Appearance
Verses 33–40
The verses are not without some connection with the preceding ones. Although the story of the slaying of a son of Adam by his brother and the subsequent prescription to the Children of Israel regarding murder, had not specifically laid down any punishment or sentence, yet the topics have affinity with these verses that describe the punishment of thieves and those who make mischief in the land.
خِلَافٍ أَوْ يُنْفَوْا مِنَ الْأَرْضِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ لَهُمْ خِزْيٌ فِي الدُّنْيَا ۖ وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ ٣٣
(5:33) The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.
Fasādan (mischief) is a masdar used in the sentence as a circumstantial clause. Waging war against God: It is impossible to take it in its literal sense; it can only be interpreted metaphorically. But the metaphorical meaning is very wide and it can be applied on disobeying any rule of the shariah and on every injustice and extravagance; yet the verse joins the Messenger with God and it means that the disobedience covers those rulings in which the Messenger had some involvement. This narrows the circle to include only those affairs for which God has given His Messenger certain authority, like fighting the disbelievers under the banner of the Prophet and keeping the roads safe from highway robbers, by maintaining the general law and order which the Prophet had established in the land. The clause: “and strive to make mischief in the land,” pinpoints the intended meaning, that is, to make mischief in the land by disturbing the peace and highway robbery; it does not refer to fighting against the Muslims. Moreover, it is known that the Prophet had never meted out the above-mentioned punishments of killing, crucifying, cutting their hands and feet on opposite sides or imprisonment to the disbelievers who were vanquished in wars.
Apart from that, the exception contained in the next verse indicates that waging war against God and the Messenger only means this making mischief in the land, because one may repent from waging war, and not from polytheism, etc.
Therefore, waging war and making mischief obviously mean the same thing, that is, disturbing general law and order. Law and order is upset when fear and anxiety prevail in society; normally this happens when arms are used and lead to killings. That is why the sunnah explains making mischief as drawing sword, etc., as we shall write under “Traditions,” God willing.
... that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land: al-Taqtīl, al-Taslīb and al-Taqtīʾ are on the stem of al-Tafʾīl from the roots, al-qatl (to kill), al-Salb (to crucify) and al-qatʾ (to cut off), and accordingly emphasize or enhance the root meanings. The conjunctive aw (or) indicates alternatives, showing that the two (or more) sides can-not appear together. The question arises whether there is any sequence or choice between the four alternative punishments mentioned here; the conjunctive does not throw light on it, and some other spoken words, or circumstantial factor is needed for deciding it. Thus the verse in this sense is vague. However, traditions have explained it and those narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-bayt shows that the four laid down punishments are applied according to the level of the mischief made. For example, a man draws sword and kills and takes property; another one only kills, a third one only takes property, and a fourth only draws sword—obviously each one’s punishment would differ from the others, as will be explained under “Traditions.”
The words: “their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides,” mean that if the hand is cut on the right side, the foot should be cut on the left; this only shows that cutting the hands and the feet means cutting one hand and one foot (on opposite sides), not both hands and both feet.
As for the words: “or they should be banished from the land,” al-nafy means banishment; tradition explains it as banishing him from one town to another.
The verse contains other matters concerned with the law; their details should be seen in books of jurisprudence.
... this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement: al-Khizy (disgrace); its meaning is clear. It has been argued on the strength of this verse that if the prescribed punishment is meted out to a guilty man, it does not necessarily mean that he will not be punished in the hereafter; and it is true to a certain extent.
إِلَّا الَّذِينَ تَابُوا مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَقْدِرُوا عَلَيْهِمْ ۖ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ ٣٤
(5:34) Except those who repent before you have them in your power; so know that Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
However, after one is caught and proof is established against him, the prescribed punishment is not waived. The sentence: “so know that God is Forgiving, Merciful,” alludes to the waiver of the said punishment. It is one of the verses where forgiveness is used for affairs other than of the next world.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَابْتَغُوا إِلَيْهِ الْوَسِيلَةَ وَجَاهِدُوا فِي سَبِيلِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ ٣٥
(5:35) O you who believe! Fear Allah and seek means of nearness to Him and strive hard in His way that you may be successful.
al-Rāghib has said:
“al-Wasīlah (with s)means attaining something with longing; it is more particular than al-waṣilah (with ṣ = joining, attaining) as it has added connotation of longing. God says: and seek means of nearness to Him; the reality of this means of nearness to God is to comply with demands of His path with knowledge and worship, and pursuit of virtues of the shariah, and it is like al-qurbah (nearness).”
