Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/330)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

So, if you loan someone a book for him to read, then he denies having received it, and you produce evidence that it is in his possession, thereby establishing both the loan and his denial of it, then amputation becomes mandatory.

“…or something else. The pickpocket who slits a pocket or something else and takes from it is subject to amputation; and it is stipulated that the stolen property be lawfully protected wealth…”

His statement, “or something else,” means something other than a loaned item or the like—for example, if it is in something you rented out to him, such as a car, and he betrays the trust placed in him regarding it by taking something from it. This is not theft, so his hand is not amputated.

His statement, “The pickpocket who slits a pocket or something else and takes from it is subject to amputation”: as mentioned earlier at the beginning of the Book of Legal Punishments, the one responsible for carrying out the amputation is the imam or his deputy.

The term “pickpocket” derives from ṭarr, meaning cutting. This is why he said, “who slits a pocket or something else and takes from it.” Slitting is not a condition, however. A pickpocket may slit a pocket with a fine razor and take the money; or he may tear it open, so that the coins fall out and he takes them from the ground; or he may sit beside you, put his hand in, and take something. In all such cases, his hand is amputated, because he has stolen from a place of secure custody.

The author specifically mentioned this because some scholars maintain that there is no amputation in such a case, since one can protect oneself against it by remaining alert. Ordinarily, when a person is awake, it is not possible for someone to steal from him.

But the correct view is that adopted by the author, because no matter how alert a person may be, he is bound to have moments of inattention—especially in crowded places. Pickpockets also have their tricks. Thus, if we were to say that their hands are not amputated, it would open a door of evil against people.

فلو أعرت شخصاً كتاباً يقرأ فيه، ثم جحده، فأقمت بينة عليه أنه عنده، فتبين بذلك ثبوت العارية وثبوت جحدها، فحينئذٍ يتعين القطع. َوْ غَيْرِها، وَيُقْطَعُ الطَّرَّارُ الَّذِي يَبُطُّ الْجَيْبَ أَوْ غَيْرَهُ وَيَأْخُذُ مِنْهُ وَيُشْتَرَطُ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْمَسْرُوقُ مَالاً مُحْتَرَماً، .. قوله: «أَوْ غَيْرِها» أي: غير العارية أو ما أشبه ذلك، مثل أن يكون في شيء أجرته إياه، كسيارة فخان فيها، كأن يأخذ منها شيئاً، فإن هذا ليس بسرقة، فلا يقطع. قوله: «وَيُقْطَعُ الطَّرَّارُ الَّذِي يَبُطُّ الْجَيْبَ أَوْ غَيْرَهُ وَيَأْخُذُ مِنْهُ» والذي يتولى القطع هو الإمام أو نائبه كما سبق في أول كتاب الحدود. وقوله: «الطرار» من الطر وهو القطع، ولهذا قال: «الذي يبط الجيب أو غيره ويأخذ منه» والبط ليس بشرط، فالطرار يبط الجيب بمبراة لطيفة ويأخذ المال، أو يشقه، وتسقط الدراهم ويأخذها من الأرض، أو يجلس إلى جنبك، ويدخل يده ويأخذ، فإنه يقطع؛ لأنه سرق من حرز. وإنما نص عليه المؤلف؛ لأن بعض العلماء يقول: إن هذا لا قطع فيه؛ لإمكان التحرز منه باليقظة، فإن الغالب إذا كان الإنسان مستيقظاً أنه لا يمكن أن يسرق منه. ولكن الصحيح ما ذهب إليه المؤلف؛ لأن الإنسان مهما كان في اليقظة فلا بد من غفلة، وكثيراً ما تكون سيما في محل الزحام، وللطرارين حيل؛ فإذا قلنا: إنهم لا يقطعون فإنه يفتح باب شر على الناس.