from the land,” though the one who banishes is not mentioned. It is known that the one who carries out banishment is the ruler—the one vested with authority. If he does not do so, the Muslims banish them. This is the reason why it is expressed in the passive voice.

How, then, are they banished? The author says: “By dispersing them, such that they are not allowed to settle in any town.” Rather, they are driven out into the wilderness and are not permitted to return to populated areas—neither their own land nor that of others. Thus, His saying, “or that they be banished from the land,” means that they are banished from the land where they waylay travellers. We banish them from towns and from the places frequented by people, because the purpose of banishment is to remove their harm and deter them from harming people.

Some scholars said that banishment means imprisonment, because imprisonment is the prison of this world—and indeed it is so. The one in prison is neither in this world nor in the Hereafter: he is not in this world among people, nor in the Hereafter among the dead. Thus, he is banished from the land. Moreover, imprisoning him is more likely to safeguard people from his evil, for if we banished them from towns and roads, they might one day raid people when they are off guard and waylay travellers. But if they are imprisoned, their harm is prevented altogether. This is the view of Abu Hanifah.

As we know, the school of Abu Hanifah is always based on rational consideration, but the apparent meaning of the verse, “or that they be banished from the land,” does not support it. Otherwise, Allah would have said: “or that they be imprisoned.” Since He said, “that they be banished from the land,” we say that they are to be banished from the land. Yet, if someone were to say that, where their harm cannot be prevented except by imprisoning them, they should be imprisoned, whereas where their harm can be prevented by dispersing them, they should be dispersed—such a view would have merit. It would incorporate part of the view of those who say that they are to be imprisoned unconditionally and of those who say that they are to be dispersed unconditionally. That is, the matter would be determined according to the differing circumstances: if their harm can be prevented by dispersing them, we do so, in accordance with the apparent meaning of the text; but if that is not possible, we imprison them, because this is more effective in preventing their harm.

It thus becomes clear that the punishment for highway robbers is of four types, and that each type corresponds to a particular crime: