Why did the Prophet order to cut off the hands and feet of the people who killed the shepherd? > Narrated Anas bin Malik: Al-bukhari 5727 > > Some people from the tribes of Ukl and Uraina came to Allah's > Messenger (ﷺ) and embraced Islam and said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! > We are owners of livestock and have never been farmers," and they > found the climate of Medina unsuitable for them. So Allah's Messenger > (ﷺ) ordered that they be given some camels and a shepherd, and ordered > them to go out with those camels and drink their milk and urine. So > they set out, but when they reached a place called Al-Harra, they > reverted to disbelief after their conversion to Islam, killed the > shepherd and drove away the camels. When this news reached the Prophet > (ﷺ) he sent in their pursuit (and they were caught and brought). The > Prophet (ﷺ) ordered that their eyes be branded with heated iron bars > and their hands be cut off, and they were left at Al-Harra till they > died in that state.

As far as I know, hirabah is a hadd offense, and so I expect that it comes with a specific burden of proof. I'm unable to find sources that explain that burden of proof **Question:** what burden of proof do the different madhahib require for hirabah?

Sometimes I hear it claimed that rape is a cut-and-dry case of hirabah. Wikipedia lists [a few scholars who had this opinion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirabah#Rape) . All other scholars I'm aware of classify rape as *zina bil jabr*, literally "forced illegal intercourse". This is relevant from two perspectives: - the burden of proof for hirabah may be different than for zina (all scholars I'm aware of require the burden of proof for zina in rape cases, which is four witnesses or a confession; in contrast, at least Saudi Arabia is claimed to have a burden of proof of [two witnesses or a confession](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirabah#In_modern_legal_systems) for hirabah) - the punishment for hirabah is different from the punishment for zina and coercion I've seen the nuance mentioned that it matters whether the rapist used a weapon or not. My questions in this regard are these: **Questions:** - which major scholars from which schools of law classified rape under hirabah? - does the use of a weapon matter for the classification of rape as either zina or hirabah?