They therefore rose to plead for her and put forward Usāmah ibn Zayd to intercede with the Prophet ﷺ.

Now Usāmah was the son of the Prophet’s freedman, Zayd ibn Ḥārithah. Zayd had been a slave presented to the Messenger ﷺ by Khadījah; the Prophet set him free, and thereafter Allah granted him a son, Usāmah. The Messenger ﷺ loved them both—Usāmah and his father Zayd—so the people said to Usāmah, “Intercede with the Messenger ﷺ.”

When Usāmah came with his plea, the Prophet ﷺ rebuked him, saying, “Are you interceding with me regarding one of Allah’s prescribed punishments?”—a censure meant as a stern reprimand.

He then stood and addressed the people with weighty, enduring words: “O people! What ruined those before you was that when a noble person among them stole, they left him alone, but when a weak person stole, they carried out the penalty upon him.” Such behaviour is sheer injustice and oppression. Which of the two, then, would be more deserving of pardon if partiality were to be shown—the impoverished weakling who owns nothing, or the grand notable? Clearly, the weak would have the stronger claim to mercy if favouritism were allowed. Yet, praise be to Allah, there is no bias or preferential treatment when it comes to enforcing Allah’s limits.

The Prophet ﷺ then declared, “By Allah, were Fāṭimah daughter of Muḥammad to steal, I would cut off her hand.” She surpasses the woman from Banū Makhzūm in lineage, rank, and piety—indeed, she is unquestionably superior, for she is the foremost lady of the women of Paradise.

His phrase ﷺ, “By Allah,” is an oath taken without anyone asking him to swear, employed to stress the ruling and highlight its gravity. Likewise, his saying “if Fāṭimah,” who is nobler than that Makhzūmī woman, “the daughter of Muḥammad,” underscores the point all the more.