The
term ma’din (minerals) is derived from the verb ‘Adana (to reside), as in the
phrase “’Adana fi al-makan,” which means ‘someone resided in some place.’
Allah, the Exalted One, says: “Allah has promised to the believing men and
believing women gardens of Eden” [at-Taubah 72] since it is an abode for
eternity.
Scholars
differ about minerals (ma’din) which are subject to zakah. Ahmad holds that
everything dug from the ground, whether created in it or buried by man, and
which has a value (such as gold, silver, iron, copper, lead, sapphires,
chrysolite, emeralds, turquoise, crystal, agate, kohl (antimony sulfide),
arsenic, tar, petroleum, sulphur, zaj) are subject to zakah. He, however, made
it a condition that the extracted mineral should attain a nisab either by
itself or by its value. Abu Hanifah is of the opinion that zakah is payable on
any mineral that can receive an imprint or melt by fire, such as gold, silver,
iron, or copper. As for liquids such as tar, or a solid mineral which cannot be
melted by fire such as rubies, there is no zakah on them. In the former case,
the admissibility of nisab is not a prior condition. Whether large or small in
amount, a fifth will be taken as zakah.
Malik
and ash-Shaf’i hold that both gold and silver qualify for zakah. Like Ahmad,
they insist that the gold should weigh at least twenty mithqal (a weight equal
to 4.68 g.) and the silver at least 200 dirhams. They agree (with the
Hanafiyyah) that these metals do not require completion of a year to be
subjected to zakah, which becomes due anytime it is available. According to the
preceding scholars, the amount should be one-fortieth, and its distribution
should be like that of the regular zakah. For Abu Hanifah, its distribution is
similar to booty (fay’).
The
Legitimacy of Zakah on Rikaz and Ma’din
That
zakah of rikaz and ma’din is obligatory is shown by a statement attributed to
Abu Hurairah: “The Prophet, upon whom be peace, said: ‘There is no compensation
for one killed or wounded by an animal, falling in a well, or because of
working in mines; but, one-fifth (khums) is compulsory on rikaz.’ “Ibn
al-Munzhir confesses that he does not know anyone who contradicted this hadith
except al-Hasan, who differentiates between what exists in the land of war and
the Islamic land. The latter holds that if rikaz is found in the land of war,
one-fifth (khums) is due, but if it is found in the Islamic land, it will be
subject to the regular zakah.
Explaining
it, Ibn al-Qayyim says that there are two interpretations of this statement:
The
first interpretation is that whenever someone hires someone else to dig a mine
for him and then he falls into it and is killed, there is no compensation for
him. This view is supported by the Prophet’s saying: “There is no compensation
for one who falls into a well or who is killed by an animal--(al-bi’r Jubar, wa
al-’Ajma’ Jubar).”
The
second interpretation is that there is no zakah on minerals. This view is
supported by the Prophet’s saying: “... but one-fifth is compulsory on
treasure--(Wa fi az-zakah al-khums).” Thus, he differentiated between mineral
(ma’din) and treasure (rikaz). He made zakah on rikaz compulsory because it is
a wealth obtained without any cost or effort. He exempted minerals (ma’din)
from zakah because they require both cost and effort for their mining.
Rikaz
Upon Which Zakah is Paid
The
rikaz are all those substances upon which one-fifth (khums) is payable, such as
gold, silver, iron, lead, brass, and the like. This is the opinion of the
Hanafiyyah, the Hanbaliyyah, Ishaq, and Ibn al-Munzhir. A report from Malik and
one of the two opinions of ash-Shaf’i also corroborate it. Ash-Shaf’i also
holds that only gold and silver are subject to khums.
The
Location of Rikaz
Rikaz
might be found in the following places:
1.
In a barren land, a land of unknown ownership, or in an intractable road, or
ruined village. In that case, khums has to be paid, and the one who found it
may keep the other four-fifths for himself. This is based on a report from
an-Nasa’i on the authority of ‘Amr ibn Shu’aib from his father and from his
grandfather, who said that when the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, was
asked about a lucky find (al-luqatah), he responded: “For anything along a
tractable road or in an inhabited village, its ownership is determined by
established custom. If the owner claims it, it is his. However, when an item is
found in an intractable road or in an uninhabited village, then on it and the
rest of the find, one-fifth (khums) is payable.”
2.
If the rikaz is found by someone in a land transferred to him, then it is his,
as it is lodged in the land. Nevertheless, his ownership does not come from his
possession of the land--it comes from the fact that it became known to him.
Analogically, this kind of find falls into the category of grass, firewood, and
game which are found on land which is not his. He can claim it if the one who
transferred the land does not ask for it. In that case, it will be his because
the land originally belonged to him. This is the view of Abu Yusuf, and the
Hanbaliyyah uphold it as sound. Ash-Shaf’i says it belongs to the owner who
transferred the land (if he claims it) before him, and so on until it is
claimed by the first original owner.
Whenever
land is transferred through inheritance, it is considered an inheritance by
itself. If, however, the inhabitants agree that it did not belong to the one
from whom they inherited it, then it belongs to the original owner. If he is
unknown, then it is considered the lost property of an unknown owner. Abu
Hanifah and Muhammad say that it belongs to the original owner of the land or
to his inheritors if they are known; if they are not, it is to be placed in the
public treasury.
3.
If it is found in the land of a Muslim or a free non-Muslim subject (zhimmi),
then it belongs to the owner of the land, according to Abu Hanifah, Muhammad,
and Ahmad. It is also reported from Ahmad that it belongs to the one who found
it (rikaz). Al-Hasan ibn Salih, Abu Thaur, and Abu Yusuf also preferred this
opinion. This view is based on the belief that rikaz is not necessarily owned
by the owner of the land, except when it is claimed by the owner. In such a case,
his word will be the final one because he has the right over the land. If he
does not claim it, it belongs to the one who finds it. Ash-Shaf’i holds that it
belongs to the one who claims it. Otherwise, it belongs to the original owner.
The
Amount Payable on Rikaz
The
amount payable on rikdz is one-fifth, regardless of a nisab, according to Abu
Hanifah, Ahmad, and one of the two correct reports of Malik and ash-Shaf’i. As
for the completion of a year (haws), all scholars agree that it has not been stipulated
as a condition.
Who
Must Pay the Khums (One-Fifth)
Most
scholars are of the opinion that khums is due on anyone who finds a treasure,
whether he happens to be a Muslim, a free non-Muslim subject (zhimmi), old,
young, sane, or insane. However, the guardians of the young and insane must pay
it on their behalf. Ibn al-Munzhir comments that all learned persons agree that
a zhimmi who finds rikaz has to pay its khums. This is also the opinion of
Malik, the scholars of Madinah, ath-Thauri, al-Auza’i, the scholars of Iraq,
those who use analogy (ashab ar-ra’y), and others. Ash-Shaf’i stated that khums
is only due upon those who must pay zakah.
To
be continued
