in the Sahīh:
“Every intoxicant is khamr, and every khamr is forbidden.”
He intended to explain to them that all intoxicants fall within the meaning of khamr, which Allah has forbidden. This explains the meaning of khamr; they already knew that Allah had forbidden khamr. They used to ask him about drinks made from grape juice, as related in the two Sahīhs from Abū Mūsā:
“He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was asked about a drink made from sorghum called mizr and a drink made from honey called bitʿ. He had been endowed with concise, comprehensive speech, so he said: ‘Every intoxicant is forbidden.’”
Through this comprehensive statement—a universal proposition—he intended to explain to them that every intoxicant is khamr. He then added what they already knew, that “every khamr is forbidden,” to establish firmly in their hearts that intoxicants are forbidden, as he explicitly stated in his words: “Every intoxicant is forbidden.” Had he confined himself to saying, “Every intoxicant is forbidden,” someone might have interpreted this as referring to the final cup, as some indeed did.
For this reason, Ahmad said: “His statement, ‘Every intoxicant is khamr,’ is more emphatic.” For they do not call the final cup khamr. Had he merely said, “Every intoxicant is khamr,” some might have interpreted this to mean that it resembles khamr in being forbidden. But when he added, “And every khamr is forbidden,” it became clear that he intended to include it within the designation khamr, which Allah has forbidden.
The point here is that this form of syllogism is innate and requires no instruction. Rather, it is as familiar to people as arithmetic. Yet these men make their formulations lengthy and obscure.