Is there a contradiction between the definition of theft and borrowing?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Is there a contradiction between the definition of theft and borrowing?
The Shaykh : What do you say?
The students: We did not hear.
The Shaykh : He says there is a contradiction between the definition of theft and borrowing, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) cut off the hand of the woman who was borrowing and denying it, and theft is taking wealth in a manner of concealment from its owner or his representative, is that right, O guide of Allah? Good, and borrowing has no such issue; borrowing is taking wealth with the permission of its owner.
I say: Many scholars have rejected taking the apparent meaning of the hadith and said: It is based on an omitted condition: she was borrowing the goods, so she stole them, and he ordered her hand to be cut off. But this is a weak opinion, because how can one omit from the hadith something that has an impact on the ruling, when the scholars of hadith have agreed that it is not permissible to abbreviate a hadith except by a scholar who understands its meaning, on the condition that what is omitted does not compromise what is mentioned? Here, if "so she stole them" is omitted, something with a profound impact on the ruling is omitted.
And the correct view is that we say the hand is cut off for denying a loan, whether it matches the definition of theft according to the jurists or falls outside of it by exception from the text of the Lawgiver, is that not so? Yes.
Moreover, some scholars say: The one who denies a loan is a thief who commits a hidden theft, and it is not possible to guard against him. How can one guard against a thief?
By closing doors and securing locks, but the borrower who came to you in need and you were kind to him, is it possible to guard against him?
Never, especially for those of noble souls who love good for others. If he comes to borrow from me and I give to him, is the reward for my kindness that he denies my loan?!
Furthermore, this cuts off kindness. From whom? From the borrower or the lender?
From the lender. People begin to prevent lending, because their loans are denied and taken from them.
So the conclusion is that the stronger opinion in this issue is that there is no omission in the hadith, and that denying a loan is a type of theft, indeed it is greater than theft because it is not possible to guard against it, unlike theft.
The Shaykh : What do you say?
The students: We did not hear.
The Shaykh : He says there is a contradiction between the definition of theft and borrowing, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) cut off the hand of the woman who was borrowing and denying it, and theft is taking wealth in a manner of concealment from its owner or his representative, is that right, O guide of Allah? Good, and borrowing has no such issue; borrowing is taking wealth with the permission of its owner.
I say: Many scholars have rejected taking the apparent meaning of the hadith and said: It is based on an omitted condition: she was borrowing the goods, so she stole them, and he ordered her hand to be cut off. But this is a weak opinion, because how can one omit from the hadith something that has an impact on the ruling, when the scholars of hadith have agreed that it is not permissible to abbreviate a hadith except by a scholar who understands its meaning, on the condition that what is omitted does not compromise what is mentioned? Here, if "so she stole them" is omitted, something with a profound impact on the ruling is omitted.
And the correct view is that we say the hand is cut off for denying a loan, whether it matches the definition of theft according to the jurists or falls outside of it by exception from the text of the Lawgiver, is that not so? Yes.
Moreover, some scholars say: The one who denies a loan is a thief who commits a hidden theft, and it is not possible to guard against him. How can one guard against a thief?
By closing doors and securing locks, but the borrower who came to you in need and you were kind to him, is it possible to guard against him?
Never, especially for those of noble souls who love good for others. If he comes to borrow from me and I give to him, is the reward for my kindness that he denies my loan?!
Furthermore, this cuts off kindness. From whom? From the borrower or the lender?
From the lender. People begin to prevent lending, because their loans are denied and taken from them.
So the conclusion is that the stronger opinion in this issue is that there is no omission in the hadith, and that denying a loan is a type of theft, indeed it is greater than theft because it is not possible to guard against it, unlike theft.