Dangane da lafazin ‘As-Saariq’ (ɓarawo), ma'anarsa a bayyane take, yayin da As-Saraqah (sata) bisa ga Shari'a shi ne: ‘Ɗaukar dukiyar da ake iya motsawa, mai daraja, wadda mallakar wani ce, a ɓoye daga wurin ajiya na al'ada (Hirz)’.
In respect to the Lafzh ‘As-Saariq’ (thief), its meaning is clear whilst As-Saraqah (theft) in accordance to the Shar’a is: ‘The taking of a movable property of a (certain) value owned by someone else covertly from a normal place of safekeeping (Hirz)’.
Kuma "hirz" shi ne wurin da dukiya take yawanci a sa a kuma ajiye ta a cikinsa lafiya.
And the Hirz is the place that property is normally put and kept safe in.
Sai dai malamai (Fuqahaa') sun sha banban a kan yadda za a yi amfani da wannan ma'ana a kan nau'ikan sata daban-daban waɗanda aka ba su sunaye daban-daban, kamar An-Nashl (satar aljihu), misali, wanda shi ne ɗaukar dukiya cikin sauri da ɓoyewa sosai daga aljihunan mutane.
However, the Fuqahaa’ differed in respect to the application of this meaning upon different forms of theft which have been given different (specific) names like An-Nashl (pickpocketing) for instance which is the taking of property quickly and in a highly covert manner from the people’s pockets.
Shin mai satar aljihu (nashshal) ɗan sata ne? Don haka ana buƙatar ijtihadi don sanin ko hukuncin sata (saraqah) ya shafi nashl (satar aljihu). Idan ya shafa, to hukuncin sata zai shafi mai satar aljihu, kuma za a yanke hannunsa idan sharuɗɗan laifin sata sun cika. Saboda haka, wasu malaman fiqhu sun ɗauki mai satar aljihu a matsayin ɗan sata wanda ya cancanci a yanke masa hannu, yayin da wasu ba su ɗauke shi haka ba, sai a yi masa hukuncin ta'zeer (hukuncin da alƙali ko shugaba zai tsara). Sun kuma sava wa juna game da mai tona kabari (nabbaash), wato wanda yake sace kafan mamaci ko abin da ke jikinsa. Shin irin wannan mutum ɗan sata ne ko a'a? Saboda haka, lafazin "sariq" (ɗan sata) a bayyane yake dangane da wajabcin yanke hannu ga kowane ɗan sata. Amma a lokaci guda yana da ɓoyayyen ma'ana dangane da mai satar aljihu da mai tona kabari, domin an ba su suna daban da na ɗan sata a cikin al'adar mutanen harshen. Hakan ya faru ne don a ƙara bayani ga ma'anar sata, domin shi yana sata daga wanda yake a faɗake, ba a hanyar ɓoye ba. Haka kuma, an ware mai tona kabari da suna daban saboda ma'anar sata ta ragu a gare shi, domin yana sata daga mamaci wanda ba ya nufin kiyaye dukiyarsa. Saboda haka, duk wannan yana da ɓoyayyen ma'ana dangane da lafazin "sariq". Don haka ana buƙatar ijtihadi domin a yi amfani da hukuncin ɗan sata a kan mai satar aljihu da mai tona kabari.
So is the Nash’shaal (pickpocket) a Saariq (thief)? Ijtihaad is therefore required to know whether the Saraqah (theft) applies to An-Nashl (pickpocketing). If it does apply, then the Hukm of Saraqah (thievery) would apply and the hand of the pickpocket would be cut if the Arkaan (pillars) of the crime of theft are met. Consequently, some of the Fuqahaa considered the pickpocket to be a Saariq (thief) and deserving of the cutting whilst others did not consider him to be so and as such a Ta’zeer (discretionary) punishment would be applied upon him as determined by the Qaadiy (judge) or the Imaam (ruler) would. They also differed in respect to the Nabbaash (grave robber) who is the one who robs the graves to take the shrouds or what is upon the dead. Is such a person a Saariq (thief) or not? Consequently, the Lafzh (wording) ‘Saariq’ is Zhaahir (apparent) in relation to the obligation of amputating the hand in regards to every Saariq. This is whilst it is, at the same time, Khafiy (unclear) in regards to the pickpocket and the grave robber because they have been specified with a name that is different to the thief within the ‘Urf (custom/tradition) of the people of the language. That is because specifying the pickpocket with another name has been done for the purpose of providing additional meaning to the Saraqah (theft). That is because he is stealing from the one who is alert and not upon the angle of hiddenness (Wajh Al-Khafiyah). In addition, the specifying of the name of the ‘Nabbaash’ (grave robber) is due to a decrease in respect to the meaning of the theft (Saraqah) because he is stealing from the dead who is not intending to safeguard or preserve his property. Consequently, all of this is Khafiy (unclear) in regards to the Lafzh (worded expression) of the ‘Saariq’ (thief). For that reason, Ijtihaad is required in order to apply the Hukm of the Saariq (thief) upon both the pickpocket and the grave robber.
Ra'ayin da na gani daidai a wannan batu shi ne, kalmar 'Saraqah' (sata) tana da ma'ana a cikin harshe. Nassi ya zo ne ana amfani da shi a kan wannan ma'ana wadda take da hakika bayyananniya kuma sananniya, alhali kuma ba a amfani da wannan ma'ana a kan An-Nashshaal da An-Nabbaash (mai satar aljihu da mai tono kabari) domin ba su zama Saariq ba. Saboda haka ana hukunta su da Ta'zeer (hukunci na hankali) wanda mai mulki ko alkali ya ga ya dace, a inda hukuncin zai zama abin hana wasu.
The correct view, as a I see it, in this issue, is that ‘Saraqah’ (theft) has a meaning in the language. The text has come to be applied upon this meaning that has a defined and known reality whilst this meaning is not applied upon the Nash’shaal and the Nabbaash (pickpocket and grave robber) because they are not Saariqs. They are therefore punished with a Ta’zeer (discretionary punishment) that the ruler or judge sees fitting, in the case where the punishment acts as a deterrent.