Azami 3980

Bukhari narrated it in the Book of Zakat (1466), and Muslim in the Book of Zakat (1000), both from the hadith of Amash, from Abu Waail, from Amr bin Harith, from Zaynab, wife of Abdullah, and I mentioned it in a long hadith, which is recorded in its place.Ibn Arabi said in his commentary on Tirmidhi (3/130-131), "Its apparent meaning is that there is no zakat due on jewelry, because of his saying to the women, 'Give charity even from your jewelry.' Had charity been obligatory on it, he would not have used it as an example for voluntary charity."Tirmidhi said after recording the hadith, "The scholars have differed on this matter. Some scholars among the companions of the Prophet ﷺ and the successors held that zakat is due on jewelry made of gold and silver, and this is the view of Sufyan Thawri and Abdullah bin Mubarak. Others among the companions of the Prophet ﷺ, including Ibn Umar, Ayesha, Jabir bin Abdullah, and Anas bin Malik, held that there is no zakat due on jewelry. This was likewise narrated from some of the jurists among the successors, and this is the view of Malik bin Anas, Shafii, Ahmad, and Ishaq."I say, the report from Ibn Umar was narrated by Malik in Muwatta in the Book of Zakat (11), from Nafi, from him, that he used to adorn his daughters and slave-girls with gold, and then would not pay zakat on their jewelry.The report from Ayesha was also recorded by Malik (10), from Abdul-Rahman bin Qasim, from his father, from Ayesha, that she used to be the guardian of her brother's orphaned daughters who were in her care and had jewelry, and she would not pay zakat on their jewelry.Malik said after recording these two reports, "As for raw gold and broken jewelry which its owner intends to repair and wear, it is like the household goods that belong to its owner, so its owner owes no zakat on it." He said, "There is no zakat due on pearls, musk, or ambergris."The report from Jabir bin Abdullah was recorded by Shafii, and from him Bayhaqi (4/138), from Amr bin Dinar, who said, I heard a man ask Jabir bin Abdullah about jewelry, "Is zakat due on it?" Jabir said, "No." The man said, "Even if it reaches a thousand dinars?" He said, "That is a lot."Ali bin Sulaym said, I asked Anas bin Malik about jewelry, and he said, "There is no zakat due on it."It is reported from Asma bint Abu Bakr that she used to adorn her daughters with gold worth nearly fifty thousand, and she would not pay zakat on it. This was recorded by Bayhaqi in Sunan al-Kubra (4/138).Judge Abu Walid Baji said in his commentary on the Muwatta, "This is a well-established view among the companions, and the most knowledgeable person about it was Ayesha , for she was the wife of the Prophet ﷺ, and his practice in this matter would not have been hidden from her. The same applies to Abdullah bin Umar, for his sister Hafsa was the wife of the Prophet ﷺ, and the matter of her jewelry would not have been hidden from the Prophet ﷺ, nor would his ruling on it have been hidden from her." Muntaqa (2/107).In the same vein is what was narrated from Jabir bin Abdullah as a raised hadith, "There is no zakat due on jewelry." Its chain of transmission is daif.Bayhaqi said in Marifah (6/144), "What is narrated from Afiyah bin Ayub, from Layth, from Abu Zubayr, from Jabir as a raised hadith, 'There is no zakat due on jewelry,' is baseless and has no foundation. It is only narrated as Jabir's own statement. Afiyah bin Ayub is unknown, so whoever cites it as a raised hadith has deceived himself regarding his religion, falling into what we criticize our opponents for, namely citing the reports of liars."I say, the matter is not as Bayhaqi said, for Afiyah bin Ayub is not unknown. Abu Zura was asked about Afiyah bin Ayub and said, "Abu Ubayda Afiyah bin Ayub is an Egyptian, there is no harm in him." Jarh wa Tadil (7/44).But the hadith is daif not because of him, rather because of the one who narrated from him, Ibrahim bin Ayub Juzjani. Al-Hafiz said in Lisan, "Abu Arab mentioned him in Duafa and quoted from Abu Tahir Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Uthman Maqdisi that he said, 'Ibrahim bin Ayub Hawrani is daif,' and Abu Tahir was among the people of critical analysis and knowledge of hadith in Egypt."The hadith has another defect, namely that it is a stopped report, and Ibn Abdul-Hadi pointed to this in Tanqih (3/67) and confirmed it as correct.Based on these hadiths and reports, the majority of scholars held that there is no zakat due on jewelry, and they likened it to household goods, because zakat is obligatory on growing wealth such as crops, trade, and livestock, whereas jewelry is like clothing, shoes, utensils, and the rest of household goods.Shafii held two views. In Baghdad, according to the report of Hasan bin Muhammad Zafarani, he said that there is no zakat due on jewelry if its owner makes use of it in a permissible manner.The second view, he said, "This is a matter about which I seek Allah's guidance," and he left the question unanswered.The view of Malik and his companions did not differ, that there is no zakat due on jewelry worn by women.This was also the view of Saeed bin Musayab, Qasim bin Muhammad, Amir Shaybi, Yahya bin Saeed, Rabia, and most of the people of Madinah, from among the successors and those after them.Abu Ubayd said, "Jewelry that constitutes capital and property is like furnishings, and it is not like silver currency, concerning which it has been established in the sunnah that a quarter of a tenth is taken."See further, Istidhkar (9/69-70).