a matter of choice, not an ordered sequence. Moreover, if Arabic usage required an ordered sequence rather than a choice whenever punishments were listed from the most severe downward, as they claim, Allah Most High would not have needed to say concerning the expiations for homicide and for declaring one’s wife as forbidden as one’s mother:
“But whoever cannot find one must fast for two consecutive months” [al-Nisā’: 92].
He could instead have said, “or fasting for two consecutive months,” since “or” is easier to pronounce and more concise. Eloquence consists in conveying meanings clearly with few words. Besides, we do not concede that freeing a slave is more burdensome than fasting for two consecutive months. Rather, fasting for two consecutive months is harder and more burdensome than freeing a slave, especially for someone of considerable wealth. Even part of this discussion is sufficient.
Section
In support of their position, they relied on the report from Ibn ‘Abbās that if a brigand commits brigandage and kills, he is to be executed; if he commits brigandage, kills, and takes property, he is to be crucified; if he commits brigandage and takes property without killing, his hand and foot are to be amputated on opposite sides; and if he commits highway brigandage without killing or taking property, he is to be banished—unless, in any of these cases, he repents before being apprehended.
Section
Al-Shāfi‘ī adopted this position attributed to Ibn ‘Abbās, although the reports transmitted from him—meaning Ibn ‘Abbās—differ greatly. Abū Hanīfah and his companions, however, said that if he terrorizes travelers without killing anyone and is apprehended before repenting, he is to be imprisoned, on the basis of Allah’s saying, Almighty and Majestic:
“Or be banished from the land” [al-Mā’idah: 33].
They interpreted banishment as imprisonment. If he takes property amounting to ten dirhams or more, his hand and foot are to be amputated on opposite sides. If he kills and takes property, Abū Hanīfah said that the ruler has a choice: he may amputate his hand and foot on opposite sides, or crucify him and kill him on the wooden frame. Alternatively, he may refrain from crucifying him, amputate his hand and foot on opposite sides, and then execute him; or he may execute him without crucifixion or amputation.
Abū Yūsuf, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, and others said that when execution becomes mandatory, no amputation is to be carried out, because execution encompasses everything. They preferred, however, that he be killed while crucified on the wooden frame. If he goes out