they cannot be reached by assistance (al-ghawth) in the ordinary course, they are considered highwaymen, because assistance does not reach them, so they are like highwaymen in the wilderness. The second condition is that they carry weapons. If they have no weapons, they are not highwaymen, because they do not prevent those who intend to confront them. We know of no disagreement regarding this. However, if they confront people with sticks and stones, they are considered highwaymen. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i and Abu Thawr. Abu Hanifah said: They are not highwaymen, because they have no weapons. Our argument is that these items fall under the category of weapons which cause death and inflict injury, so they are similar to iron. The third condition is that they arrive openly (mujaharah) and seize wealth by force. As for if they take it secretly, they are thieves; and if they snatch it and flee, they are plunderers (muntahebun) and no cutting off of limbs is due upon them. Likewise, if one or two individuals go out against the rear of a caravan and snatch something from it, they are not highwaymen, because they do not rely on protection and strength. But if they go out against a small number of people and overpower them, they are highwaymen.

1595 - Issue; He said: "Whoever among them kills and takes wealth is to be executed, even if the owner of the wealth pardons him, and he is to be crucified until his notoriety spreads, then delivered to his family. Whoever among them kills but does not take wealth is to be executed without being crucified. And whoever takes wealth but does not kill, his right hand and left foot are to be cut off from opposite sides, then the wounds are to be cauterized and he is to be released."

We have narrated something similar to this from Ibn Abbas. This is also the position of Qatadah, Abu Mijlaz, Hammad, al-Layth, al-Shafi'i, and Ishaq. From Ahmad, it is reported that if he kills and takes wealth, he is to be executed and have his limbs cut off, because each