Q. I read in Arab News a fatwa by Adil Salahi stating very clearly that women need not pay any zakah on their jewelry provided it is intended for personal use. I also read a fatwa by Qari Abdul-Basit in Urdu News, a sister publication of Arab News, equally firm in stating that women’s jewelry is liable to zakah. Could you please sort out my confusion.
Ambreen Faiz
A. This is a simple example of how different scholars look at questions. I have been repeatedly stating my ruling on this question in Arab News, because this is a frequently asked question. No scholar has written to me objecting to this ruling, not even my esteemed colleague, Qari Abdul-Basit, although he reads English, but I do not read Urdu. However, I know how this contradiction comes about.
One school of thought requires the payment of zakah on women’s jewelry, while the other three as well as other eminent scholars do not. It is easy for a scholar to answer questions on the basis of the school of thought he knows best, particularly in such simple matters that have no complication. Yet a scholar should not look only in his own school of thought. Certainly he must not limit himself to his questioner’s school of thought. It is his duty to look for the more valid view, supported by the stronger evidence, and to consider what is best for his questioner.
When we look at the evidence we have on this issue, we find a Hadith requiring the payment of zakah on jewelry, and another defining that such zakah could be in the form of lending the jewelry to someone who has no jewelry of her own. There are several other Hadiths that make clear that no zakah is payable on jewelry kept for personal use. What is the role of scholars when they have such conflicting evidence? The answer is that they must try to reconcile the different statements. This may be done in several ways, such as looking at the circumstances when these were said; considering the particular case of the Prophet’s companion who asked about the issue in question; the way each statement is phrased; the occasions on which different statements were made and which was earlier and which was later, etc. Leading scholars have always done that, and many are the occasions when a scholar would differ from his own school of thought, because he was enlightened on a Hadith that might have not been considered by, or known to, earlier scholars.
Sometimes we are faced with questions like: Is it possible that such great scholars as Abu Haneefah, Al-Shafie, Malik and Ahmad ibn Hanbal did not know a Hadith relating to such a simple question, while other or lesser scholars were aware of it? The answer is that it is possible. When you consider that in their period of history, the only methods of learning was through the teaching of other scholars and from books dictated by scholars or copied by long hand, you realize that access to information was much harder. Today, we find most of what we want on the Internet. Books are available on CDs, and printed books are easily obtainable. They are available in libraries if one cannot afford them. Moreover, the authentic collections of Hadiths were produced after the death of three of the four Imams. Only Imam Ahmad had a look at Al-Bukhari’s Sahih. Imam Ahmad, who was one of the top Hadith scholars in our history, did not finalize his own collection, Al-Musnad, in his own lifetime. It was finalized by his son Abdullah, a scholar of Hadith in his own right. likewise, Malik and Al-Shafie were highly reliable on Hadith. Their scholarship in this area is solidly based. Yet they had to work within what was available to them. A Hadith could have been learned by a scholar as reported by a chain of transmitters that included one he might have classified as unreliable, while the same Hadith was known to another scholar through different transmitters all of whom were reliable. The first scholar would discount the Hadith, while the second would uphold it.
When it comes to someone like myself answering a reader’s question, I have to look at the evidence supporting the opposite views, and also on the circumstances that prevail today as well as what suits my reader best. In this day and age, when we know how easy it is for a jeweler to put before you two seemingly identical items, one made with real diamonds and the other false, I cannot tell my readers that they should lend their jewelry to pay its zakah. I uphold the view that this was a recommendation by the Prophet (peace be upon him), i.e. a Sunnah, and should be done only when the lender is certain that she would come to no loss as a result of lending her jewelry. In a truly Islamic society, such cheating would be minimal.
In conclusion, I hold on to my ruling that no zakah is payable on jewelry kept for personal use. This is indeed the view of the majority of scholars over many generations.
A Second Wife Related to the First
Q. Could you please explain whether it is permissible for one to marry a second wife who is the cousin of his present wife?
M. Ejaz
A. It is well known that Islam permits marriage with up to four wives at any one time, provided, however, that they are all treated equally and fairly. If one fears that he might not be able to ensure equality and fairness in his treatment of his wives, then he is not allowed more than one.
Islam, however, does not allow marriage with two sisters at the same time. A man may marry his wife’s sister, only if his wife has died or if they were divorced. The prohibition is stated in the Qur’an. The Prophet also stated that a second wife cannot be the aunt, maternal or paternal, or the niece of his present wife. The reason for this prohibition is that such marriages can easily ruin the relation between close relatives, such as sisters, aunts and nieces. Islam is keen to preserve family and social relations so as to maintain strong bonds within its community. More distant relations, such as cousins of his wife, are permissible to marry.
Considering that, we should wonder whether it is advisable to marry one’s wife’s cousin. We all know that bringing a second wife into one’s family is bound to cause much trouble. Therefore, anyone contemplating a second marriage must think very hard on the course into which he is leading his family. For this second wife to be related to his first one, and having both under his roof at the same time, this could spell much trouble.