It is a sort of joining together, that is, a spiritual joining which connects the slave with his master; there is no link that connects man with his Lord except the submissiveness of worship and veneration. Therefore, the means of nearness means ensuring the reality of veneration and turning the face of humility and poverty to His direction—this is then the connecting link that joins the servant to his Lord. As for knowledge and good deed, these are obviously its tools and concomitants, except if knowledge and deed are used to this very condition.
It is clear from the above discourse that in the clause: “and strive hard in His way,” the word al-jihād (fighting, striving) has been used in its wider sense which covers both fighting the unbelievers and struggling against one’s base desires and anger. There is no reason to restrict it to the fight against unbelievers, especially as the clause is connected to the preceding order to seek means of nearness to God, and you have seen what it means. Moreover, the reason given in the two following verses is more appropriate to that wider connotation.
However, it is possible to restrict this jihād to the fight against unbelievers, keeping in view the Qur’anic style: The jihād in this verse is qualified with the phrase: “in His way,” and this qualification has been used in all the verses which exhort Muslims to fight the enemy; while general striving does not contain this condition, as God says: And (as for) those who strive hard for Us, We will most certainly guide them onto Our ways; and Allah is most surely with the doers of good (). Accordingly, the order to fight in the way of God after the order to seek means of nearness to Him mentions a particular after the general for showing its importance; and probably the same is the case of the order of seeking means of nearness to Him coming after the order of fearing God.
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْ أَنَّ لَهُمْ مَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا وَمِثْلَهُ مَعَهُ لِيَفْتَدُوا بِهِ مِنْ عَذَابِ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ مَا تُقُبِّلَ مِنْهُمْ ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ ٣٦ يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَخْرُجُوا مِنَ النَّارِ وَمَا هُمْ بِخَارِجِينَ مِنْهَا ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُقِيمٌ ٣٧
(5:36-37) Surely (as for) those who disbelieve even if they had what is in the earth, all of it, and the like of it with it, that they might ransom themselves with it from the punishment of the Day of Resurrection, it shall not be accepted from them, and they shall have a painful punishment. They would desire to go forth from the Fire, and they shall not go forth from it, and they shall have a lasting punishment
As we have pointed out above, the two verses apparently give the reason of the theme of the preceding verse. The three verses together enjoin people to fear God, seek means of nearness to Him and fight in His way, because these are the important means for warding off the painful lasting punishment from them. That is the only relevant factor, and nothing else can take its place; because if the unbelievers (who had not feared God, and had not sought any means of nearness to Him, nor had they fought in His way) had possession of all that is in the earth—and usually it is the utmost that a man desires—and then they were given again as much, and they wished to ransom themselves with it from the punishment of the Day of Resurrection, it shall not be accepted from them, and they shall have a painful chastisement; naturally they would desire to go out of the Fire but they shall not succeed, because it is a lasting punishment which would never go away from them.
The verses show that:
First: The punishment is the basic aspect which is nearer to man; it is only īmān and piety which ward off this punishment from him, as the words of God point to it: And there is not one of you but shall come down to it; this is a decided decree of your Lord. Then We shall deliver those who were pious, and We shall leave the unjust therein on their knees (). Most surely man is in loss, except those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on each other patience ().
Second: The original human nature, which feels pain from fire in this world, will not become inactive or null and void in the next world; otherwise they would not have felt pain or agony of fire, nor would have they desired to go forth from it.
وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِنَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ ٣٨ فَمَنْ تَابَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ظُلْمِهِ وَأَصْلَحَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحِيمٌ ٣٩
(5:38–39) And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their hands as a punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah; and Allah is Mighty, Wise. But whoever repents after his inequity and reforms (himself), then surely Allah will turn to him (mercifully); surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
“And” begins the new sentence, and here it stands for ammā (as for); that is why the predicate “cut off” has taken fā (then—not translated in English), as is usual for the clause which comes in reply of ammā; it is said by the exegetes. The word, aydi (hands) is plural, which in Arabic is used for at least three items, while here it means only two hands. It is said that such usage is common; some, rather many, organs in human body are double, like eyes, ears, hands, feet and legs; when two persons are involved the total of these organs comes to four, which demands plural, like their eyes, hands and legs, etc. The usage of plural spread to organs of two persons, even if the said organ was not double. For example, they say: ‘I covered the backs and stomachs [in plural] of the two with hitting.’ God says: If you both turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts [in plural] are already inclined ... (). “Hand” is used for the organ attached to shoulder; according to traditions here it refers to the right hand; cutting of hand means severing the whole or part of it with a sharp instrument.
The words: “as a punishment for what they have earned,” are apparently a circumstantial clause connected to the cutting, that is, while the cutting is a punishment from God for what they have earned; al-nakāl (exemplary punishment, meted out so as to make the culprit as well as the others desist from the crime.)
As the cutting of hand is an exemplary punishment, the statement quite appropriately follows it: “But whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms (himself), then surely God will turn to him (mercifully).” The meaning: As the cutting of hand is an exemplary punishment given with the aim of making the culprit desist in future from his crime, so whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms himself and does not think of stealing—and it is this factor by which repentance is established—then surely God will accept his repentance and turn to him with forgiveness and mercy, because He is Forgiving, Merciful. He says: Why should Allah chastise you if you are grateful and believe? And Allah is the Appreciator, Knowing ().
There are many other jurisprudential topics connected with this verse; interested readers should consult books of fiqh for them.
أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ يُعَذِّبُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَيَغْفِرُ لِمَنْ يَشَاءُ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ ٤٠
(5:40) Do you not know that Allah—His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth; He chastises whom he pleases; and forgives whom he pleases and Allah has the power over all things.
It gives the reason why He accepts the repentance of the stealing man and woman when they repent and reform themselves after their iniquity: To God belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth, and the King has full authority and power to decide about his kingdom and his subjects as he pleases—be it punishment or mercy. Therefore God has the power and authority to chastise whom He pleases and forgive whom He pleases, according to the underlying reason and wisdom—thus He chastises the stealing man and woman if they do not repent, and forgives them if they repent.
The end clause: “and God has power over all things,” explains the reason of the sentence: “His is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth”; Kingdom is an aspect of power while ownership emanates from creation and origination, that is, divine guardianship.
We may explain it as follows: God is the Creator and Originator of all things; there is nothing whose self and its effects do not belong to God. He is the Giver of what He gives and Withholder of what He withholds; He has power to do with every thing as He pleases—and it is the ownership. God says: Say: “Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the Subduer.” (). Allah is He besides Whom there is no god, the Ever-living, the Self-subsisting by Whom all subsist; slumber does not overtake Him nor sleep; whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His (). Also He has power to do with all the things whatever He pleases and intends; it is because everything begins from Him, and His decree is enforced and His will effective—and it is the kingdom and rulership on everything. Thus God is the Owner because everything subsists by Him, and is the King because He is Powerful, He is neither powerless nor pre-vented from enforcing His pleasure and will.
Examining Narrations
- [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from Abū Sālih from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, “There came to the Messenger of God, a group from Banū Dubbah, (who were) sick. So the Messenger of God said to them, ‘Stay with me; when you will recover, I shall send you in an expedition.’ They said, ‘Keep us out of Medina.’ So he sent them to the Ibili’s-Sadaqah, they drank its (camel’s) urine and ate from its milk. When they were cured and became strong, they killed three camel-herders. It (the news) reached the Messenger of God and he sent ʿAlī to them, and lo! They were in a valley wandering, unable to go out of it, near the land of Yemen. He captured them and brought them to the Messenger of God. Then this verse was revealed: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land; ...” (al-Kāfī)
Author’s comments: al-Shaykh has narrated it in al-Tahdhīb through his chain from Abū Sālih with minor difference; and al-Ayyāshī has narrated it in his al-Tafsīr from the same Imam and there is in it at the end the addition: So the Messenger of God chose to cut off their hands and feet on opposite sides.
