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 one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who wiped over his leather socks (*khuff*) while resident and then traveled, or wiped while traveling and then became resident? And likewise, what is the ruling on one who incurred a minor ritual impurity (*ḥadath aṣghar*) while resident, then traveled and wiped while traveling?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Whoever wipes over his leather socks (khuffayn) while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, before a day and a night have passed in both cases, completes the wiping period of a resident. If he wipes while resident and then travels after a day and a night have passed, he must remove the socks, because the period has ended. Likewise, if he wipes while traveling and then becomes resident after a day and a night have passed, he must remove them as well.
Whoever breaks his wuḍūʾ while resident and then wipes while traveling takes the ruling of a traveler as regards the duration of wiping, so long as he does not become resident. It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik wa ʿUddat al-Nāsik (Vol.1/p.15): “If he wipes over both [socks] or one of them while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, or doubts whether he began the wiping while traveling or while resident, he completes only the wiping period of a resident. But if he broke his wuḍūʾ while resident and wiped while traveling, he completes the period of a traveler, whether or not the full time of a prayer had passed over him while resident.” And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on a suitor (khāṭib) going out alone with his fiancée before the marriage contract is concluded?

It is unlawful for a suitor, prior to the marriage contract , to do anything that would be unlawful for any non-maḥram man — including touching his fiancée, being secluded with her (khalwah), or seeing her without her complete sharī‘ah-compliant covering — even after the recitation of al-Fātiḥah (This is a cultural custom to seek Allah's blessing (barakah) and mark mutual consent) and the family's approval [of the engagement]. This is because the engagement, without the formal marriage contract, does not render unlawful matters permissible. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.