enough to save you from the Fire.’

Abu Dawud recorded the report (1/244), as did others, and—according to al-Hafiz in al-Talkhis (6/19)—its chain meets the standards of authenticity adopted by al-Bukhari and Muslim. The Muhammad b. ʿAtaʾ who appears in the isnad is Muhammad b. ʿAmr b. ʿAtaʾ, a reliable narrator whose reports are accepted in both Sahih collections, as noted in al-Targhib. Ibn al-Jawzi, however, assumed in al-Tahqiq (1/198/1) that he was a different, unknown individual; he therefore declared the hadith weak. Such an assessment is not worth heeding.

This hadith is explicit in making zakat obligatory on jewelry, and it is the proof upon which those who uphold that ruling—among them the Hanafis—rely.

Yet a report from ʿĀʾishah herself seems to conflict with this. Mālik (1/245) relates—through al-Qasim b. Muhammad, the very transmitter of the ring narration—that ʿĀʾishah used to sponsor her orphaned nieces who owned jewelry, but she would not take zakat from their ornaments. Its chain is exceptionally sound, and a similar wording has already been mentioned in the report of Ahmad.