This story is narrated in Sunnī collections of ahādīth (including al-Sihāh al-Sittah) with different chains and varying particulars. Some of those traditions say that the Messenger of God cut their hands and feet on opposite sides and gouged out their eyes; others say that he killed some of them and crucified some others and cut off and gouged out eyes of yet others; others tell us that he gouged out their eyes because they had gouged out the eyes of the camel-herders; still others say that God forbade him to gouge out the eyes, and that the verse was revealed admonishing him for this mutilation; some of them say that he wanted to gouge out their eyes but did not do so; etc.
However, the traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-bayt do not mention the gouging out at all.
- [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from ʿAmr b. ʿUthmān b. ʿUbaydullāh al-Madāinī from Abu al-Hasan al-Ridā that he was asked about the words of God; the Mighty, the Great: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be banished from the land. “What is it that when he does it he becomes liable to one of the four (punishments)? Then he (the Imam) said, ‘When he wages war against God and His Messenger and strives to make mischief in the land and kills someone, he will be killed; and if he kills and takes (other’s) property, he will be killed and crucified; and if he takes property without killing, his hand and foot will be cut off on opposite sides; and if he draws out sword, wages war against God and His Messenger and strives to make mischief in the land but does not kill and does not take property, he will be banished from the land.’ I said, ‘How will he be banished from the land and what is the limit of his banishment?’ He said, ‘He shall be banished from the town where he had done what he had done to another town, and it will be written to the people of that (another) town that he has been banished, so they should not sit with him, nor should they sell anything to him, establish marriage ties with him, or take food or drink with him; this will be done to him for a year; if he leaves that town for another town, the people of that town will be informed in similar terms, until the year comes to end. I said, ‘And if he proceeds to the land of polytheism to enter it?’ He said, ‘If he proceeds to the land of polytheism to enter it, its people will be fought against.’” (al-Kāfī)
Author’s comments: al-Shaykh in al-Tahdhīb and al-ʿAyyāshī in his al-Tafsīr have narrated it from Abū Ishāq al-Madāinī from the same Imam; and nearly-mutawātir traditions of this meaning have been narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-bayt. Also it has been narrated through various Sunnī chains; and some of their traditions say that it depends on Imam’s discretion, he shall kill if he pleases, and shall crucify if he pleases, and shall cut off hands and feet on opposite sides if he pleases, and shall banish if he pleases. Some Shīʾah traditions too likewise say that the Imam has the discretion. For example, see the tradition narrated in al-Kāfī from Jamīl b. Darrāj from al-Ṣādiq about this verse: He says: “I said, ‘What are they liable to form these prescribed punishments that God has named?’ He said, ‘It is up to Imam; he shall cut off if he pleases, and banish if he pleases, and crucify if he pleases, and kill if he pleases.’ I said, ‘Banishment, up to where?’ He said, ‘He shall be banished from one town to another;’ and said that ʿAlī had banished two men from Kūfah to Basrah.” Its details may be found in fiqh. However, the verse is not without a certain indication that there is a sequence in these laid down punishments according to the levels of disorder. The alternatives—killing, crucifying, cutting of hand and foot on opposite sides and banishment—are not on the same level, on a par; they greatly differ in intensity and degree, and this in itself is a rational proof of this sequential order.
Also, the verse clearly shows that these are the laid down punishments for waging such war and making mischief in the land; so whoever draws out a sword and strives to make mischief in the land or slays someone, he will have to be killed because he is a fighter against God and His Messenger and a mischief maker; it does not come under retribution, that is, he is not being killed because he has slew a respectable soul; so even if the heirs of the slain person agree to take blood-money, his punishment of killing is not waived. al-ʿAyyāshī has narrated in his al-Tafsīr from Muḥammad b. Muslim from Abū Jaʾfar a tradition which says, inter alia, “Abū ʿUbaydah said, ‘May God ameliorate you! (What) do you see if the heir of the slain person pardoned him (that is, the slayer)?’ Abū Jaʾfar said, ‘If they pardoned, then it is incumbent on the Imam to kill him, because he certainly had waged war, killed and stolen.’ Then Abū ʿUbaydah said, ‘Then if the heirs of the slain wanted to take blood-money from him and let him go free, do they have the right to do so?’ He said, ‘No. His (punishment) is to be killed.’”
