ʿUmar ii and the Prohibition of Ṭilāʾ and Nabīdh
Following a brief introduction, this article has two parts and an appendix. In the first part, I examine the passage prohibiting intoxicating ṭilāʾ (cooked grape juice) in the “fiscal rescript” attributed to ʿUmar ii (d. 101/720) by Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam (d. 214/829). I argue that this passage’s core go...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
2023
|
| In: |
Islamic law and society
Year: 2023, Volume: 30, Issue: 4, Pages: 329-391 |
| Further subjects: | B
Earthquake
B fiscal rescript B ʿUmar I B Christian chroniclers B Alcohol B Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam B isnād analysis B rizq B nabīdh B ṭilāʾ B ʿUmar ii |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | Following a brief introduction, this article has two parts and an appendix. In the first part, I examine the passage prohibiting intoxicating ṭilāʾ (cooked grape juice) in the “fiscal rescript” attributed to ʿUmar ii (d. 101/720) by Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam (d. 214/829). I argue that this passage’s core goes back to an edict of ʿUmar ii that is no longer extant. I suggest that ʿUmar ii issued the prohibition following an earthquake that devastated Syria because he feared that the drinkers of intoxicants would cause a similar catastrophe to befall all Muslims. I situate ʿUmar ii’s prohibition within the early legal discussions about ṭilāʾ. In the second part, I analyze a group of edicts prohibiting nabīdh (date wine) that are attributed to ʿUmar ii. I conclude that the edicts are pseudepigraphical. In the appendix, I trace the transmission history of a tradition attributed to al-Shaʿbī about a missive of Umar I concerning ṭilāʾ. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1568-5195 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Islamic law and society
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15685195-bja10041 |