Ruling on Money Earned during Hawl

Answered according to Shafi'i Fiqh by Darul Iftaa Jordan
I have a sum of money that reached Nisaab in the month of Muharam. Six months later, I earned a thousand JDs. Should I pay the Zakah on both amounts or just the portion which reached Nisaab and one lunar year elapsed on possessing it?

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

Owning an amount of money equal to Nisaab (Minimum amount liable for Zakah) at a particular time, and owning a new amount after a few months-for example, owning ten thousand JDs in the month of Muharram, then earning another ten in the month of Thul-Hijjah, whether the latter was a revenue of the former or came from a separate source, such as inheritance-entails paying the Zakah of the first ten thousand after one whole lunar year elapses on possessing it(Hawl). As for the second ten thousand, its Zakah should be paid after a Hawl elapses on possessing it. This is because it was narrated that : Aishah said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah(PBUH) say: 'There is not Zakat on wealth until Hawl (one year) has passed.' ”{Related by Ibn Majah}. He(PBUH) also said, " Whoever earns any money, he is not liable to pay Zakah, until the period of a year has passed (while still possessing the same amount of money)"{Related by Ibn Majah}. And this is the view of the Shafie jurists.

Hanbali jurist are of the view that if the second amount of money was a revenue of the first, then both should be combined into one and its Zakah should be paid after a Hawl(One whole lunar year) elapses on possessing it. But, if it wasn`t a revenue of the first amount, then it`s Zakatable after a Hawl elapses on possessing it.

On the other hand, Hanafi jurists said that both amounts should be combined into one and its Zakah should be paid after a Hawl elapses on possessing it, whether the second amount was a revenue of the first or not.

In his commentary on the above Hadith, Al-Imam Al-Khatabi(May Allah have mercy on him) said, "It backs the argument of the scholars who said that if the new amount wasn`t a revenue of the first then its Zakah should be paid after one Hawl elapses on possessing it and not as part of the Hawl of the original/first amount. Scholars have differed in this regard:

Al-Shafie said: "The Hawl of the new money starts from the date of its earning, and this was related on the authority of Abu Baker, Ali, Othman and A`ysha(May Allah be pleased with them). This is also the view of Ataa`, Ibrahim An-Nokhai`e and Omar bin Adul-Aziz."

Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: "The Hawl of the amount received as a share in an inheritance starts from the date of its reception. However, the Hawl of the amount earned as revenue of another is the same as that of the original sum."

Abo Hanifa said: "Revenues should be combined with original sums and their Zakah should be paid as one amount. This is of course after that amount reaches Nisaab and one whole lunar year elapses on possessing it."{Ma`alim As-Sunnan, 2/3 }.

We, Iftaa` Department, see that the view of the Hanafie school of thought is more forbearing because dedicating a new Hawl for each earned amount of money leads to variance of Zakah payment times and possession of Nisaab, and this leads to harm since the Hawl was legislated to facilitate for people. Allah The Almighty said, " and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion"{Al-Hajj, 78}.

If the earned wealth isn`t similar to the original wealth, then each should have a Hawl of its own. For example, gold or silver earned out of cattle. And Allah knows best.

This answer was collected from the official government Iftaa Department of Jordan.

Find more answers indexed from: Darul Iftaa Jordan
Read more answers with similar topics: