or an aggressor transgressed against him and cut it off, the obligation of cutting is dropped, and there is nothing upon the aggressor except disciplinary punishment (adab). This is the position of Malik, al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and the People of Reason (Ashab al-Ra'y). Qatada said: Retaliation (qisas) is to be taken from the one who cut it, and the thief's foot is to be cut. This is incorrect, for the hand of the thief was already lost, and the one who cut it severed a member that was not inviolable (ma'sum). If an aggressor cut it after the theft, but before the theft was proven and the sentence of cutting was passed, and then it was proven, the ruling is the same. If he testified to the theft and the judge imprisoned him to verify the witnesses' character, and then an aggressor cut it, and the witnesses were subsequently declared credible, the ruling is the same; but if they were not declared credible, retaliation becomes incumbent upon the aggressor. This is the position of al-Shafi'i. The People of Reason said: There is no retaliation upon him, because the truthfulness of the witnesses is a possibility, so that creates ambiguity (shubha). Our argument is that he cut a limb of someone who is his equal (mukafi') intentionally and without right, so the cutting (retaliation) is binding upon him, just as if he had cut it before the presentation of the evidence.

Section: If he steals and the one executing the sentence (jadhdhadh) cuts his left hand instead of his right, it is sufficient, and there is nothing upon the cutter except disciplinary punishment. This is the position of Qatada, al-Sha'bi, and the People of Reason. This is because cutting the right hand of the thief leads to the loss of the benefit of the genus and the cutting of both his hands for a single theft, so it is not prescribed. Once the cutting of his right hand is negated, the cutting of his left hand occurs as sufficient for the mandatory cutting, so no retaliation is incumbent upon the one who did it. Our colleagues said: There are two views regarding the necessity of cutting the right hand of the thief. Regarding the situation where the cutter does not know that it is the left hand, or thinks that cutting it is sufficient, al-Shafi'i has two opinions: one, that the right hand of the thief is not to be cut, so that both his hands are not cut for a single theft. Second, that it is to be cut, just as if his left hand had been cut in retaliation. As for the cutter, our colleagues and al-Shafi'i agreed that if he cut it without the thief's volition, or if the thief extended it out of panic or a belief that it was sufficient, and the cutter cut it knowing it was his left hand and that it was not sufficient, then retaliation is upon him. If he did not know it was his left hand, or thought it was sufficient, then the blood money (diyah) for it is upon him. If the thief extended it willingly while aware of both matters, there is nothing upon the cutter; because he gave permission for it to be cut, so he resembles someone other than a thief. The preferred view according to us is what we mentioned first. And God knows best.

1582 - Issue: He said: (If he repeats, he is imprisoned, and nothing is cut but a hand and a foot). Meaning, if he repeats and steals after his hand and foot have been cut, nothing else is cut from him, and he is imprisoned. This is the position of Ali, may God be pleased with him, al-Hasan, al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, al-Zuhri, Hammad, al-Thawri, and the People of Reason. It is narrated from Ahmad that in the third instance his left hand is cut, in the fourth his right foot, and in the fifth he is disciplined and imprisoned. It was narrated from Abu Bakr and Umar, may God be pleased with them, that they cut the hand of one who had already had his hand and foot cut. This is the view of Qatada, Malik, al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir. It was narrated from Uthman, Amr ibn al-As, and Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz that his left hand is cut in the third instance, the right foot in the fourth, and he is killed in the fifth, because Jabir said: A thief was brought to the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and he said, "Kill him." They said: O Messenger of Allah, he only stole. He said, "Cut him." He said: So he was cut. Then he was brought a second time, and he said, "Kill him." They said: O Messenger of Allah, he only stole. He said, "Cut him." He said: So he was cut. Then he was brought a third time, and he said, "Kill him." They said: O Messenger of Allah, he only stole. He said, "Cut him." He said: Then he was brought a fourth time, and he said, "Kill him." They said: O Messenger of Allah, he only stole. He said, "Cut him." Then...