عربي
Home


Articles

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

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What are the conditions for a valid Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
First: The age of the animal must meet the Sharia requirements. These requirements vary depending on the type of sacrifice:
 
Camels: Must have completed five years and entered their sixth.
 
Cows: Must have completed two years and entered their third.
 
Goats: Must have completed two years and entered their third. As for Sheep, they must have completed one year and entered their second.
 
Some scholars have permitted goats that have completed one year and entered their second.
 
The Hanafi school, along with an opinion in the Maliki school, permits sacrificing sheep that are at least six months old, provided they are healthy and physically substantial. According to the Shafi’i school, it is permissible if the sheep sheds its front teeth (ajdha') before reaching one year [Al-Iqna’, by Al-Shirbini (Vol.2/P.588)].
 
Second: Soundness and freedom from defects. The animal must be free from any defect that causes a decrease in its meat or market value. This is based on the hadith narrated by Al-Bara' bin 'Azib, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:
 
"Four [defects] are not permissible in sacrifices: A one-eyed animal whose blindness is evident, a sick animal whose illness is evident, a lame animal whose lameness is evident, and an emaciated animal that has no marrow in its bones." [Reported by Abu Dawood and Al-Tirmidhi, who graded it as authentic].
 
These defects are detailed as follows:
 
Evident Lameness: It is not permissible to sacrifice a lame animal if the lameness is severe enough to prevent it from walking to the pasture or seeking food, as this leads to a decrease in its meat. However, slight lameness that does not hinder its grazing is overlooked.
 
Evident Blindness (One-eyed): It is not permissible to sacrifice a sheep, cow, or camel that has a white film over its eye blocking light, or one that has lost an eye entirely. Weak vision that does not affect its ability to eat does not prevent the sacrifice from being valid.
 
Evident Illness: An animal with a clear sickness that prevents it from eating or moving is not valid. This includes severe mange (Jarab) that spoils the meat.
 
Extreme Emaciation: An animal so thin that there is no marrow left in its bones is invalid. The standard for emaciation that invalidates the sacrifice is that which spoils the quality of the meat to the point that people would find it undesirable even in times of plenty.
 
Additional Considerations:
These are the defects mentioned in the Prophetic tradition, and any defect that causes emaciation or reduces the meat or value is compared to them by analogy. This includes animals that are mentally unstable (diseased), those with mange, or those with a missing ear. In contrast, a slit or pierced ear does not affect the validity of the sacrifice. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on wiping the white area behind the ears instead of wiping the head?

The obligation in ablution is to wipe some of the head; it is not a condition to wipe all of it. Wiping the white area behind the ears suffices for that. 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.

See More