For example, if a man steals dirhams or dinars from an open shop, he has stolen from an unprotected place, so his hand is not to be cut off. This is because one of the conditions for amputation is that the theft be taken from a protected place. However, the author says that the value is doubled against him: thus, if the stolen item is worth one hundred, we make it two hundred.

The evidence for this is that it is authentically reported from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, that whoever steals fruit from an unprotected place is liable for double compensation (1).

The author, may Allah have mercy on him, holds that there is no difference whether what is stolen is fruit, kathar (the heart of a palm tree), or anything else. Fruit includes dates, while kathar has been said to mean the heart of the palm tree, and it has also been said to mean its blossom. What is established in the sunnah is fruit and kathar; as for anything besides these two, the sunnah does not mention it. Some scholars therefore extended the ruling of the two to other things, as the author, may Allah have mercy on him, maintains. The established school, however, holds that other things are not included by analogy with them. Thus, if one steals from an unprotected place, there is no amputation; he is only liable for its value if it is a valued item, or for an equivalent replacement if it is a fungible item.

Those who held that the compensation is doubled argued that the sunnah establishes double compensation for fruit and kathar, and that we know of no basis for this other than the fact that they were stolen from an unprotected place. Accordingly, the effective cause is theft from an unprotected place; hence, the value of anything stolen from such a place is doubled against the thief. As for those who held that its value is not doubled, they said: the basic rule regarding liability is that an item is compensated for with its equivalent. Fruit and kathar, when stolen, were excluded from this rule by textual evidence, while everything else remains subject to the original rule.