Re-explanation of the author's statement: "Zakah is obligatory in gold when it reaches twenty mithqals, and in silver when it reaches two hundred dirhams, being one-tenth of them."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and all his Companions. We are re-explaining this briefly, and if Allah wills, it will be clear.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Zakah is obligatory in gold when it reaches twenty mithqals, and in silver when it reaches two hundred dirhams, being one-quarter of one-tenth of them". When it reaches twenty mithqals, and we said that the mithqal is four and a quarter grams, then one-quarter of one-tenth is obligatory in it. In silver, when it reaches two hundred dirhams, and we said that two hundred dirhams is one hundred and forty mithqals, multiply one hundred and forty by four and a quarter, and it reaches five hundred and ninety-five grams. When it reaches this amount, one-quarter of one-tenth is obligatory in them, because this is the nisab. The minimum nisab for gold and silver is this.
It should be known that gold and silver are not like livestock. As for what increases by calculation, we have previously mentioned that there is a reduction (waqf) in livestock, so there is nothing due between the two thresholds. However, for these, if it increases by even a single grain, zakah becomes obligatory in it when the nisab is reached. Gold is added to silver to complete the nisab. So if a person has half a nisab of gold and half a nisab of silver, zakah is obligatory on him, and he pays out one-quarter of one-tenth of the gold and one-quarter of one-tenth of the silver. And if he has two-thirds of a nisab of gold and one-third of a nisab of silver, likewise zakah is obligatory on him. This is the position the author (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted. They reasoned that the purpose of the two currencies is one, which is to be the value of things. The value of things is either gold or silver. Since the purpose of both is one, one must be added to the other. But the correct view is that one is not added to the other. The reason for this is that the Sunnah indicated that zakah on gold is not obligatory until it reaches twenty mithqals, and that zakah on silver is not obligatory until it reaches five awqiyah.Sunan an-Nasa'i 2486Sahih (Darussalam) This is explicit regarding gold. He said: This is also explicit. Their reasoning that the purpose of both is one is refuted. First, it is an analogy in opposition to the text, so its consideration is defective. Second, it is a refuted analogy. Why? By wheat and barley. The purpose of wheat and barley is one, which is sustenance, and yet one is not added to the other to complete the nisab.
Likewise, it is refuted by livestock. If a person has half a nisab of sheep and half a nisab of cattle, is one completed by the other? No, even though the purpose is one. This man has cattle and he has sheep to increase them, and yet one is not added to the other to complete the nisab. By this, we know the weakness of this opinion adopted by the author (may Allah have mercy on him), which is adding gold to silver to complete the nisab. First, because it contradicts the Sunnah, and what contradicts the Sunnah is a defective analogy. Second, it is refuted. By what? By the fact that they did not say to add barley to wheat, or to add sheep to cattle, for example. A species is not added to its species. A type is correctly added to its type, such as types of fruits and types of dates, where some are added to others. Good.
According to the opinion of addition, is it added by parts or by value? This is a matter we tell you for the sake of knowledge, otherwise there is no branching from it. Why? Because it is weak and abrogated. But for the sake of knowledge, is it added by value or by parts? There is disagreement among those who hold the opinion of addition. The madhhab is that it is added by parts. So if he has ten dinars and he has one hundred dirhams, some of it is added to the other. And if he has eight dinars equal to one hundred dirhams, and he has one hundred dirhams, is it added or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Why? Because it does not reach the nisab. Eight dinars is less than half a nisab, and one hundred dirhams is half a nisab, so he has less than the nisab, so there is no addition. Good.
Then he said: "And the value of trade goods is added to each of them". "The value of trade goods is added" means if a person has trade goods. Trade goods are not specific to a certain asset. Everything prepared for trade is trade goods and is not restricted to a specific asset. If a person has clothes to sell, zakah is obligatory on them if he intends them for trade. If he has real estate he intends for trade, to trade in it, to buy and sell in it, then these are trade goods. These are added to complete the nisab to gold or to silver. So if he has one hundred dirhams of silver and he has trade goods equal to one hundred dirhams, zakah is obligatory on him in the trade goods he has and in the silver he has.
So if someone says, "A person does not have a nisab of silver and does not have a nisab of trade goods," we say, but the intended meaning of trade goods is the value. And actions are by intentions. The owner of the trade goods does not want to sell these goods today and buy them tomorrow, or buy others tomorrow. He wants what? He wants the value. Therefore, the value of the trade goods is added to what he has of the currencies to complete the nisab. Is this clear or not? Good.
