Such vessels differ from musical instruments: no amputation is imposed for stealing the latter, because it is unanimously agreed that acquiring them is prohibited and that destroyed instruments have no compensable value, whereas liability for the workmanship in vessels is disputed.

If a group jointly makes a breach and enters the secure place, and one of them removes property meeting the minimum threshold while the others do not, all of them are subjected to amputation. If two people cooperate in making a breach, then one enters, removes the stolen property, and hands it to the other outside the secure place, amputation applies to the one who entered, not the one outside. The same applies if he throws the property to the other and the latter takes it. If two people cooperate in making a breach, then one enters and leaves the property near the breach while the other puts his hand through it and takes the property, both are subjected to amputation. But if two people cooperate, one making the breach without taking anything and the other taking the property without making the breach, neither of them is subjected to amputation.

If someone breaches the secure place, enters it, and consumes the property within it, he must make restitution but is not subjected to amputation. If the thief is subjected to amputation while the property remains intact, it is returned to its owner. If the thief returns after his amputation and steals it again after it has been secured, he is subjected to amputation again. If the thief consumes what he stole, he is subjected to amputation and held liable for its value. If the stolen property is gifted to him, this does not remove his liability to amputation. Nor is amputation waived if the owner of the property pardons him with respect to it.

In the amputation prescribed for theft, men and women, free persons and slaves, and Muslims and non-Muslims are treated alike. A child is not subjected to amputation, nor is an insane person. A drunk person is subjected to amputation if he steals while intoxicated, but an unconscious person is not subjected to amputation if he steals while unconscious. A slave is not subjected to amputation for stealing from his master’s property, nor is a father for stealing from his child’s property. Relatives are subjected to amputation for stealing from one another, except parents and children.

As for the fixed legal penalty for khamr (intoxicating drink), anyone who drinks something whose large quantity intoxicates—whether khamr or nabīdh (fermented drink)—is subjected to the fixed penalty, regardless of whether he actually becomes intoxicated from it.