- [al-Suyūtī] narrates from Ibn Abī Shaybah, ʿAbd b. Hamīd, Ibn Abi al-Dunyā (in Kitāb al-Ashrāf), Ibn Jarīr and Ibn Abī Hātim from al-Shaʾbī that he said, “Hārithah b. Badr al-Tamīmī, a resident of Basrah, had made mischief in the land and waged war; and he talked with some men from Quraysh to obtain from ʿAlī a promise of security for him, but they refused. Then he came to Saʾīd b. Qays al-Hamadānī. So he approached ʿAlī and said, ‘O Leader of the Faithful! What is the recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land?’ He said, ‘(It is) that they should be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite side, or they should be banished from the land.’ Then (the Imam) said, ‘Except those who repent before you have them in your power.’ Then Saʾīd said, ‘Even if it be Hārithah b. Badr.’ Thereafter, Saʾīd said, ‘This is Hārithah b. Badr; he has come repenting; is he then safe?’ [The Imam, a.s.], said, ‘Yes.’ So [Saʾīd] brought him to ʿAlī, and he did his bayʾah; and the Imam accepted it from him and wrote for him a warrant of safety.” (al-Durr al-manthūr)
Author’s comments: Saʾīd spoke the words, ‘Even if it be Hārithah b. Badr’, as an appendix he attached to the verse, with the aim of showing its unrestricted generality which covers everyone who repents after waging war and making mischief. Such additions are found generally in every speech.
- [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from Sawrah Banī Kulayb that he said, “I said to Abū ʿAbdillāh, ‘A man comes out of his house, proceeding to mosque or for some other work; another man meets him and going behind him, beats him and takes away his clothes?’ (The Imam) said, ‘What do they say about it those who are in your place?’ I said, ‘They say that it is open immorality; and war mongering happens in the towns of polytheists.’ He said, ‘Which has more sanctity, the house of Islam or the house of polytheism?’ I said, ‘The house of Islam.’ Then (the Imam) said, ‘Such people are covered by this verse: The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be killed ‘” (al-Kāfī)
Author’s comments: What the narrator has pointed out concerning the opinion of the people has been narrated in some Sunnī traditions. For example, al-Dahhāk has explained the reason of its revelation in these words: “This verse was revealed about the polytheists, and al-Tabarī has written in his al-Tafsīr that ʿAbd al-Malik b. Marwān wrote to Anas asking him about this verse. So Anas wrote to him: ‘Surely this verse was revealed about those people from the ʿArniyyīn, and they were from Bujaylah.’ Anas said, ‘Then they apostatized from Islam, killed the camel-herder, took away the camels, and spread terror in the way and committed adultery. So the Messenger of God asked Gabriel about the judgement regarding those who wage war. He said, “Whoever steals and spreads terror in the way and thinks unlawful hidden part as lawful, you crucify him.”’” There are several other traditions.
The verse, with its generality, supports the tradition of al-Kāfī; and it is known that reason or occasion of revelation does not restrict the apparent meaning of a verse.
- al-Qummī has written about the words of God: O you who believe! Fear Allah and seek means of nearness to Him ..., that (the Imam) said, “Come near God through the Imam.”
Author’s comments: That is, through obedience to the Imam. Thus it is based on the flow of the Qur’an, and applies the verse to its best import. A similar narrative has come from Ibn Shahrāshūb that he said, “The Leader of the Faithful, said about the divine word: and seek means of nearness to Him: ‘I am the means of nearness to Him.’” And nearer to it is the narration of Basāir al-darajāt, through his chains from Salmān from ʿAlī. Also possibly the two narratives may be a sort of interpretation. Ponder on it.
- Majmaʾ al-bayān quotes a tradition from the Prophet that he said, “Ask from God for me the wasīlah, as it is a rank in the Garden, will not get it except one servant, and I hope that I shall be him.”
- [al-Sadūq] narrates through his chain from Abū Saʾīd al-Khudrī that he said, “The Messenger of God, said, ‘When you ask from God, ask for me the wasīlah.’ We asked the Prophet about the wasīlah; so he said, ‘It is my rank in the Garden ...’” (It is a long narrative, known as the Hadīth of Wasīlah.)
