The first step is to weigh the matter against the benefits or harms that will ensue.
If the person involved is not known for wickedness or harm, the Prophet ﷺ said, “Overlook the slips of those who possess dignity.” Therefore, if reporting him would itself lead to some harm, it is better not to report. But if leaving the matter unreported would cause harm, and the individual is one of those who habitually cause injury—factors that call for escalation—then referring the case to the authorities is preferable.
-
A person who borrows an article and then denies it (jāḥid al-ʿāriyah) is to be treated like a thief; his hand is to be severed. The juristic disagreement on this point will be presented below.
-
Justice and equality are obligatory for everyone—rich or poor, noble or common—in judgments, prescribed penalties, and in all matters they share in common.
-
Applying the ḥudūd to the weak while suspending them for the powerful is a cause of ruin and destruction, and of misery in both worlds.
-
Swearing an oath in grave matters serves to underscore and confirm their importance.
-
Hyperbole, analogy, and illustrative examples are permissible in speech when they clarify, explain, and affirm the truth.
-
The ḥadith highlights a great virtue of Usāmah, for no one was considered more fitting than he to intercede with the Prophet ﷺ. The incident occurred during the Conquest of Mecca.
Scholarly disagreement
The jurists have differed over a person who denies a borrowed article: should his hand be severed or not?
• The majority—including the three Imams, Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, and al-Shāfiʿī—hold that he is not to be amputated. This is also a narrated view from Imam Aḥmad, preferred by his students al-Khiraqī, Abū al-Khaṭṭāb, and Ibn Qudāmah, the author of al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr, based on the Prophet’s statement, “lā qiṭʿa ʿalā khāʾin” (No hand is to be severed for treachery).
They answer the present ḥadith by saying that her denial of the borrowed article was mentioned only for identification, not because her hand was severed for that reason; rather, it was severed for theft, which is why the word “theft” appears in the report. They offered other explanations as well, but none of them are persuasive.
• A second narration from Imam Aḥmad is that such a person’s hand should indeed be severed, and this is the adopted position in his school. ʿAbd Allāh ibn Imam Aḥmad said, “I asked my father, saying, ‘Do you follow this ḥadith?’”