What is your opinion regarding the statement of Shaykh Abu Bakr al-Jaza'iri that zakah on jewelry (worn gold) is not obligatory?

The questioner : I heard of a man named Abu Bakr al-Jaza'iri. I really like him in his tafsir, his wording, and the gentleness of his speech. You must have heard of him and know him. He speaks about women's gold jewelry by telling you that this, whether it is jewelry for a woman, whether she wears it on an occasion, meaning once, twice, or three times a year, no zakah is paid on it. But he says, do not take from me and say that this is the one who used to pay and now does not. He said to them, but also, if you pay the zakah, that is better, and if you pay charity on its behalf, as some scholars say. He said some of the Companions and the Tabi'un... that many of them said there is no zakah, and he named some names regarding the fact that there is no zakah in jewelry, as long as she adorns herself with it. It is like household items, like the house's carpets and rugs. She has sofas, meaning this jewelry that the woman has is considered jewelry, so she uses it and needs it. So, what is your opinion of his words, and his words where he said, do not say, by Allah, that I am different. He said you must pay the zakah and speak about it, and I say you do not pay the zakah. I say that zakah is not obligatory on it. But if you pay, by Allah, that is better. But do not burden the one who said yes and the one who said no. So, I was very pleased with this speech that he uttered. Of course, he narrated it in a better form than the one I narrated. So, what is your opinion of what Abu Bakr al-Jaza'iri said?

The Shaykh : My opinion, Abu 'Uthman, is known, I think.

The questioner : His method of expression and what he says about the ruling...

The Shaykh : What concerns me is not the method, what concerns me is the style. If it satisfies both parties, or if it brings the explicit legal evidence that this gold is excluded from all gold and that there is no zakah on it, that is one aspect. And from another aspect, regardless of the explicit hadiths that zakah is obligatory on women's jewelry; and that when the Messenger of Allah was asked, "Does the woman pay zakah?" she said, "No." He answered, peace be upon him, that it is a brand of fire. So, I am not concerned with the style that ignores the goal. But if we combine good style with the correctness of the goal, that is the highest thing that can come from a scholar. As for beautiful, honeyed words that have no legal evidence beneath them obligating what he says, he speaks in this issue as the doctors of the end times do. They present the different opinions in the same issue and say, "And each has its face, so you take this opinion and this, take the second opinion, and they are all seeking from the Messenger of Allah," so they claim, do you see? Or by way of a joke, which is the conclusion of the session, they claimed that one of the muftis needed to travel, so he left his father in his place and in his stead, and he was ignorant. He appointed him in his place to issue fatwas to the people. So he said to him, "O my son, I am an ignorant man as you know." He said to him, "I will show you a method..."