On the Obligation of Zakah in Trade Goods

The questioner : ... regarding the obligation of zakah in trade goods, and the other opinion, after establishing permissibility, holds that zakah is obligatory in general, without the conditions of a lunar year or trading intent. The majority of scholars hold that zakah is obligatory with a lunar year and trading intent. The question is that we want to clarify this issue in light of the Book and the Sunnah and the understanding of the pious predecessors of this issue, so that we may emerge with our hearts certain of this correct opinion?

The Shaykh : All praise is due to Allah; we praise Him, seek His help, and seek His forgiveness. We seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our own souls and from the badness of our deeds. Whomsoever Allah guides, none can mislead, and whomsoever He misleads, none can guide. And I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah alone, with no partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger. As for what follows:
It is known to all scholars without exception that the original ruling regarding wealth, as it is regarding blood and private parts, is that it is forbidden (haram), and that it is not permissible to impose any of these three matters except by an explicit text from the Book of Allah or from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), or by a certain consensus of the scholars of the Ummah. In what I have known and looked into and come upon, I did not find evidence from ... to these three sources for what the majority of scholars, both early and late jurists, have held regarding the obligation of zakah on trade goods with the two conditions mentioned earlier in the question, namely that it reaches the nisab first, and then that a lunar year passes over it secondly. And a third thing they say is that if these two conditions are met in any of the trade goods, it is necessary to appraise these goods at the end of every year after the lunar year has passed. After the appraisal, two and a half percent is paid out of the estimated value, as is the case with the zakah of the two types of currency. We did not find such a detailed ruling explicitly stated, as we mentioned earlier, in the Book and the Sunnah and the consensus of the Ummah. Since the original ruling is what we have mentioned, our position is one of prohibition against imposing zakah on trade wealth in a manner and with restrictions for which no mention has come in any of those sources. However, it is not hidden from any researcher or scholar that there are general texts commanding the payment of zakah and the purification of souls by paying zakah; these are general texts. Then there are specific texts that clarified what are the things upon which zakah is obligatory, and what are ... that are obligatory, whether they relate to the two types of currency, as mentioned earlier, or relate to some of the domestic animals such as sheep, cattle, and camels, or relate to some of the fruits and the like.
There are texts that clarify what is obligatory regarding these types, so we say: we adhere to these texts and apply them, and we do not add to them by using reasoning or analogical reasoning, because there is something that prevents that, namely the principle I mentioned at the beginning of this talk. Especially since some hadiths confirm this principle, such as the hadith of Mu'adh ibn Jabal (may Allah be pleased with him) when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) sent him to Yemen as a caller, a bringer of good news, and a teacher. He said to him (peace and blessings be upon him): He mentioned wheat, barley, dates, and raisins. So his saying "do not take" confirms that rule: the default ruling regarding wealth is prohibition and restriction, except where there is an explicit text. This is joined by other hadiths that state this explicitly, for example, in the hadith agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim, which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): ... the hadith continues until his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): He also said (peace and blessings be upon him), and the hadith is in the two Sahihs. Therefore, when some merchants from Sham came to 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) with horses for sale for trade, they said to him: "O Commander of the Faithful, take their zakah." He said (may Allah be pleased with him): "My two predecessors did not do that". They persisted, and he persisted. 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was present in the assembly and said: "O Commander of the Faithful, take it from them as a type of voluntary charity." He took it, and their hearts were pleased. This is evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) [ruled that there is no zakah on horses]. The hadith is in Musnad al-Imam Ahmad, and it clarifies that there is no zakah on horses that are raised and sold for the purpose of trading, just as he (peace and blessings be upon him) made zakah obligatory on the other animals mentioned earlier, such as sheep, cattle, and camels. This concludes my explanation in answer to that question. However, many contemporary jurists, if not most of those who study jurisprudence, because most of these contemporaries have not studied jurisprudence in the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but if they have studied it, they have studied it by what they read in the traditional, school-based fiqh books that require the reader and the student to adhere to them without knowing the evidence of their authors. The best of these are those who study the four schools of jurisprudence, which is what is called today comparative jurisprudence. They read the opinion of this school and that school, live in the differences, and then transmit the opinion of each school along with the evidence that the school mentions, without studying these evidence in light of the scientific principles of hadith or the principles of jurisprudence. For example, they do not apply at all the principles of jurisprudence such as general and specific, absolute and restricted, and the like, which they may have read in the science of principles and studied, and perhaps killed it with theoretical research, but they have not applied it practically. Likewise, regarding the other principle, which is the principle of the science of hadith and its principles: for example, when they transmit the evidence for each opinion or school, they do not build upon it scientific verification, saying "this hadith is authentic," "this is good," "this is weak," and the like. What they fall into today, because of the ease of what they go to and fall into, is that they consider what they call public benefit, which excuses them from exerting themselves and applying the scientific principles mentioned earlier. Then, if they consider public benefit, what do they consider? The benefit of the poor or the benefit of the rich? The benefits related to both parties are only one benefit. The Wise Lawgiver has seen the benefit of both parties, and this is the difference between the ruling of the Wise Lawgiver and the opinion of those who use their own reasoning and opinion. I also want to draw attention to this, and one more thing, and I hope it is the last. These people who use their own reasoning and opinion, and who look into the benefit of the poor and the needy, look at the issue we are discussing with one eye. Here is the explanation: they say it is not in the interest of the poor and the needy, nor does the wisdom of the Most Wise of the Wise indicate that a man who has millions in the value of trade goods should not have zakah imposed on them, for in that is the deprivation of the poor and the needy from obtaining their known right mentioned in the general saying of Allah the Exalted: My answer to this is from two aspects, and perhaps we will finish explaining them and end our discussion of this issue to receive any difficulties, doubts, or objections that may come to us. The first answer is that we adhere to the general principle mentioned at the beginning of the talk. We say: it is obligatory for these rich people with trade goods to pay zakah from them themselves to achieve the intended purpose for which zakah was made obligatory in all its types and forms, as our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) indicated in the Noble Qur'an by His saying: So every rich person who has trade goods must purify himself from what his soul has brought him, which is stinginess, as He (Mighty and Majestic) said: He must purify himself from this stinginess by giving what his soul is pleased with, which is the obligatory zakah, so that he purifies himself from the filth of miserliness and stinginess. This is the first answer. So let no one understand that there is absolutely no zakah on the rich with trade goods, because our discussion is that there is no *regulated* zakah on them, as explained at the beginning of the talk. As for absolute zakah, it is necessary, as Allah the Exalted said: This right has an absolute part that applies in its absoluteness, and a restricted part as explained in the Sunnah and in the books of jurisprudence as well, with disagreement among them in some branches. As for the other matter, I say, and reality confirms it, that among the wisdom of the Most Wise of the Wise is that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) made a specific zakah obligatory on hoarded wealth with a known threshold, as long as this wealth is hoarded, and He did not make such a zakah obligatory on this wealth that was hoarded and then turned into trade goods. In that is a profound wisdom, because the greatest benefit for the poor and the needy, and indeed for the Muslim community as a whole, is realized after imposing this regulated zakah on these trade goods more than on hoarded wealth. The evidence is that when this hoarded wealth turns into trade, it moves these funds and employs the poor and the needy, so their benefit is first greater than the percentage imposed on hoarded gold or silver. Then, may Allah have mercy on you, it becomes purer and more noble for them, as indicated by him (peace and blessings be upon him) in the well-known hadith: And as he said in the well-known hadith: So the transformation of hoarded wealth into trade goods is more beneficial for the poor and more noble for them, because they take it by the labor of their hands. This is what I have, and now we listen to what you have.

The questioner : Please proceed.