Non-alcoholic beer is haram in the Shafi`i
qas...@ziplip.com
>What is the Shafii position on the consumption of
>non-alcoholic beer?
The Shafi`i School considers non-alcoholic beer prohibited
(haram) due to its being filthied (munajjas).
A barley/malt nabidh would seem mubah but the problem lies
in the fact that non-alcoholic beer is previously fermented
alcoholic beer from which the alcohol was taken out. As an
alcoholic mix it was a muskir ma'i` i.e. liquid intoxicant
and therefore a najis mixture in the Shafi`i madhhab,
comparing to khamr in respect to filth -najasa- (khamr being
unanimously* najis per Imam al-Ghazzali). So this applies
to beer. Therefore, as a liquid, it remains najis even after
the actual cause of najasa - the alcohol - is taken out and
even if 0.00% alcohol remain. It remains najis even if boiled,
like blood, except that the najasa of the latter is literal
while that of consumption-alcohol is moral. WAllahu a`lam.
*Among the Four Schools. This excludes Rabi`a, the Zahiris,
al-Shawkani, and those who followed their opinion.
As for the argument that there is some alcohol in
non-alcoholic beer: yes, in trace amounts also found in
fruit juices or yeasted bread, less than 0.5%. This type
of alcohol is irrelevant here.
In the Hanafi Madhhab the alcoholic nabidh (fermented
mash) is not only pure but purifying as wudu' is even
permissible with it in travel in the absence of water.
(Majmu` cf. Bada'i` 1:10)
It has been the fashion among many non-Hanafis to scoff at this
but the actual practice of some of the Salaf who drank nabidh
that contained a fair amount of alcohol seems to confirm
the Hanafi position. At the very least, it appears that
those Companions and Tabi`in never considered any factor of
najasa in those drinks but only their intoxicant as the
criterion of prohibition.
Yahya ibn Ma`in said: "The prohibition of fermented mash
is true (tahrim al-nabidh sahih i.e. authentically reported)
but I stop short of declaring it haram: saintly and righteous
people drank it on the basis of sound hadiths [but see al-
Dhahabi's disclaimer below] while other saintly and righteous
people declared it haram on the basis of sound hadiths."
Cf. al-Dhahabi, Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (Risala ed. 11:88).
Similarly Yahya's Imam in Fiqh, Abu Hanifa - Allah be well-
pleased with them - said that the Sunna is to not declare
as haram the fermented nabidh of dates (Bada'i` 1:7).
Al-Dhahabi also cited (12:494) the story of the Hanafi
Qadi Bakkar ibn Qutayba - one of al-Tahawi's great teachers -
when he took up judgeship in Cairo and met al-Muzani, one of
the foremost companions of al-Shafi`i. One of Qadi Bakkar's
companions asked al-Muzani: "The hadiths have mentioned both
the prohibition of wine (tahrim al-nabidh) and its permissibility
(tahlilih), so why did you (Shafi`is) give precedence to its
prohibition?" Al-Muzani replied: "No-one ever declared it
prohibited in Jahiliyya; then it was declared halal for us,
and agreement formed over its permissibility; then it was
declared haram. This, therefore, gives pre-eminence to the
narrations of tahrim." Bakkar approved of this reply. Al-Dhahabi
adds: "Furthermore, the hadiths of tahrim are many and sound,
which is not the case with the hadiths of permissibility."
Al-Muzani's comment shows that if there was indeed abrogation
of the hukm of nabidh itself, it was from permissibility to
prohibition, not vice-versa. But the point is that no one
considered najasa an issue. If it were, then surely it would
have been present from the start. But Allah knows best.
Was-Salam
Hajj Gibril
--
GF Haddad
Qas...@ziplip.com