Question # 491: I had a discussion with my friend on Zakah on jewelry. According to her we should give Zakah on jewelry if it exceeds Nisaab. But I was told by a scholar that there is no Zakah for ornaments kept for use. I want to know the correct opinion. JZK.
bismi-llahi r-raḥmani r-raḥīm,
Assalamu ‘laikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,
All praise and thanks are due to Allah (سبحانه و تعالى), and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger (صلى الله عليه و سلم).
First of all, we implore Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) to help us serve His cause and render our work for His sake.
Shorter Answer: There is a difference of opinion among scholars with respect to the Zakah on jewelry. According to the majority of the Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali, ornaments and jewels used by a woman are not subject to Zakah as long as she uses them as an adornment irrespective of the frequency of use and they are not intended for keeping as treasure or trading; however, the Hanafi scholars necessitate paying Zakah if the gold/silver has reached the minimum legal amount (nisaab) and a full Islamic lunar year has passed. Nonetheless, even though the view of the majority of the scholars is the most preponderant opinion, it is better to pay Zakah on jewelry to be on the safe side and avoid the difference of opinion. Moreover, there is no sahih hadith which excludes it (jewelry) from zakah. Lastly, the zakah need not be paid from the jewelry itself, rather it is sufficient to give the equivalent value each time a year passes, according to the value of gold and silver in the market when the year is completed.
Long Answer: The scholars of Islam differed in opinion concerning Zakah on ornaments and jewels used by women.
The majority of the Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali scholars are of the view that [ornaments and jewels used by a woman are not subject to Zakah] as long as she uses it as an adornment regardless whether she wears it daily or on special occasions [(and they are not intended for trading.] This opinion is reported from five companions of the Prophet who all said: “There is no Zakah in the woman’s jewelry.” Ibn Qudamah said: “There is no Zakah for the jewelry of a woman if she wears it or loans it out; this is the dominant view of the (Hanbali) School. This is narrated from Ibn ‘Umar, Jabir, Anas, ‘Aa’ishah and Asmaa’ (رضي الله عنهم). This is also the view of Al-Qasim, Ash-Sha‘bi, Qatadah, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali, ‘Amrah, Maalik, Ash-Shafi‘i, Abu ‘Ubayd, Ishaq and Abu Thawr.” This is the most preponderant opinion.
Some scholars, [who] said that there was no zakah to be paid on it, because by using it in a permissible manner, it becomes like clothing and other items, and is not like a product that has a commercial value. They responded to the general meaning of the ayah [Soorah al-Tawbah, 9:34] by pointing out that the practice of the Sahabah excluded gold that was used for adornment. [The following ahadith is noteworthy in this regard:]
- It was reported with a saheeh isnad that ‘Aa’ishah (رضي الله عنها) used to look after her brother’s orphaned daughters in her apartment. They had gold jewelry but she did not pay zakah on it. Al-Daaraqutni narrated with his isnad from Asmaa’ bint Abi Bakr (رضي الله عنها) that she used to adorn her daughters with gold jewelry, and she did not pay zakah on it, (although its value was) nearly fifty thousand. (Sunan al-Daaraqutni)
- Abu ‘Ubayd said in his book al-Amwal: “Isma’il ibn Ibrahim told us, from Ayyub, from Naafi’, from Ibn ‘Umar, that he would marry one of his daughters for ten thousand (as mahr), of which he would make her jewelry four thousand, and they did not pay zakah on that.” (A similar report was narrated by al-Daaraqutni; Abu ‘Ubayd in al-Amwaal: al-Bayhaqi)
- He said: “Isma’il ibn Ibrahim told us, from Ayyub, from ‘Amr ibn Deenaar, who said: ‘Jabir ibn ‘Abd-Allah was asked, “Is there any zakah on jewelry?” He said, “No.” He was asked, ‘What if it reaches (the amount of) ten thousand?” He said, “That is a lot.”’” (Narrated by al-Shafi’i in al-Musnad (edited by al-Sindi); al-Umm; also narrated by Abu ‘Ubayd in al-Amwal: al-Bayhaqi)
The other opinion states that such ornaments and jewels are subject to Zakah as long as their value equals 85 grams of gold and one possessed them for one lunar year… This is narrated by ‘Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, ‘Abdullah Ibn Massoud, Ibn ‘Abbas and others (رضي الله عنهم). According to Imam Abu Hanifa, …it is compulsory to give the Zakah of gold even if it used by the woman for ornament. This is also the opinion of some contemporary Muslim scholars who took the following ahadith …as their evidence:
- It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (رضي الله عنها), the wife of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم), said: The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه و سلم) entered upon me and I was wearing rings of silver on my hand. He said: “What is this, O ‘Aa’ishah?” I said: “I made them to adorn myself for you, O Messenger of Allah.” He said: “Have you given zakah on them?” I said: “No.” He said: “The punishment for them in Hell is enough for you.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, classed as saheeh by al-Albani)
- It was narrated from ‘Amr ibn Shu’ayb, from his father, from his grandfather, that a woman came to the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه و سلم) and she had a daughter of hers with her. On her daughter’s hand were two thick bracelets of gold. He said to her: “Have you given the zakah on these?” She said: “No.” He said, “Would you like Allah to make you two bracelets of fire on the Day of Resurrection because of these?” So, she took them off and gave them to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) and said: “They are for Allah and His Messenger.” (Narrated by Abu Dawood and al-Nasa’i; classed hasan by al-Albani)
- It was narrated that Umm Salamah said: “I used to wear jewelry of gold, and I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, is this kanz (money, the Zakah of which has not been paid)?’ He said, ‘Whatever reaches the amount at which zakah is obligatory, then pay the zakah. Then it will not be kanz.’” (Narrated by Abu Dawood, classed da’eef)
The ahadith of ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas, ‘Aa’ishah and Umm Salamah quoted above mention this, and these are jayyid ahadith with no valid criticism concerning their isnads, so we should act upon them. Although al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Hazm regarded them as da’eef, there is no solid evidence for this, as far as we know. We should note that al-Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) may be excused for what he said because he quoted the hadith of ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Amr with a da’eef isnad, but it was narrated by Abu Dawood, al-Nasa’i, and Ibn Majah with a different, sahih, isnad, which al-Tirmidhi probably did not discover.
The opinion of the majority of the scholars –Allah knows best –is the more predominant one, since such wealth will not increase and it is intended for personal use.
Nonetheless, even though the view of the majority of the scholars is the most preponderant opinion, it is better to pay Zakah on jewelry if one is well-off in order to be on the safe side and in order to fulfill the rights of the poor. However, if a woman, as mentioned by an-Nawawi in al-Majmoo’ and Ibn Qudaamah in al-Mughni, keeps such jewelry as a treasure or trade, then she has to pay Zakah. [Moreover, there is no sahih hadith which excludes it (jewelry)…]
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “…The zakah need not be paid from the jewelry itself, rather it is sufficient to give the equivalent value each time one year passes, according to the value of gold and silver in the market when the year is completed.” (Fataawa Islamiyyah)
On the other hand, if a man adorns himself with a golden ring or the like, or adorns himself with silver other than a ring, then he has to pay Zakah on that ornament, since this practice is forbidden.
(The above reply is based on various answers on similar topics provided by:
- Islamqa.info; and
- Islamweb.net, a web site belonging to the Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs in the State of Qatar)
Allahu A’lam (Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) knows best) and all Perfections belong to Allah, and all mistakes belong to me alone. May Allah (سبحانه و تعالى) forgive me, Ameen.