If you meditate on this hadīth and as to how the meaning of the verse fits on it, you will find that wasīlah is the position of the Prophet in presence of his Lord, with which he gets nearer to God; and joins him there his pure progeny, then the good servants from among his ummah. And it has been narrated in some traditions narrated from them that verily the Messenger of God adheres to his Lord, and we adhere to him and you [the Shīʾahs] adhere to us.
And to this, returns what we have written concerning the two narratives of al-Qummī and Ibn Shahrāshūb that possibly they are a sort of interpretation. Probably God will help us to explain this theme in a more appropriate place further on.
- Appended to these traditions is the narration of al-ʿAyyāshī from Abū Basīr that he said, “I heard Abū Jaʾfar, saying, “Enemies of ʿAlī, they shall abide in the Fire; God has said: and they shall not go forth from it.”
- Tafsīr al-burhān writes about the verse: And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals cut off their hands, quoting ash-Shaykh who narrates in al-Tahdhīb through his chain from Abū Abraham that he said, “The hand of the thief will be cut and his thumb and palm left (intact), and his foot will be cut and his heel left (intact) so he shall walk with it.”
- [al-Shaykh] also narrates through his chain from Muḥammad b. Muslim that he said, “I said to Abū ʿAbdillāh, ‘In (theft of) how much will the thief’s hand be cut?’ He said, ‘In one-fourth of dīnār.’” He (Muḥammad) says, “I told him, ‘In two dirhams?’ He said, ‘In one-fourth of dīnār; whatever the value of dīnār may be.’” He (Muḥammad) says, “Then I said to him, ‘What do you think? One who steals less than one-fourth of a dīnār, will the name of thief apply to him? And is he in that condition, a thief before God?’ So he said, ‘Anyone who steals from a Muslim a thing which he owns and keeps preserved, the name, thief, will apply to him, and he is a thief before God, yet (his hand) shall not be cut off except in one-fourth of a dīnār or more; and if the hand of a thief were to be cut off in less than one-fourth of a dīnār you would have found the people in general amputated.’” (al-Tahdhīb)
Author’s comments: The words of the Imam, if the hand of a thief were to be cut off in less than one-fourth of a dīnār , indicate that this law of cutting of hand (with this condition) is a relief from God and His mercy towards His servants. This rule, that is, restriction of this order to the theft of one-fourth of a dīnār or more, is narrated through some Sunnī chains too; it has been narrated in al-Sahīh of al-Bukharī and al-Sahīh of Muslim through their chains from ʿÃishah that the Messenger of God said, “Will not be cut the hand of a thief except in one-fourth of a dīnār and more.”
- Samāʾah narrates from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, “When a thief is caught his middle of palm will be cut off, then if he returned (stole again) his leg will be cut off from middle of foot; then if he returned he will be put in prison; then if he stole in the prison, he will be killed.” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- Zurārah narrates from Abū Jaʾfar, (that he was asked) about a man who stole and his right hand was cut off, then he (again) stole and his left leg was cut off, and (now) he steals the third time? (The Imam) said, “The Leader of the Faithful, used to imprison him for ever, and he used to say, ‘I feel ashamed of my Lord that I should leave him without any hand with which he should cleanse himself and without any leg with which he should go for his needs.’ (The Imam then) said, ‘So when he cut the hand he cut it below the joint of fingers with the palm, and when he cut the leg he cut it below the ankle.’ (The Imam) said, ‘He did not think it proper to disregard any of the laid down punishments.’” (ibid.)
