What is the ruling on one who stole his father's money, and from the money that his grandmother and sister entrusted to his father? Is his act considered theft or embezzlement if he took money from the safe after being assigned to retrieve it from there? And should his hand be cut off if the total of his thefts reaches the nisab, but no single theft reached it? Knowing that he confessed and they forgave him.

The hadd punishment is not to be implemented except by the ruler or his deputies, not by individuals. Hudud punishments are not obligatory merely by the act itself, but only after they are established before the ruler through evidence or confession. The perpetrator is not obligated to inflict the hadd upon himself. Furthermore, the majority of scholars do not consider amputation for a son who steals from his father's wealth, due to the obligation of the father to provide for him and his inheritance from the father. Also, because he has the right to enter his father's house. All these are shubuhat (doubts) that avert the hadd from him. It is also a condition for the nisab (definition) (minimum amount) in theft that the entire wealth be stolen at once. If it is stolen in separate instances, then there is no amputation for him.