﴾ “Whosoever kills a person unless to retaliate for a murder...

﴾ “Whosoever kills a person unless to retaliate for a murder or for corruption done in the land, it shall be as if that person has killed all people…” [^1] Of course, in view of this a thief that strips the society of its property and security must experience severe punishment, the visualization of which will prevent them from encroaching upon the sanctity of the society’s property. Must mercy be shown with regard to punishment of a thief?

The second issue is Islam’s decree that the hand of a thief must be severed. That which is understood from Islamic decrees regarding retaliation or retribution in kind [qisās] is that, regarding punishment, the harm inflicted by an offender upon the offended is appraised and inflicted upon the offender, in order that it be a penance for their act and a lesson for others.

Surely, a felony, the essence of which is ruination of half the life of the victims (the effort put in to secure one’s livelihood), cannot be resolved with a fine—great or small—or a few months in prison. The best testimony to this fact is that execution of such punishments has not had the least effect in preventing this corruption. In Islam—as per the real value—one hand of a thief, which is approximately equivalent to half their life efforts, is severed.

This shows the baselessness of a series of criticisms by our own alleged intellectuals. Unfortunately, just as theft has completely ruined economic security in our country like a contagious disease, this blight has deeply rooted itself into our intellectual environment and correct intellectual concepts are being stolen from us!

These highbrows ask, “Why should a human individual who must struggle for their own welfare using their God-given hands until the final moment of their life and must solve their problems by their own able hands, be rendered helpless to the end of their life by losing their hand because of a mistake necessitated by economic need?” The essence of this criticism is acquiescence to the offence and solving the problem by arousing pity and human sympathy.

In other words, “It is true that the thief has committed a felony; however, seeing that economic pressure usually forces this offence upon noble humans, pity and compassion prevents us from making them wretched forever by cutting off their hand.” The mistake in this logic is abundantly clear. It is true that there is no problem in abiding by one’s emotions regarding personal rights.