Hadith No: 1
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of the Apostate
Issue regarding one who neglects prayer being called to it for three days - Section on believing that it is permissible to do something unanimously agreed upon as forbidden
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (12)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... And it has been narrated that Qudamah ibn Muz'un drank alcohol, considering it permissible, so Umar established the punishment upon him but did not declare him a disbeliever. Similarly, Abu Jundal ibn Suhayl and a group with him drank alcohol in Sham, considering it permissible and citing the Word of Allah, the Exalted, {There is no blame upon those who believe and do righteous deeds for what they have eaten} (Surah al-Ma'idah 5:93). They were not declared disbelievers, and they recognized its prohibition, repented, and the punishment was carried out upon them. Those in similar circumstances would be treated in accordance with their judgment, and likewise, any person ignorant of something that can be reasonably ignored would not be ruled as a disbeliever until they understand it, the doubt is removed, and they subsequently consider it permissible.

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 2
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Hudud
Issue of the free unmarried man's fornication - Section on enforcing the punishment on the sick
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (48)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... Abu Bakr said about the postpartum woman, and this is the view of Ishaq and Abu Thur because Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) enforced the punishment on Qudamah ibn Maz'un in his illness and did not postpone it. This was known among the companions, and they did not deny it, so it was considered a consensus. Moreover, the punishment is obligatory, and nothing that Allah has made obligatory should be delayed without evidence. Al-Qadi stated that the apparent opinion of al-Kharaqī is to postpone it, due to his saying regarding someone on whom the punishment is obligatory: "and he is a healthy, sane person." This is the view of Abu Hanifah, Malik, and al-Shafi'i, supported by Ali's (may Allah be pleased with him) narration concerning one who has recently given birth, along with the reasoning we mentioned earlier. As for Umar's action in flogging Qudamah, it is possible that he was suffering from a minor illness that did not prevent the full enforcement of the punishment, and for this reason, it was not reported that he alleviated the punishment with fewer lashes; rather, he chose a moderate number of lashes, similar to what would be used on a healthy person.

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 3
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Hudud
Issue on the Conditions for Witnesses of Zina - Section on Witnessing the Hudud without a Claimant
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (76/77)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... It is permissible to bear witness for the hadd without a claimant, and we do not know of any disagreement on this. Ahmad explicitly stated it and supported it with the case of Abu Bakrah when he and his companions witnessed against al-Mughira without a prior accusation and al-Jarud and his companion witnessed against Qudamah ibn Mazyun for drinking alcohol without a prior accusation. This is because the hadd is a right of Allah Almighty, so testimony for it does not require a prior claim, unlike acts of worship. It is clarified that a claim in other rights is only made by the one entitled to it, and in this case, no one among human beings has a right to claim it. If testimony were to depend on a claim, establishing it would be impossible.

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 4
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Drinks
Issue: Whoever drinks an intoxicant, whether little or much, shall be flogged eighty lashes if he drinks it while he is choosing to drink it.
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (158)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... It is established from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his holy progeny) that the consumption of alcohol is forbidden, with narrations that collectively reach the level of widespread transmission (tawatur), and the ummah has unanimously agreed on its prohibition. However, it is reported that Qudamah ibn Mumزون, Amr ibn Ma'dikrub, and Abu Jundal ibn Suhail said it is permissible due to the words of Allah, the Exalted, saying: {There is no sin upon those who believe and do righteous deeds for what they have eaten} (Surah al-Ma'idah 5:93). The scholars among the companions explained to them the meaning of this verse and the prohibition of alcohol, and they enforced the legal punishment on them for drinking it. They then returned to this understanding, leading to a consensus. Whoever considers it permissible now has contradicted the Prophet (peace be upon him and his holy progeny), for it is a known certainty from the transmission that his prohibition is understood. This person incurs disbelief on account of this and should be advised to repent. If he repents, well and good; otherwise, he should be killed.
- .... Al-Jawzjani narrated with his chain from Ibn Abbas: that Qudamah ibn Mundhir drank alcohol. Umar said to him, "What led you to do that?" He replied, "Indeed, Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, says: {There is no sin upon those who believe and do righteous deeds for what they have eaten} (Surah al-Ma'idah 5:93), and I am one of the early emigrants, one of the people of Badr and Uhud." Umar said to the people, "Answer the man," but they fell silent. So he said to Ibn Abbas, "Answer him." Ibn Abbas replied, "Allah only revealed it as an excuse for those who acted before it was prohibited, for those who drank it before it was made haram. He then revealed: {O you who believe, intoxicants, gambling, stone altars [to other than Allah], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it that you may be successful} (Surah al-Ma'idah 5:90) as evidence against the people." Then Umar asked about the punishment for this, and Ali ibn Abi Talib said, "If he drinks, he will be in a daze, and if he is in a daze, he will be fabricating [falsehoods]. So flog him eighty times." Umar then flogged him eighty lashes. Al-Waqidi reported that Umar said to him, "You have erred in your interpretation, O Qudamah. If you are cautious, you will avoid what Allah has prohibited you."

