicates, I will flog him.' And because the odor indicates his drinking, it follows the same ruling as a confession. The first opinion is more appropriate, because the odor could be explained by him having rinsed his mouth with it, or having mistaken it for water and, upon finding it in his mouth, spat it out, or he thought it did not intoxicate, or he was compelled, or he ate ripe nabq (jujube fruit), or he drank apple juice, for from that there can be an odor like the odor of khamr. When such is possible, the hadd—which is averted by doubts—does not become mandatory. The hadith of Umar is an argument in our favor, for he did not inflict the hadd based on the presence of the odor, and had it been mandatory, Umar would have hastened to it. And Allah knows best.

Section: If he is found intoxicated or vomiting khamr, then according to Ahmad, there is no hadd upon him, due to the possibility that he was compelled or did not know that it intoxicates. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. The narration of Abu Talib from him regarding the hadd by the odor suggests that the hadd is mandatory here by way of priority, because this does not occur except after drinking it, so it is like the case when testimony is established against him for drinking it. Sa'id narrated, saying: Hushaym informed us, saying: al-Mughirah informed us, from al-Sha'bi, who said: When the matter of Qudamah occurred as it did, Alqamah al-Khasiyy came and said: 'I bear witness that I saw him vomiting it.' Umar said: 'Whoever vomits it has indeed drunk it,' and he struck him with the hadd. Husayn ibn al-Mundhir al-Raqashi narrated, saying: 'I witnessed Uthman, and al-Walid ibn Uqbah was brought to him, and Humran and another man testified against him. One of them testified that he saw him drinking it, and the other testified that he saw him vomiting it. Uthman said: 'He would not have vomited it unless he had drunk it,' and he said to Ali: 'Carry out the hadd upon him.' So Ali ordered Abdullah ibn Ja'far, and he struck him.' Recorded by Muslim. In one narration, Uthman said to him: 'You have been overly fastidious in your testimony.' This occurred in the presence of the scholars of the Companions and their leaders, and it was not objected to, so it was an consensus (ijma'). And because it is sufficient for the testimony against him that he drank it, and he would not vomit it or become intoxicated from it unless he had drunk it.