Articles

Some Rulings on the Zakah Due on Olives
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 08-11-2015

First: Zakah is Due on Olives

According to the Hanafites, the Malikites, the early statement of Ash-Shafi`e, and one narration of the Hanbalites, Zakah is due on olives because its produce can be stored away for future usage. Please refer to [Al-Hawi, vol.3/pp.505-506] by Al-Mawardi.

 

Second: The Nisaab of Olives Zakah

The Nisaab of olives Zakah is five Awsuq according to the opinion of the majority of the Muslim scholars, contrary to Abu Hanifa`s opinion as regards the Nisaab of crops and fruits. If the amount of olives was less than five Awsuq, then no Zakah is due on it, but if it was five or more, then Zakah is due on it, as indicated by the following Hadith: The Prophet (PBUH) said: "There is no Zakat on less than five Awsuq (of dates), or on less than five camels, or on less than five Awaq of silver." (22 Yemeni Riyals Faransa)" [Agreed upon].

According to modern weights and measurements, the Nisaab of olives Zakah is (611kgs.), as stated in the book, [Al-Maqadeer Ash-Shar`iah (pp.201] by Al-Kurdi. Here, what counts is the weight of the olives, not the oil.

 

Third: The Amount of the Zakah Due on Olives

On the land irrigated by rain water, Ushr (i.e. one-tenth)is compulsory as Zakah; and on the land irrigated by the well, half an Ushr (i.e. one tenth)is compulsory as Zakah paid by the owner, whether the yield was olives, or olive oil. This is indicated by the Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH) who said: "On a land irrigated by rain water or by natural water channels or if the land is wet due to a nearby water channel Ushr (i.e. one-tenth) is compulsory (as Zakat); and on the land irrigated by the well, half of an Ushr (i.e. one-twentieth) is compulsory (as Zakat on the yield of the land)." [Bukhari].

 

Fourth: It is preferable that Olives Zakah is Given as Oil

Ash-Shafi`e (May Allah bless him) said, "It is permissible to give olives as Zakah, but it is preferable to give one Ushr as oil."

Kindly refer to the book: [Al-Majmou`] by An-Nawawi.

 

Fifth: Olives Zakah is to be Given by the Owner if he Sold the Fruits while on the Tree

It is impermissible to sell the olives while on the trees, save if they are obviously ripe. In this case, the Zakah is due on the owner alone, because the Zakah becomes due when the olives are ripe, and they were while in his possession. Please refer to [Moghni Al-Mohtajj, vol.4/pp.461]. However, if the owner sold the olives after they had become obviously ripe, then it is obligatory that he exclude the amount of Zakah from that deal, or to notify the purchaser in order to avoid dispute.

 

Sixth: Ruling on Exchanging Olives with Olive Oil

It is impermissible to exchange olives with olive oil; rather, it should take the form of sell and buy transaction in order to avoid usury (Riba). This is because olives are the origin of olive oil, and it is impermissible to exchange two items of the same kind. Please refer to [Al-Mohazab, vol.2/pp.37] by Ash-Shirazi and [Al-Hawee, vol.5/pp.243] by Al-Mawardi.

Seventh: It is preferable to give Zakah from the same kind on which Zakah is due. However, it is permissible to give the Zakah in cash to facilitate for the recipients and to achieve that, which is best to the poor, as indicated by the Hanafites Mazhab (Juristic school). Please refer to [Al-Ikhtiar Li`ta`leel Al-Mokhtar, vol.1/pp.102]. 

 

Eighth: The Costs of Pressing Olive Oil aren`t Deducted from its Zakah

Costs of processing the olive oil aren`t to be deducted from the Zakah due on it; rather, the Zakah should be given from the overall yield. Please refer to [Moghni Al-Mohtajj, vol.4/pp.461] by Ash-Shirbini. The proof of this is that the Islamic Sharia has differentiated the amount of the due Zakah on basis of the irrigation costs; therefore, it prescribed an Ushr (one-tenth) in case the costs of irrigation were paid by the farmer. Had all the costs of cultivation been deducted, there wouldn`t have been such a variation in the amount of the obligatory Zakah. Accordingly, the farmer either gives the Zakah from the olives yield before pressing, or from the net olive oil after pressing, and the cost of pressing the olives isn`t to be deducted from the due Zakah.

 

For More

* Ruling on Picking up Leftover and Fallen Fruits at Harvest Time
* Islamic Ruling when Owner of Olive Grove Stipulates Taking a Certain Number of Olive Oil Tins after Production
* Ruling of Islamic Law on Paying the Zakat of Olives with Old Oil

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on omitting the prostration of recitation?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The prostration of recitation (Sajdat al-Tilawah) is a Sunnah for both the reader and the listener. There is no sin in omitting it, though doing so results in missing a great reward. Muslim narrated from Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet ﷺ said: 'When the son of Adam recites a verse of prostration and prostrates, Shaytan withdraws weeping, saying: "Woe to him! (and in the narration of Abu Kuraib: "Woe to me!") The son of Adam was commanded to prostrate and he prostrated, so Paradise is his; and I was commanded to prostrate and I refused, so the Fire is mine."'
 
Sheikh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) stated: 'It is recommended to prostrate immediately after reciting or hearing a verse of prostration. If one delays it but the interval is short, he may still prostrate. However, if the interval is long, the opportunity is missed.' [Rawdat al-Talibin Vol.1/P.323].
 
Furthermore, the prostration of recitation becomes obligatory (Wajib) in congregational prayer if the Imam prostrates, out of the necessity of following him. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Does the use of suppositories, enemas, or hemorrhoid creams affect the validity of fasting?

Enemas and suppositories inserted through either of the two private passages invalidate the fast. This ruling is based on the statement of Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him): "Breaking the fast occurs from what enters (the body), not from what exits." [Reported by Al-Bayhaqi in As-Sunan Al-Kubra]
His generalization regarding anything entering the body indicates that it invalidates fasting, whether it is nutritious or not, as even non-nutritious substances resemble food in form.
It is recommended to use them before Fajr or after Iftar. However, if a person must use them while fasting, they should continue refraining from food and drink for the rest of the day and make up for that day later.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.