Usually, we hear on television regarding the rulings of zakah that zakah is not obligatory on a woman for the gold she wears as adornment, so please clarify this issue for us?

The questioner: Excuse me, Shaykh, I mentioned that women’s gold is subject to obligatory zakah. Usually, we hear on television regarding the rulings of fasting in the blessed month of Ramadan that they do not permit this matter.

The Shaykh : What is it?

The questioner: They do not permit it.
The student: They do not make it obligatory.

The questioner: They do not make zakah on gold obligatory for women, so please give a brief clarification, may Allah reward you.

The Shaykh: A brief clarification, if Allah wills. Of course, when you say "brief," you mean "concise," whereas "simple" actually means "lengthy."
The student: Because if we were to sit until morning, we would not...

The Shaykh: First, it is obligatory for every Muslim to have a fixed principle in his mind: there are two principles. One of them, and no one doubts it, is that it is the nature of human beings to differ. It is the nature of human beings to differ, and this is not necessarily a sign of being corrupt; rather, it is also the nature of righteous people to differ. The greatest example of this is our righteous predecessors (the Salaf), whom we follow, whose methodology we adopt, and whom we make intermediaries between us and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in conveying to us the Sunnah of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in its three categories: speech, action, and approval. This righteous Salaf differed, so what can be said of those who came after them? They must differ, and this is what our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) indicated, indeed stated explicitly, in His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He): Since the righteous Salaf differed on few or many issues, and we have no need to give examples, I think that each of you must have at least one example in his mind. So, let me return to reminding you of the other principle: since it is the nature of human beings to differ, what is the position of the Muslim regarding this difference? The second principle is stated explicitly in the Noble Qur'an when the Lord of the Worlds said: And if?
The student: If you dispute.

The Shaykh: And if you doubt, with the letter "fa," if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you are believers in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best and the fairest interpretation. So, our Lord (Mighty and Majestic), who informed us in the previous verse that the Ummah will differ, therefore He provided them with an exit and said: A very important condition . So, if you hear a disagreement on a certain issue, and this issue is like the question of whether zakah is obligatory on women’s jewelry, you must demand evidence from both disputing parties, so that you are in accordance with His saying (the Exalted) regarding arbitration and referring to Allah and the Messenger, and so that you are as He (Mighty and Majestic) said: , and so that the Muslim does not live in ignorance, like a wandering sheep that does not know what this enclosure is or what that is, but rather walks with certainty and insight. So now, you mentioned that on some radio stations they say there is no zakah; what is the evidence? You must ask and not be satisfied with any person who says it is obligatory or not obligatory, but rather—if you have a capacity for jurisprudential understanding—to know the evidence of each of the disputing parties. After reminding you of these two principles, I say: those who say that there is no zakah on gold or silver jewelry have two bases and two proofs. The first is the original principle: the original ruling for all wealth is that zakah is not obligatory on it except by explicit text. And a second thing is that there are some hadiths: that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saw jewelry on the hands of some women and said to her: . She said: No. He said: . Those who follow the first school of thought say that this hadith is not authentic, and they may support this with some other things, such as "that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saw jewelry on some women, but he did not order her to pay zakah, rather he ordered her to throw it away"; they say that since he did not order it, then there is no zakah on it. When confronted with the explicit hadith I mentioned earlier, they doubted its authenticity.
And by that I mean a critique of verification and weakening. This science was deprived of its due right regarding the scholars of the Muslims who served the Islamic sciences in every way, except for this science, in which, in every time and every era, and not in every place, very few individuals who mastered the science of verification and weakening have excelled. Therefore, to this day, the Muslims have inherited a lack of interest in this science of verification and weakening. And for that reason, they take the hadith from the nearest path, especially if that path agrees with the narrow sectarianism they have lived with, and they do not proceed to the wide space that commands the Muslim to take his knowledge from all scholars of the Muslims without committing to one imam for whom he shows fanaticism, taking his knowledge and boycotting the knowledge of the other imams. What I want to conclude is that there are explicit and authentic hadiths that order the women whom the Messenger (peace be upon him) saw adorned, not only with gold but also with silver, to pay zakah. And the hadiths that do not contain the order to pay zakah, which those who say it is not obligatory hold onto, are based on the original state of innocence, meaning: based on the original ruling, meaning before the legislation of zakah on this type of jewelry. This is the summary of what should be mentioned for this blessed night, if Allah wills. And let me conclude with his saying (peace be upon him): the expiation of the gathering is that the Muslim says: .