Zakah is an act of worship that requires the purification of wealth, the establishment of social balance, and spending in the way of Allah for His pleasure. After prayer, it is the most important financial obligation in Islam. Along with spiritual purification, it also serves as a means of ensuring the circulation of wealth. Zakah is a structured and regulated system of such spending, whose objective is not limited merely to helping the needy; rather, its primary purpose is to protect human beings from the trial of wealth and the potentially harmful effects of its love. Moreover, zakah also plays an important role in the stability of the social order. For this reason, Allah Almighty Himself has prescribed its law, so that there is no unnecessary interference in an individual’s property and the state’s financial system remains balanced.
The rate of zakah has been clearly fixed in the Shariah, leaving no scope for ijtihad in this matter. However, the determination of the nisab and the concessions granted therein fall within the domain of ijtihad. The issue of whether zakah is obligatory on women’s jewelry is also one of these ijtihadi matters, regarding which there is disagreement among the jurists.
Some jurists hold zakah to be obligatory on all kinds of jewelry, as is the opinion of the Hanafis. In contrast, according to the Maliki, Shafiʿi, and Hanbali jurists, only such jewelry falls within the scope of zakah that is not in use and is kept solely for hoarding or investment.
This disagreement is, in reality, an example of differing ijtihadi applications in determining the nisab, which has arisen in light of changing circumstances and the demands of different times. Contemporary economic and social changes have further enhanced the importance of this discussion. On the one hand, the affluent use jewelry to display and demonstrate their wealth; on the other, jewelry is no longer merely a means of accumulating wealth but has also come to be regarded as a symbol of cultural and social status. These very factors highlight the need for renewed reflection on this issue, so that the law and principles of zakah can be understood more effectively in a contemporary context.
It should be borne in mind that the fundamental condition for the obligation of zakah—upon which there is consensus among jurists—is that the item in question be mal nami (productive or growth-oriented wealth), that is, wealth capable of increase and investment. Accordingly, those jurists who maintain that zakah is absolutely obligatory on jewelry actually classify it under the category of “capital assets.” In this regard, the basis of their argument is primarily the hadith literature.
The reports attributed to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) from which the obligation of zakah on jewelry is inferred are as follows:
1. The report of Ayshah (RA) The Prophet (PBUH) asked whether she paid zakah on her silver rings. When she replied in the negative, he said:
“These are sufficient for you for the Fire of Hell.” (Sunan Abi Dawud: 1558)
2. The report of Umm Salamah (RA)
“I asked the Prophet (PBUH) whether, if a woman possesses gold jewelry, it would be counted as kanz (hoarded wealth). He replied: ‘If she pays its zakah, then it is not kanz.’” (Sunan Abi Dawud: 1564)
3. The report concerning thick gold bangles
“The Prophet (PBUH) saw a woman wearing thick gold bangles and said: ‘Do you pay zakah on these?’
When she replied in the negative, he said: ‘Would you like Allah to make you wear bangles of fire in their place?’” (Sunan Abi Dawud: 1563)
Those jurists who do not consider zakah obligatory on jewelry used in daily life present various scholarly explanations in interpreting these hadiths, among which the following are noteworthy:
1. These hadiths are weak or not explicit
According to some hadith scholars, these reports are either weak in terms of their chains of transmission or do not contain an explicit statement establishing the obligation of zakah.
2. Specific applied instruction According to the Shafiʿi and Maliki jurists, these hadiths pertain to jewelry that is kept as stored wealth, whereas jewelry in regular use is excluded from this ruling.
3. No change in the fundamental principle Some hadith scholars maintain that these reports were narrated to encourage the payment of zakah, not as definitive proof establishing its obligation.
The scholars who hold this inclination also find support for their ijtihad in those reports and narrations where the Companions and Successors themselves adopted this position. Some such evidences are as follows:
1. Jabir ibn Abdullah (RA): لَيْسَ فِي الْحُلِي ِ زَكَاة — “There is no zakah on jewelry.” (Daraqutni: 170; al- Bayhaqi: 7959)
2. Anas ibn Malik (RA): Zakah was not paid on his sister’s jewelry. (Daraqutni: 171)
3. Abdullah ibn Umar (RA): He did not pay zakah on the jewelry of his daughters. (Musannaf Ibn Abi
Shaybah: 10399)
4. Ayshah and Asmaʾ (RA): The payment of zakah on their jewelry is not established. (Musannaf Ibn Abi
Shaybah: 10398)
5. Imam Malik (RA): He considers jewelry among items of use and does not regard zakah as obligatory on it. (al-Muwattaʾ 1/251)
A balanced and practical perspective
In our student-level opinion, zakah should not be obligatory on jewelry used for daily wear, because it falls within the category of personal necessities and has the status of non-productive wealth. However, if jewelry is kept purely as a store of wealth or for the display of social status, then its nature effectively transforms into mal nami.
Similarly, if jewelry is purchased as a secure asset (investment asset), with the primary purpose of selling it when needed, then it practically falls under the category of investment, and the application of zakah becomes possible.
If the quantity of jewelry is extraordinarily large according to prevailing social norms and its actual use becomes merely nominal—such as when hundreds of tolas of jewelry are given to daughters at the time of marriage solely to display status—then, as a precautionary measure, it would be more appropriate to pay zakah on it, so that a sense of religious responsibility and accountability with regard to wealth is maintained.
Furthermore, individuals who are financially stable and affluent and possess large quantities of jewelry would do well to ensure the payment of zakah if, under the state’s financial system, they fall within the “high-income bracket.” In contrast, in middle-class households, jewelry collected for the marriage of daughters is neither used on a daily basis nor fully at the owner’s disposal; rather, it is preserved merely as a trust. For this reason, such jewelry should be considered exempt from zakah.
Along with this juristic application, the Quranic warning must always be kept in view, which cautions human beings about the consequences of becoming engrossed in the love of wealth and failing to spend it in the way of Allah. Allah says:
“Then give them tidings of a painful punishment—those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah. On the Day when it will be heated in the Fire of Hell and their foreheads, their sides, and their backs will be branded with it [and it will be said], ‘This is what you hoarded for yourselves, so taste what you used to hoard.’” (Surah al-Tawbah 9:34)
Explaining this, the respected teacher Javed Ahmed Ghamidi writes:
After paying zakah, it is not forbidden to save money for present and future personal and business needs. However, if a demand for spending arises—whether from the creation or from the Creator—and a person refuses to spend, then the punishment is the same as that which the Quran has described thereafter. Imam Islahi writes:
“…It is this very spending that grants the treasure of wisdom and through which light increases in the heart. If, while accumulating wealth, a person remains indifferent to the orphans, the helpless, and the destitute in his surroundings, or becomes detached from the call to religion, the establishment of religion, religious education, and other works of jihad in the way of Allah, then he cannot be absolved of accountability and responsibility before Allah, even if he has fulfilled the legal requirement of his wealth.” (Tadabbur-e-Quran 3/566)