depends on the inquirer’s knowledge of the nature of the conclusion sought and the evidence, of what they entail, and of what entails them. Suppose that a single premise is all he needs to know to reach the desired conclusion: the evidence that needs to be explained to him is that premise. For example, someone may know that khamr (wine) is forbidden and that the nabīdh whose status is disputed is intoxicating, yet not know that every intoxicant is khamr. He needs only this premise.

If he is told that it is authentically reported that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“Every intoxicant is khamr,”

he reaches his desired conclusion. There is no need to tell him, “Every nabīdh is intoxicating, and every intoxicant is khamr,” or, “Every intoxicant is khamr, and all khamr is forbidden.” All this is already known to him. His only uncertainty was whether the term khamr applies exclusively to certain intoxicants, as some Muslim scholars thought, or encompasses every intoxicant. Once it is established for him that the bearer of the revealed law used it generally rather than restrictively, he reaches his desired conclusion.

This hadith appears in Sahīh Muslim and is transmitted in two wordings:

“Every intoxicant is khamr.”

“And every intoxicant is forbidden.”

He did not say, “Every intoxicant is khamr, and all khamr is forbidden,” following the Greek arrangement. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is far too exalted in his knowledge and exposition to speak in the manner of their ravings. If his purpose is merely to make the ruling known, his statement needs no accompanying proof. If his purpose is to explain the evidence—as Allah has explained in the Quran the principal theological conclusions that establish faith in Allah, His messengers, and the Last Day—then he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is the most knowledgeable of all creation concerning the truth and the best at explaining it. Thus, it is clear that not every conclusion requires two premises, nor are all conclusions sufficiently established by