His statement: “and vessels containing wine that is not legally protected.” If a person breaks vessels of wine, he bears no liability, because they contain something for which no compensation is due—namely, wine. Wine entails no liability: even if it were worth thousands, and someone destroyed it, he would not be liable for it, because it has no legal value.

If someone were to ask: What about the vessels? A vessel holds both wine and other things, and thus may be used for wine and for other purposes. We reply: since wine was in it, its legal protection has lapsed with the lapse of the legal protection of what it contains; therefore, no compensation is due for it. What is established incidentally may not be established independently. This is supported by the fact that Umar ibn al-Khattab—may Allah be pleased with him—burned the shop of a wine seller (1), which is more far-reaching than merely destroying wine vessels.

Some scholars say that if one breaks wine vessels, he is liable, because the vessels themselves are legally protected and the wine can be destroyed without destroying them—unless the wine cannot be destroyed except by destroying the vessels. This is based on the principle that whatever is indispensable for carrying out a permitted act is included in the permission for that act. This is the correct view, because the basic rule concerning a Muslim’s property is that it is legally protected.

His statement, “that is not legally protected,” is an adjective describing the wine, not the vessels. The author—may Allah have mercy on him—thereby informs us that if one breaks the vessels containing legally protected wine, he is liable. What is legally protected wine? It is the wine of a dhimmi who lives in Muslim lands under the payment of jizya. His wine is legally protected, meaning that it is not lawful for us to pour out the wine that he drinks, provided that he does not do so openly. Thus, if a dhimmi is in his home