- Zarqān (companion and fast friend of Ibn Abī Duwād) said, “One day Ibn Abī Duwād returned from al-Muʾtasim’s presence and he was distressed. So I asked him about it. He said, ‘Today I wish that I had died twenty years earlier.’” He (Zarqān) said, “I told him, ‘Why?’ He said, ‘Because of what happened from this black, Abū Jaʾfar Muḥammad b. ʿAlī b. Moses, today in presence of Amīr al-muʾminīn al-Muʾtasim.’” (Zarqan says) “I said, ‘And how was it?’ He said, ‘A thief confessed to stealing and asked the caliph to cleanse him by punishing him according to the shariah. The caliph gathered jurisprudents in his presence and Muḥammad b. ʿAlī (too) was brought there. So (the caliph) asked us about the cutting (of hand), from which place it should be cut off.’ He (Ibn Abī Duwād) said, ‘I said, “From wrist, because God says regarding tayammum: and wipe your faces and your hands [];” and a group joined me in this (opinion); and some others said, “Rather it must be cut from elbow.” He (the caliph) asked, “And what is its proof?” They said, “Because when God said: and your hands up to elbows, regarding the washing (in wudūʾ), it proved that the limit of hand is up to elbow.”’ (Ibn Abī Duwād) said, ‘Then he turned towards Muḥammad b. ʿAlī and said, “What do you say about it, O Abū Jaʾfar!” He said, “The people have already spoken about it, Amīr al-muʾminīn!” He said, “Leave aside what they have said; what do you have (about it)?” He said, “Excuse me from it, Amīr al-muʾminīn!” He said, “I adjure you by God that you should tell (me) what you know about it.” He said, “Now that you have adjured me by God, I say that they have made a mistake in the sunnah; because cutting must compulsorily be at the joint of the fingers, and palm should be left (intact).” (The caliph) said, “And what is its proof?” He said, “The saying of the Messenger of God: sajdah is on seven organs: face and two hands and two knees and two feet; if his hand is cut off from wrist or elbow, he will not have a hand to do sajdah upon; and God, the Blessed, the High, says: And that the places of sajdah are Allah’s, that is, these seven organs on which sajdah is done: therefore call not upon any one with Allah [], and what is Allah’s is not cut off.” ‘ (Ibn Abī Duwād) said, ‘So al-Muʾtasim liked it (very much) and ordered the thief’s hand to be cut off from the fingers’ joint, below the palm.’ Ibn Abī Duwād said, ‘I was extremely shocked and wished that I were dead.’”
Ibn Abī Zarqān said that Ibn Abī Duwād then continued, “After the third day I went to Muʾtasim and said, ‘It is incumbent upon me to give sincere advice to Amīr al-muʾminīn; and I am going to tell him that because of which, I know, I shall enter the Fire.’ He said, ‘And what is it?’ I said, ‘When Amīr al-muʾminīn gathers in his presence jurisprudents and scholars of his subjects for a problem in a religious matter, and asks them about its law, and they tell him what they know of the order concerning it; and there are in that gathering his sons, commanders, ministers and secretaries; and people have heard that [question and answers] from behind his door; then he leaves aside the opinions of all of them because of one man’s opinion (in whose imāmah a group of this ummah believes, and claims that, that man has more right to this position than the caliph), then the caliph gives order according to that man’s opinion, instead of the jurisprudents’ order?’” (Ibn Abī Duwād) said, “So his color changed and he understood what I wanted to tell him; and said, ‘May God give you good reward for your sincere advice!’”
He said, “On the fourth day he ordered a certain man from among his minister-secretaries to invite [Muḥammad b. ʿAlī] to his house. He (the Imam) refused to accept and said, ‘You know that I do not attend your gatherings.’ He said, ‘I only invite you for a meal, and I love that you should step on my clothes (that is, carpets) and enter my house, so I should be blessed with your blessing; and so-and-so, son of so-and-so, a minister of the caliph, desires to meet you.’ So he went to his place; when he was offered the meal, he felt the pain of poison, and (at once) called for his riding animal. The host asked him to stay; he said, ‘My going out of your house is better for you.’ So he remained in agony the whole day and night until he died.” (ibid.)
Author’s comments: This story has been narrated through other chains too. We have copied the whole narration, in spite of its length (like some preceding repeated traditions) because it contains some deep Qur’anic discourses that may help in understanding of the Qur’anic verses.
- [al-Suyūtī] narrates from Ahmad, Ibn Jarīr, and Ibn Abī Hātim from ʿAbdullāh b. ʿUmar that a woman committed theft in the time of the Messenger of God, and her right hand was cut off. So she said, “Do I have repentance? O Messenger of God!” He said, “Yes. Today you are (free) from your sin like the day you were born of your mother.” Then God revealed the verse in the chapter of “The Table”: But whoever repents after his iniquity and reforms (himself), then surely Allah will turn to him (mercifully), surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
Author’s comments: The tradition is in the style of application and looks at the connection of the verse with the preceding one. Obviously, both verses were revealed together.
A place where camels—donated as sadaqah (alms-giving, etc.) to Bayt al-Māl—were kept. (Ed.) ↩︎