Al-Asfahānī stated: kanz (hoarded wealth) is to pile money upon itself and store it away.

Muḥammad Rashīd added: kanz refers to what is locked in chests of minted dinars and dirhams, not raw gold and silver that may lawfully be fashioned into jewelry. Dinars are made for spending and have no benefit except through circulation; hoarding them renders their benefit void.

As for the two ḥadiths cited on this issue, the scholars have examined both their chains of transmission (isnād) and their wording (matn):

• The report of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb reaches us through Ibn Luhayʿah and al-Muthannā ibn al-Ṣabāḥ, both of whom are weak narrators. In general, the scholars have differed over the acceptability of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb’s narrations, and the best summary is that whatever he relates from his father from his grandfather—as is the case here—is weak, whereas what he transmits from others is acceptable.

• Regarding the ḥadith of Umm Salamah, there is a break in the chain between ʿAṭāʾ and Umm Salamah, for he never heard directly from her. In addition, the isnād contains ʿItāb ibn Bashīr and Thābit ibn ʿAjlān, both of whom have been deemed problematic.

Scholarly verdicts on these two ḥadiths include the following:

– al-Tirmidhī: “Nothing in this chapter is authentic.”
– al-Nasāʾī judged the report of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb to be mursal (missing the Companion).
– Abū ʿUbayd said: “The Yemeni ḥadith is only known through a single route whose chain is criticized.”
– Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr: “Nothing sound from the Prophet ﷺ concerning gold has been established.”
– Ibn Ḥazm: “The reports invoked to oblige zakāh on jewelry are feeble; there is no point in pursuing them.”

Evidence cited by those who hold zakāh on jewelry to be non-obligatory:

First: al-Bukhārī (1395) and Muslim (982) record that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, “No charity is due from a Muslim on his slave or on his horse.”

al-Nawawī commented: This ḥadith indicates that possessions kept for personal use are not subject to zakāh.