And if the value of the stolen item decreases, or if the thief takes possession of it, the amputation is not waived

The Shaykh : He says "And if the value of the stolen item decreases, or if the thief takes possession of it, the amputation is not waived" This means that this thief stole an item that was worth a quarter of a dinar or three dirhams according to the school of thought, but when he was brought before the judge, its value had dropped so that it was worth less than a quarter of a dinar. Is the criterion the time of bringing the case to the judge, or is it the time of the theft? It is the latter. Therefore, he said that if the value decreases, meaning at the time of bringing the case to the judge, the amputation is not waived, because when he stole it, he stole the minimum threshold (nisab). For example, he stole a pen worth a quarter of a dinar, and when he was brought before the judge, the pen was worth only an eighth of a dinar because the price dropped, or because the pen broke, or something similar. In this case, the amputation is not waived; rather, the amputation remains. Likewise, "or if the thief takes possession of it". His statement "takes possession of it" appears, on the surface of his words, to refer to the value, because he said "if the value of the stolen item decreases", meaning the value. But that is not the case; rather, the meaning is "or if he takes possession of it," meaning he takes possession of the stolen item itself, in which case the amputation is not waived. For example, a man stole a garment from someone worth a quarter of a dinar. After stealing it, he took possession of it by going to the owner and buying it from him. Here, if the owner demands his property and brings the case to the judge, the amputation is not waived. But if he has not brought the case to the judge, the amputation is waived. This is not because he took possession of it, but because one of the conditions for amputation is that the one from whom it was stolen demands his property. If he sells it or gives it as a gift, the demand is waived at that time, and the amputation is waived. To summarize: if the value of the stolen item decreases after bringing the case to the judge, the amputation is not waived; he is amputated. If he takes possession of the stolen item, the amputation is also not waived. But if he takes possession of it before bringing the case to the judge, the amputation is waived. This is not because he took possession of it, but because one of the conditions for amputation is that the one from whom it was stolen demands his property. The evidence that this is a condition for amputation is the hadith of Safwan ibn Umayyah regarding the story of the man who stole his cloak. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered his hand to be amputated, but Safwan said, "It is his, O Messenger of Allah." Then he said This indicates that if he does not demand it, there is no amputation.