Explanation of the author's statement: "And the buried treasure is what is found from the burial of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, and in it is a fifth, whether it is little or much."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then he said "And the buried treasure is what is found from the burial of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, and in it is a fifth". The word *rikaz* is a form of passive participle, meaning that which is buried, i.e., what is buried in the ground. However, not everything that is buried is considered *rikaz*; rather, it is that which is from the burial of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, meaning what was buried during the pre-Islamic age of ignorance. The meaning of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance is the period before Islam. This is when we find a treasure buried in the ground, and when we extract it, we find signs of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance in it, such as it being coins that are known to be from before Islam, or having a date on them from before Islam, or something similar to that. This is the meaning of the author's statement "from the burial of the pre-Islamic age of ignorance".
What is its ruling? He says that in it is a fifth, whether it is little or much. Therefore, the minimum threshold for zakah is not required for it, due to the generality of the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Then the scholars differed regarding the fifth: is it zakah or is it *fay'*? Some scholars said that it is zakah. On this view, the zakah of buried treasure would be the highest amount obligatory in zakatable wealth, is that not so?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because in other wealth there is a tenth, half a tenth, a quarter of a tenth, a sheep from forty, a sheep from five camels, and so on. But this is a fifth, so it is the largest share in zakatable wealth. Also, the minimum threshold for zakah is not required for it; it is obligatory on it whether it is little or much. From a third aspect, it is not required that it be from a specific type of wealth; it is the same whether it is gold, silver, or other minerals, whatever it may be, unlike zakah. This indicates that the opinion that it is *fay'* is closer to the truth than the opinion that it is zakah.
The position in our school, may Allah have mercy on them, is that it is fay, so the "al" in al-khums is for mental reference, not to indicate the amount, as you would say the third, the quarter, the fifth, or the tenth. No, according to this view, the "al" is for mental reference, meaning the khums known in Islam, which is the fifth of the war spoils. The fifth of the spoils is allocated to the channels of fay, so it becomes fay for the general interests of the Muslims. Good.
If a person finds buried treasure that does not have a sign of disbelief or that it is from the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, what is its ruling? Its ruling is that if he knows its owner, he must return it to him or inform him of it. How does he return it or inform him? That is, either you carry it yourself to its owner or you inform him. Which is easier? Informing him, because it may be heavy and tiring for me, requiring a load. So if I inform him, my conscience is cleared. And if its owner is not known, such that we did not find a name on it and we did not expect it to belong to a specific person, then its ruling is the ruling of lost property. Lost property is to be announced for a full year. If its owner comes, it is returned to him; otherwise, it belongs to the finder. Good.
If you hired a man to dig a well for you in your house or in a private room, which is called a basement by some people, and he found this buried treasure, does it belong to the owner of the house or to the worker?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, whoever said it belongs to the owner of the house has erred, and whoever said it belongs to the worker has erred. Yes?
The questioner : There is a distinction in this.
The Shaykh : What is the detail?
The questioner : If he hired him to extract this buried treasure, it belongs to the owner of the house. And if he hired him only to dig, it belongs to the worker.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. This is the detailed ruling: if the owner of the land hired him to dig for him, it belongs to the owner of the land. And if he hired him to dig a well and then this worker found it, it belongs to the workerSahih al-Bukhari 1. Yes. Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) said.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The stronger opinion is that it is distributed in the manner of *fay'*. And we mentioned three aspects that indicate that the stronger opinion is the saying of those who say that it is distributed in the manner of *fay'*.
"Chapter on the Zakah of the Two Currencies". The two currencies is the dual of *naqd*, meaning that which is coined, because *naqd* means giving, and gold and silver are not giving, but they are given. So *naqd* means that which is coined, and it refers to gold and silver. On this basis, copper coins are not *naqd* in the terminology of jurists because they are not gold or silver. Therefore, the scholars differed on whether there is usury or interest in them or not, and whether there is zakah in them absolutely, or are they commodities? If one intends to trade with them, then there is zakah in them; otherwise, there is not? Here are two great and important issues. The first is whether there is zakah in them absolutely and that they are in the ruling of *naqd*, or not, unless one intends to trade with them because they are commodities? This is one issue. The second issue is whether usury or interest applies to them or not? Both are two great issues that require deep clarification. And it is known that paper money is considered to be from copper coins or from the two currencies?
