Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/295)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

is eighty.” The Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, agreed to that (1). The point of evidence in this report is that he said, “The lightest of the prescribed punishments is eighty.” Yet we know that, in the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, the drinker was struck about forty times (2), and during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, forty times (3). Had it been a prescribed punishment, the lightest prescribed punishment would have been forty. Moreover, had it been a prescribed punishment, neither Umar nor anyone else would have been able to exceed it, for no one may increase a prescribed punishment—just as the noon prayer cannot be increased beyond four units, the sunset prayer beyond three, or the dawn prayer beyond two. The same applies to the prescribed punishments determined by Allah or His Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him.

Furthermore, his statement, “The lightest of the prescribed punishments is eighty,” indicates that it is permissible to exceed the number of lashes with which the drinker used to be flogged in the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. Had it been a prescribed punishment, it would not have been permissible to exceed it, nor would Umar have consulted the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, regarding an increase—especially since he, may Allah be pleased with him, was known for observing the limits set by Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He.

Fifth: What is authentically reported from Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As, may Allah be pleased with them both: “If he drinks, flog him.” He mentioned this three times, then said: “If he drinks a fourth time, kill him” (4). This proves that it is a punishment that escalates until it reaches execution. Had it been a fixed prescribed punishment, its penalty would not have changed.

This is, in my view, the stronger opinion, and it is the apparent position of Ibn al-Qayyim in I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in: namely, that it is a discretionary punishment, but it may not be reduced below the lowest number established by the sunnah. As for increasing it, there is no objection to doing so if the ruler considers it to be in the public interest.

(1) Reported by Muslim in al-Hudud (Legal Punishments), chapter: “The Prescribed Punishment for Wine” (1706), on the authority of Anas ibn Malik. (2) Its source has been cited previously on p. 293. (3) Reported by al-Bukhari in al-Hudud, chapter: “What Has Been Reported Regarding Flogging the Wine Drinker” (6773), and Muslim in al-Hudud, chapter: “The Prescribed Punishment for Wine” (1706), on the authority of Anas. (4) Its source has been cited previously on p. 294.

ثمانون، فوافق على ذلك الصحابة (١)؛ وجه الدلالة من هذا الحديث أنه قال: «أخف الحدود ثمانون»، ونحن نعلم أن الرسول ﷺ: ضُرِبَ الشارب في عهده نحو أربعين (٢)، وفي عهد أبي بكر ﵁ أربعين (٣)، ولو كان حدّاً لكان أخف الحدود أربعين، ثم لو كان حدّاً ما استطاع عمر ولا غيره أن يتجاوزه، فالحد لا يمكن أن يزيده أحد، كما لا تزاد صلاة الظهر عن أربع، وصلاة المغرب عن ثلاث، وصلاة الفجر على اثنتين، أيضاً الحدود التي قدرها الله أو رسوله ﷺ. وأيضاً قوله: أخف الحدود ثمانون، يدل على أنه يجوز أن نتجاوز ما كان الشارب يُجْلَد إيَّاه في عهد النبي ﷺ، ولو كان حدّاً ما جازت مجاوزته، ولا استشار عمر الصحابة ﵃ في الزيادة، مع أنه كان ﵁ معروفاً بالوقوف عند حدود الله ﷾. خامساً: ما صح الحديث به عن عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص ﵄: «إذا شرب فاجلدوه»، وذكر ذلك ثلاثاً، ثم قال: «فإن شرب الرابعة فاقتلوه» (٤)، وهذا دليل على أنه عقوبة تتدرج حتى تصل إلى القتل، ولو كان حدّاً محدوداً لكان الحد فيه لا يتغير. وهذا هو الراجح عندي، وهو ظاهر كلام ابن القيم في إعلام الموقعين، وهو أنه تعزير لكن لا ينقص عن أقل تقدير وردت به السنة، وأما الزيادة فلا حرج في الزيادة إذا رأى الحاكم المصلحة في ذلك.

(١) أخرجه مسلم في الحدود باب حد الخمر (١٧٠٦) عن أنس بن مالك ﵁. (٢) سبق تخريجه ص (٢٩٣). (٣) أخرجه البخاري في الحدود/ باب ما جاء في ضرب شارب الخمر (٦٧٧٣)، ومسلم في الحدود/ باب حد الخمر (١٧٠٦) عن أنس ﵁. (٤) سبق تخريجه ص (٢٩٤).