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 5
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Drinks
Issue: Whoever drinks an intoxicant, little or much, shall be flogged eighty lashes if he drinks it while it is his choice to do so.
Chapter Two: The Punishment for Drinking a Little or a Lot of Intoxicants
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (160)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... And Umar imposed a punishment on Qudamah ibn Mazyun and his companions despite their belief that what they drank was permissible, and the distinction between this and other matters of اختلاف (difference of opinion) is twofold. One is that the action in this disputed issue here is an invitation to engage in something that is unanimously agreed upon as forbidden, while actions in other matters of اختلاف serve to divert from their kind in a collective agreement on their prohibition. The second is that the Sunnah from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his holy progeny) has become widespread, ruling the prohibition of this disputed matter, leaving no one with a valid excuse to believe it is permissible, unlike other matters of ijtihad. Ahmad ibn al-Qasim said, "I heard Abu Abdullah say regarding the prohibition of intoxicants that there are twenty indications from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his holy progeny), some of which state: 'Every intoxicant is wine,' and others state: 'Every intoxicant is forbidden.'"

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 6
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Drinks
Issue: Whoever drinks an intoxicant, little or much, is to be flogged eighty lashes if he drinks it while he is choosing to do so.
Section: Found drunk or vomits wine
Volume: (9) - Page Number: (163/164)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]
- .... Section: And if he is found drunk or vomits wine: Ahmad said that there is no punishment on him, as it is possible he was coerced or did not know that it would intoxicate him. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i and the narration of Abu Talib from him. The punishment for the smell indicates that a punishment is obligatory here all the more so, because that can only occur after drinking it, resembling a situation where there is evidence against him for having drunk it. And Sa'id narrated to us, saying: Hisham narrated to us, saying: al-Mughira from al-Sha'bi, who said: When what happened with Qudamah occurred, Alqamah the eunuch came and said: I bear witness that I saw him vomiting it. Then Umar said: "Whoever vomits it has indeed drunk it," and he struck him with the prescribed penalty.
- .... Nor is it necessary to mention his knowledge that it is intoxicating, because the apparent assumption is choice and knowledge, and anything else is rare and unlikely. Therefore, there was no need to clarify it, and that is why it is not considered in any of the testimonies. Nor did Uthman consider it in the testimony against al-Walid ibn Uqbah or did Umar consider it in the testimony against Qudamah ibn Mardun, or in the testimony against al-Mughira ibn Shu'bah. Even if they testified to emancipation or divorce, it would not be necessary to mention choice, just as it is here.

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 9

Hadith No: 7
Ibn Qudamah - al-Mughni - Book of Testimonies - Chapter on Testimony in Rights of Two Types
Volume: (10) - Page Number: (194)
[The text is lengthy, so only the relevant excerpt is provided here]

- .... The second type: rights belonging to a human being that are not specifically assigned, such as a waqf (endowment) for the poor and needy, or for all Muslims, or on a mosque, a water facility, or an unclaimed cemetery, or a will for something of that nature, or rights that belong to Allah Almighty, such as punishments solely for Allah Almighty, or zakat (almsgiving), or expiations (kaffarat). Testimony for these does not require a prior claim because there is no specific human being entitled to it who would assert and demand it. For this reason, Abu Bakrah and his companions testified against al-Mughira and al-Jarud and Abu Huraira testified against Qudamah ibn Madh'un for drinking alcohol. Likewise, those who testified against al-Walid ibn Uqbah for drinking alcohol did so without a prior claim, and their testimonies were accepted. Therefore, it was not considered necessary for the initiation of a waqf to have acceptance or approval from anyone.

---

Reference: Al Magani Book 10