92wine. From this other jurists drew an analogy,
thereby prohibiting all other alcoholic substances.
Notice that these jurists conceded the point that
khamr did originally mean grape wine only. The
Hanafi s responded by asking, well, if that was
the case, why would the Prophet’s companions
be drinking other fermented drinks? No qiyas is
valid if it contradicts specifi c evidence, and the ac-
tions of the Prophet’s companions are specifi c evi-
dence. Other jurists rebutted this by arguing that
the actions of individual companions do not carry
divine authority in their methodological approach,
and so on and so forth.Harris So you’re saying that this same dexterity can be
applied to the topics of unbelief and martyrdom?
Nawaz Yes, absolutely. That’s but one example. I went
into some depth with it merely to demonstrate the
importance that interpretive methodologies played
historically in reading Islamic scripture. Some
Hanafi s took a similar view regarding apostasy. The
hadith you referred to is a solitary (ahad) hadith:
“Whoever changes his persuasion (din), kill him.”
Some Hanafi s argue that this couldn’t possibly
mean “kill apostates,” because the hadith literally
Bereitgestellt von | New York University Bobst Library Technical Services
Angemeldet