Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (6/36)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

The distinction between outwardly apparent and concealed wealth was the view preferred by our shaykh, Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa‘di, may Allah have mercy on him.

The view we have considered stronger is more likely to discharge one’s liability and is more prudent. Praise be to Allah: “Charity does not diminish wealth,” as the Infallible One ﷺ said. (1)

No zakah is due on the wealth of one whose debt reduces it below the nisab

His statement, “No zakah is due on the wealth of one whose debt reduces it below the nisab,” apparently indicates that, in his view, there is no difference whether the debt is of the same type as the wealth he possesses or of a different type. Thus, if he owes a debt in gold but possesses silver, no zakah is due on the silver. Likewise, if he owes a debt in silver but possesses livestock, no zakah is due on it.

Even if the wealth is outwardly apparent

His statement, “Even if the wealth is outwardly apparent”: the word law (even if) here indicates a point of disagreement. The usual practice of the jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, is that when they use law, the disagreement is generally strong; when they use hatta (even), the disagreement is generally weak. When they use a negative formulation—for example, saying, “Such-and-such is not a condition”—this indicates that there is disagreement over the matter, which may be weak or strong. Yet they do not use an expression such as “Such-and-such is not a condition” unless there is disagreement as to whether it is a condition. For if there were no disagreement, there would be no need to negate it, since not mentioning it itself indicates its negation.

Therefore, whenever you find, after the conditions and obligations have been mentioned, such wording as “Such-and-such is not a condition” or “Such-and-such is not obligatory,” know that there is disagreement concerning the issue. The explanation of the view to which the author alluded has already preceded. Outwardly apparent wealth is that which is kept in enclosures and homes, such as livestock, fruits, and grain.

(1) Its source has been cited previously on p. 10.

والتفريق بين الأموال الظاهرة والباطنة اختيار شيخنا عبد الرحمن بن سعدي ﵀. وهذا الذي رجحناه أبرأ للذمة، وأحوط، والحمد لله «ما نقصت صدقة من مال» كما يقوله المعصوم ﵊ (١). وَلَا زَكَاةَ فِي مَالِ مَنْ عَلَيْهِ دَيْنٌ يُنْقِصُ النِّصَاب .......... وقوله: «ولا زكاة في مال من عليه دين ينقص النصاب» ظاهر كلامه ﵀ أنه لا فرق بين أن يكون الدين من جنس ما عنده، أو من غير جنسه، فإذا كان عليه دين من الذهب، وعنده فضة فلا زكاة فيها، وكذا لو كان عنده دين من الفضة، وعنده مواشٍ فلا زكاة فيها. وَلَوْ كَانَ المَالُ ظَاهِراً، ......... قوله: «ولو كان المال ظاهراً» «لو» هذه إشارة خلاف، وعادة الفقهاء ﵏ إذا جاؤوا بـ «لو» فالغالب أن الخلاف قوي، وإذا جاؤوا بـ «حتى» فالغالب أن الخلاف ضعيف، وإذا جاؤوا بالنفي فقالوا مثلاً: ولا يشترط كذا وكذا، فهذا إشارة إلى أن فيه خلافاً قد يكون ضعيفاً، وقد يكون قوياً، لكنهم لا يأتون بمثل هذا العبارة «ولا يشترط» إلا وفيه خلاف بالاشتراط؛ لأنه لو لم يكن خلاف فلا حاجة إلى نفيه؛ لأن عدم ذكره يعني نفيه، فإذا وجدت في كلام بعد ذكر الشروط والواجبات: «ولا يشترط كذا»، أو «لا يجب كذا» فاعلم أن في المسألة خلافاً، وقد تقدم بيان القول الذي أشار إليه المؤلف، والمال الظاهر هو الذي يحفظ في الصناديق والبيوت، مثل: الماشية والثمار والحبوب.

(١) سبق تخريجه ص (١٠).