{"title":"乌麦尔二世和Ṭilā和nab<e:1>的禁令","authors":"Elon Harvey","doi":"10.1163/15685195-bja10041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract 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 .","PeriodicalId":55965,"journal":{"name":"Islamic Law and Society","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ʿUmar ii and the Prohibition of Ṭilāʾ and Nabīdh\",\"authors\":\"Elon Harvey\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15685195-bja10041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract 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 .\",\"PeriodicalId\":55965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Islamic Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"145 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Islamic Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685195-bja10041\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Islamic Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685195-bja10041","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract 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 .
期刊介绍:
Islamic Law and Society provides a forum for research in the field of classical and modern Islamic law, in Muslim and non-Muslim countries. Celebrating its sixteenth birthday in 2009, Islamic Law and Society has established itself as an invaluable resource for the subject both in the private collections of scholars and practitioners as well as in the major research libraries of the world. Islamic Law and Society encourages discussion on all branches of Islamic law, with a view to promoting an understanding of Islamic law, in both theory and practice, from its emergence until modern times and from juridical, historical and social-scientific perspectives. Islamic Law and Society offers you an easy way to stay on top of your discipline.