Yes, yes. The questioner: . . . . The Shaykh: Never, it is not.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Never, it is not... The author of *Bulugh al-Maram* says its chain is strong, and 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather: whoever cites a defect in his narration by claiming it is disconnected, that is incorrect. That is, the Imams, such as al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma'in, and others, all accept his narration as evidence, yes?
The questioner : ... Who said...
The Shaykh : Some hadith scholars even said that if the chain to 'Amr is authentic, then 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather is like Malik from Nafi' from Ibn 'Umar, meaning it is a chain of gold, but this is an exaggeration.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes? Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : These are ambiguous pronouns, but all of them, whether this one or that one, both have connected chains.
The questioner : The Shaykh of those who say it is obligatory...
The Shaykh : There is no, there is no evidence.
The questioner : If there were zakah, he would have specified it.
The Shaykh : No, because this jewelry is assumed to have been subject to zakah, and the rest in their hands has had its zakah paid. This is what is expected from the Companions. Then, if I said, for example, give charity from what you have set aside for your expenses from dirhams, and the dirhams reach the nisab, does that mean there is no zakah on the dirhams because I said "and not from dirhams"? Answer?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : There is zakah on them, that is the case. There is zakah on the jewelry, and this does not indicate the dropping of the zakah. The one who prevents [it] even from their personal needs gives charity.
The questioner : ... There is no zakah, there is no...
The Shaykh : Why... except.
The questioner : Because the original ruling regarding zakah.
The Shaykh : That is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Yes, yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Never, it is not... The author of *Bulugh al-Maram* says its chain is strong, and 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather: whoever cites a defect in his narration by claiming it is disconnected, that is incorrect. That is, the Imams, such as al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma'in, and others, all accept his narration as evidence, yes?
The questioner : ... Who said...
The Shaykh : Some hadith scholars even said that if the chain to 'Amr is authentic, then 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather is like Malik from Nafi' from Ibn 'Umar, meaning it is a chain of gold, but this is an exaggeration.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes? Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : These are ambiguous pronouns, but all of them, whether this one or that one, both have connected chains.
The questioner : The Shaykh of those who say it is obligatory...
The Shaykh : There is no, there is no evidence.
The questioner : If there were zakah, he would have specified it.
The Shaykh : No, because this jewelry is assumed to have been subject to zakah, and the rest in their hands has had its zakah paid. This is what is expected from the Companions. Then, if I said, for example, give charity from what you have set aside for your expenses from dirhams, and the dirhams reach the nisab, does that mean there is no zakah on the dirhams because I said "and not from dirhams"? Answer?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : There is zakah on them, that is the case. There is zakah on the jewelry, and this does not indicate the dropping of the zakah. The one who prevents [it] even from their personal needs gives charity.
The questioner : ... There is no zakah, there is no...
The Shaykh : Why... except.
The questioner : Because the original ruling regarding zakah.
The Shaykh : That is obligatory.