The questioner : Copper coins.
The Shaykh : From the copper coins.
What is its ruling? He says that in it is a fifth, whether it is little or much. Therefore, the minimum threshold for zakah is not required for it, due to the generality of the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)
And in the buried treasure is a fifth.
وفي الرّكاز الخمسThe questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Because in other wealth there is a tenth, half a tenth, a quarter of a tenth, a sheep from forty, a sheep from five camels, and so on. But this is a fifth, so it is the largest share in zakatable wealth. Also, the minimum threshold for zakah is not required for it; it is obligatory on it whether it is little or much. From a third aspect, it is not required that it be from a specific type of wealth; it is the same whether it is gold, silver, or other minerals, whatever it may be, unlike zakah. This indicates that the opinion that it is *fay'* is closer to the truth than the opinion that it is zakah.
The position in our school, may Allah have mercy on them, is that it is fay, so the "al" in al-khums is for mental reference, not to indicate the amount, as you would say the third, the quarter, the fifth, or the tenth. No, according to this view, the "al" is for mental reference, meaning the khums known in Islam, which is the fifth of the war spoils. The fifth of the spoils is allocated to the channels of fay, so it becomes fay for the general interests of the Muslims. Good.
If a person finds buried treasure that does not have a sign of disbelief or that it is from the pre-Islamic age of ignorance, what is its ruling? Its ruling is that if he knows its owner, he must return it to him or inform him of it. How does he return it or inform him? That is, either you carry it yourself to its owner or you inform him. Which is easier? Informing him, because it may be heavy and tiring for me, requiring a load. So if I inform him, my conscience is cleared. And if its owner is not known, such that we did not find a name on it and we did not expect it to belong to a specific person, then its ruling is the ruling of lost property. Lost property is to be announced for a full year. If its owner comes, it is returned to him; otherwise, it belongs to the finder. Good.
If you hired a man to dig a well for you in your house or in a private room, which is called a basement by some people, and he found this buried treasure, does it belong to the owner of the house or to the worker?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, whoever said it belongs to the owner of the house has erred, and whoever said it belongs to the worker has erred. Yes?
The questioner : There is a distinction in this.
The Shaykh : What is the detail?
The questioner : If he hired him to extract this buried treasure, it belongs to the owner of the house. And if he hired him only to dig, it belongs to the worker.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. This is the detailed ruling: if the owner of the land hired him to dig for him, it belongs to the owner of the land. And if he hired him to dig a well and then this worker found it, it belongs to the worker
The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended.
إنما الأعمال بالنّيات وإنما لكل امرئ ما نوىThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : The stronger opinion is that it is distributed in the manner of *fay'*. And we mentioned three aspects that indicate that the stronger opinion is the saying of those who say that it is distributed in the manner of *fay'*.
"Chapter on the Zakah of the Two Currencies". The two currencies is the dual of *naqd*, meaning that which is coined, because *naqd* means giving, and gold and silver are not giving, but they are given. So *naqd* means that which is coined, and it refers to gold and silver. On this basis, copper coins are not *naqd* in the terminology of jurists because they are not gold or silver. Therefore, the scholars differed on whether there is usury or interest in them or not, and whether there is zakah in them absolutely, or are they commodities? If one intends to trade with them, then there is zakah in them; otherwise, there is not? Here are two great and important issues. The first is whether there is zakah in them absolutely and that they are in the ruling of *naqd*, or not, unless one intends to trade with them because they are commodities? This is one issue. The second issue is whether usury or interest applies to them or not? Both are two great issues that require deep clarification. And it is known that paper money is considered to be from copper coins or from the two currencies?
The questioner : Copper coins.
The Shaykh : From the copper coins.