Is amputation required for the one who denies possession of a borrowed item (*Jahid al-'Ariyah*)?

Primary text

There is a difference of opinion transmitted from Ahmad regarding the denial of a borrowed item. One narration attributes to Ahmad and Ishaq the ruling that amputation is required, based on the narration of Aisha concerning a woman who borrowed items and then denied possession, leading the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, to order her hand amputated after her plea for mercy was rejected, where the Prophet stated: "By Him in Whose Hand is my soul, even if Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, were to commit theft, I would cut off her hand." This narration is agreed upon. However, the sounder opinion, according to the jurists, is that there is no amputation for denying possession of a loan, based on the statement: "There is no amputation for the betrayer." Denying possession is considered a form of betrayal, akin to denying a deposit (*Wadi'ah*). The woman whose hand was cut was punished for theft, not solely for denial, as indicated by the context of the hadith regarding the noble and the weak being treated equally under the law.