Continuation of the explanation of the author's statement: "In the case of anything other than the tenth, except for the offspring of grazing livestock and the profit of trade, even if it does not reach the nisab. If the two reach the nisab, their hawl is the hawl of the original capital; if not, it is from the completion of the capital."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said, regarding what is excluded from the requirement of a hawl: "Except for the offspring of grazing livestock and the profit of trade, for their hawl is the hawl of the original capital if it is a nisab, or from the completion of the capital if it is not." "The offspring of grazing livestock" means their young, and the profit of trade is well known. So, if their hawl is the hawl of the original capital if it is a nisab, or from the completion of the capital if it is not. Suppose a person has half a nisab—we are explaining this now—if it is assumed that he has half a nisab and six months have passed, and then it becomes a full nisab, and after three months he profits an amount equal to a nisab, when does the hawl begin? Is it from when he first owned it, or after six months from when the nisab was completed? It is the latter, meaning the hawl begins from the time the nisab was completed until twelve months have passed, at which point he pays its zakah. As for the profit, it follows the original capital; it follows it from the time it became a nisab. As for what is gained by means other than profit, such as a man inheriting money or being given a gift, or a woman owning the mahr or the like, this is not added to the money he has for the purpose of the hawl, because it is independent and not a branch of it. So, if it is assumed that a person owns money that he acquired in the month of Muharram, reaching the nisab, and in the month of Rabi' al-Thani a relative dies and he inherits from him, is it added to the first amount for the hawl or not? It is not added, because it is not a branch of it. This is new, independent money.
Now, if the inheritance is less than the nisab, the inheritance he received in the month of Rabi' is less than the nisab, is it added to the first amount to complete the nisab, and is the hawl started from the time he owned it, or not? The scholars say it is added to complete the nisab but not added for the hawl. Is this a known statement or not? There is no known statement, it appears so, yes, now, there is no contradiction.
He owned a nisab in the month of Muharram, the Muharram between Dhul Hijjah and Safar, is this known or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is known. He owned a nisab in the month of Muharram, and in the month of Jumada al-Thani, which is after six months have passed, he inherited new money. Is the hawl based on the first amount or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is not based on the first amount. Why? Because it is independent and requires a year to pass over it. Now, is it based on the first amount for the nisab? Meaning, if the inheritance he received is less than the nisab, is it added to the first amount and zakah becomes obligatory on it, but it is not obligatory until its hawl is complete?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : The answer is yes. So, the money gained is not added to what he has for what? For the hawl. And it is added to what he has for the nisab. Complete? Is this known now or not?
The questioner : Understood.
The Shaykh : Now, if we assume that the nisab is two hundred dirhams, and he has money that he owned in the month of Muharram, and in Jumada al-Thani he owned one hundred dirhams by inheritance, one hundred dirhams is less than the nisab, is that not so? Is there zakah on it or not? There is zakah on it, even though it is less than the nisab. Why? Because he had money, money that reaches the nisab, so it is added to the money and zakah becomes obligatory on it. But when does he pay zakah on the one hundred dirhams? Does he pay it when the first year is complete, i.e., in Muharram, or when its year is complete in Jumada? The latter; he pays it in Jumada. So the rule is that the money gained, other than profit, is added to what he has for the nisab but not added to what he has for the hawl. Complete. Now, do we start the new lesson? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The difference is that when he owns it, he now has, from what he owned, a nisab and a half, for example. If we assume that he initially had a nisab and he owned half a nisab, he now has a nisab and a half. The hawl of the half begins from the time he owned it, while the hawl of the first nisab began from the time he owned it. Now.
The author said: "And whoever has a debt or a right, such as a mahr or other, upon a solvent person or otherwise, pays its zakah when he receives it for the time that has passed."
Now, if the inheritance is less than the nisab, the inheritance he received in the month of Rabi' is less than the nisab, is it added to the first amount to complete the nisab, and is the hawl started from the time he owned it, or not? The scholars say it is added to complete the nisab but not added for the hawl. Is this a known statement or not? There is no known statement, it appears so, yes, now, there is no contradiction.
He owned a nisab in the month of Muharram, the Muharram between Dhul Hijjah and Safar, is this known or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is known. He owned a nisab in the month of Muharram, and in the month of Jumada al-Thani, which is after six months have passed, he inherited new money. Is the hawl based on the first amount or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is not based on the first amount. Why? Because it is independent and requires a year to pass over it. Now, is it based on the first amount for the nisab? Meaning, if the inheritance he received is less than the nisab, is it added to the first amount and zakah becomes obligatory on it, but it is not obligatory until its hawl is complete?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : The answer is yes. So, the money gained is not added to what he has for what? For the hawl. And it is added to what he has for the nisab. Complete? Is this known now or not?
The questioner : Understood.
The Shaykh : Now, if we assume that the nisab is two hundred dirhams, and he has money that he owned in the month of Muharram, and in Jumada al-Thani he owned one hundred dirhams by inheritance, one hundred dirhams is less than the nisab, is that not so? Is there zakah on it or not? There is zakah on it, even though it is less than the nisab. Why? Because he had money, money that reaches the nisab, so it is added to the money and zakah becomes obligatory on it. But when does he pay zakah on the one hundred dirhams? Does he pay it when the first year is complete, i.e., in Muharram, or when its year is complete in Jumada? The latter; he pays it in Jumada. So the rule is that the money gained, other than profit, is added to what he has for the nisab but not added to what he has for the hawl. Complete. Now, do we start the new lesson? Yes?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The difference is that when he owns it, he now has, from what he owned, a nisab and a half, for example. If we assume that he initially had a nisab and he owned half a nisab, he now has a nisab and a half. The hawl of the half begins from the time he owned it, while the hawl of the first nisab began from the time he owned it. Now.
The author said: "And whoever has a debt or a right, such as a mahr or other, upon a solvent person or otherwise, pays its zakah when he receives it for the time that has passed."