ʿAbdullāh, the son of Imām Aḥmad, relates: “I asked my father, ‘Do you act on this ḥadīth?’ He replied, ‘I know of nothing that invalidates it.’

Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh and the Ẓāhirī jurists said the same. They based their view on the report concerning the Makhzūmī woman, and they held that the statement, ‘No hand is to be cut off for a betrayer,’ is restricted to cases other than a person who betrays a loaned item. The rationale that obliges amputation for a thief is equally present—indeed, even more acute—in one who denies a borrowed article; therefore he is excepted from the general ruling.

Benefit:
The scholars unanimously agree that the usurper (ghāṣib), the snatcher (mukhtalis), and the plunderer (muntahib) are not to have their hands amputated. This is not because they are blameless; they are aggressors whose corruption requires a discretionary punishment that will deter them.

In the Sunan collections it is narrated from Jābir that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “No hand is to be cut off for a betrayer, a plunderer, or a snatcher.”

They are exempt from amputation for the reason cited at the beginning of the chapter from Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ, and for other wisdoms known only to the One who legislated what best rectifies people’s affairs.