necessitated by need, and the people are in hardship and famine. The same is narrated from al-Awza'i. This is understood as applying to one who cannot find food to buy, or cannot find anything with which to buy it, for he has an ambiguity in taking what he eats or what he uses to buy food. It has been reported from Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that the servants of Hatib ibn Abi Balta'ah slaughtered a camel belonging to al-Muzani, and Umar ordered their amputation, then he said to Hatib: "I see that you are starving them." Thus, he warded off the amputation from them when he [thought that he] was starving them. As for one who finds what he can eat, or finds what he can buy food with, he is subject to amputation, even if it is at a high price. This was mentioned by al-Qadi, and it is the school of al-Shafi'i. There is no amputation for a wife if the husband withholds her due sustenance or that of her child, and she takes from his property, regardless of whether she takes the equivalent of that or more; because she is entitled to that amount, and the excess is considered shared by what she is entitled to take. Likewise, there is no amputation for a guest if he is denied his hospitality and takes from the host's property for that reason.

1590 - Issue: He said: (Amputation is not mandated except by the testimony of two just witnesses, or a confession twice).

The sum of this is that amputation is only necessitated by one of two matters: clear evidence (bayyinah) or confession, and nothing else. As for clear evidence, it is stipulated that they be two free, just, Muslim men, regardless of whether the thief is a Muslim or a Dhimmi. We have already mentioned this in the section on testimony in cases of adultery, which suffices us from repeating it here. It is stipulated that they describe the theft, the place of safe-keeping (hirz), the type of the minimum taxable amount (nisab), and its value, so that any disagreement regarding it may be removed. They should say: "We testify that this person stole such-and-such, its value is such-and-such, from a safe-keeping." And they must describe the safe-keeping. If the owner of the stolen property is absent, and his agent appears and demands the stolen property, the two witnesses must elaborate on his lineage, saying: "From the safe-keeping of so-and-so, son of so-and-so, son of so-and-so," such that he is distinguished from others. Once these conditions are met, amputation becomes mandatory.