A man has eighty dirhams and he has clothes for sale for trade equal to one hundred and twenty dirhams. Is zakah obligatory on him or not? It is obligatory, because the value of the trade goods is added to gold or silver. Good.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Zakah is obligatory in gold when it reaches twenty mithqals, and in silver when it reaches two hundred dirhams, being one-quarter of one-tenth of them". When it reaches twenty mithqals, and we said that the mithqal is four and a quarter grams, then one-quarter of one-tenth is obligatory in it. In silver, when it reaches two hundred dirhams, and we said that two hundred dirhams is one hundred and forty mithqals, multiply one hundred and forty by four and a quarter, and it reaches five hundred and ninety-five grams. When it reaches this amount, one-quarter of one-tenth is obligatory in them, because this is the nisab. The minimum nisab for gold and silver is this.
It should be known that gold and silver are not like livestock. As for what increases by calculation, we have previously mentioned that there is a reduction (waqf) in livestock, so there is nothing due between the two thresholds. However, for these, if it increases by even a single grain, zakah becomes obligatory in it when the nisab is reached. Gold is added to silver to complete the nisab. So if a person has half a nisab of gold and half a nisab of silver, zakah is obligatory on him, and he pays out one-quarter of one-tenth of the gold and one-quarter of one-tenth of the silver. And if he has two-thirds of a nisab of gold and one-third of a nisab of silver, likewise zakah is obligatory on him. This is the position the author (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted. They reasoned that the purpose of the two currencies is one, which is to be the value of things. The value of things is either gold or silver. Since the purpose of both is one, one must be added to the other. But the correct view is that one is not added to the other. The reason for this is that the Sunnah indicated that zakah on gold is not obligatory until it reaches twenty mithqals, and that zakah on silver is not obligatory until it reaches five awqiyah.
No Sadaqah is due on less than five Awaq.
ليس فيما دون خمس أواق صدقةWhen it reaches twenty dinars
إذا بلغ عشرين ديناراLikewise, it is refuted by livestock. If a person has half a nisab of sheep and half a nisab of cattle, is one completed by the other? No, even though the purpose is one. This man has cattle and he has sheep to increase them, and yet one is not added to the other to complete the nisab. By this, we know the weakness of this opinion adopted by the author (may Allah have mercy on him), which is adding gold to silver to complete the nisab. First, because it contradicts the Sunnah, and what contradicts the Sunnah is a defective analogy. Second, it is refuted. By what? By the fact that they did not say to add barley to wheat, or to add sheep to cattle, for example. A species is not added to its species. A type is correctly added to its type, such as types of fruits and types of dates, where some are added to others. Good.
According to the opinion of addition, is it added by parts or by value? This is a matter we tell you for the sake of knowledge, otherwise there is no branching from it. Why? Because it is weak and abrogated. But for the sake of knowledge, is it added by value or by parts? There is disagreement among those who hold the opinion of addition. The madhhab is that it is added by parts. So if he has ten dinars and he has one hundred dirhams, some of it is added to the other. And if he has eight dinars equal to one hundred dirhams, and he has one hundred dirhams, is it added or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Why? Because it does not reach the nisab. Eight dinars is less than half a nisab, and one hundred dirhams is half a nisab, so he has less than the nisab, so there is no addition. Good.
Then he said: "And the value of trade goods is added to each of them". "The value of trade goods is added" means if a person has trade goods. Trade goods are not specific to a certain asset. Everything prepared for trade is trade goods and is not restricted to a specific asset. If a person has clothes to sell, zakah is obligatory on them if he intends them for trade. If he has real estate he intends for trade, to trade in it, to buy and sell in it, then these are trade goods. These are added to complete the nisab to gold or to silver. So if he has one hundred dirhams of silver and he has trade goods equal to one hundred dirhams, zakah is obligatory on him in the trade goods he has and in the silver he has.
So if someone says, "A person does not have a nisab of silver and does not have a nisab of trade goods," we say, but the intended meaning of trade goods is the value. And actions are by intentions. The owner of the trade goods does not want to sell these goods today and buy them tomorrow, or buy others tomorrow. He wants what? He wants the value. Therefore, the value of the trade goods is added to what he has of the currencies to complete the nisab. Is this clear or not? Good.
A man has eighty dirhams and he has clothes for sale for trade equal to one hundred and twenty dirhams. Is zakah obligatory on him or not? It is obligatory, because the value of the trade goods is added to gold or silver. Good.