Zakat

Yahya related to me from Malik from Amr ibn Yahya al-Mazini that his father said that he had heard Abu Said al-Khudri say that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "There is no zakat on less than five camels, there is no zakat on less than five awaq (two hundred dirhams of pure silver) and there is no zakat on less than five awsuq (three hundred sa)

Yahya related to me from Malik from Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abd arRahman ibn Abi Sasaca al-Ansari from al-Mazini from his father from Abu Said al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "There is no zakat on less than five awsuq of dates, there is no zakat on less than five awaq of silver and there is no zakat on less than five camels

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to his governor in Damascus about zakat saying, "Zakat is paid on the produce of ploughed land, on gold and silver, and on livestock." Malik said, "Zakat is only paid on three things:the produce of ploughed land, gold and silver, and livestock

Yahya related to me from Malik that Muhammad ibn Uqba, the mawla of az Zubayr, asked al-Qasim ibn Muhammad whether he had to pay any zakat on a large sum given to him by his slave to buy his freedom. Al- Qasim said, "Abu Bakr as-Siddiq did not take zakat from anyone's property until it had been in his possession for a year." Al- Qasim ibn Muhammad continued, "When Abu Bakr gave men their allowances he would ask them, 'Do you have any property on which zakat is due?' If they said, 'Yes,' he would take the zakat on that property out of their allowances. If they said, 'No,' he would hand over their allowances to them without deducting anything from them

Yahya related to me from Malik from Urwa ibn Husayn from A'isha bint Qudama that her father said, "When I used to come to Uthman ibn Affan to collect my allowance he would ask me, 'Do you have any property on which zakat is due? 'If I said, 'Yes,' he would deduct the zakat on that property from my allowance, and if I said, 'No,' he would pay me my allowance (in full)

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to say, "Zakat does not have to be paid on property until a year has elapsed over it

Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab said, "The first person to deduct zakat from allowances was Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan." (i.e. the deduction being made automatically) . Malik said, "The agreed sunna with us is that zakat has to be paid on twenty dinars (of gold coin), in the same way as it has to be paid on two hundred dirhams (of silver)." Malik said, "There is no zakat to pay on (gold) that is clearly less than twenty dinars (in weight) but if it increases so that by the increase the amount reaches a full twenty dinars in weight then zakat has to be paid. Similarly, there is no zakat to pay on (silver) that is clearly less than two hundred dirhams (in weight), but if it increases so that by the increase the amount reaches a full two hundred dirhams in weight then zakat has to be paid. If it passes the full weight then I think there is zakat to pay, whether it be dinars or dirhams." (i.e. the zakat is assessed by the weight and not the number of the coins.) Malik said, about a man who had one hundred and sixty dirhams by weight, and the exchange rate in his town was eight dirhams to a dinar, that he did not have to pay any zakat. Zakat had only to be paid on twenty dinars of gold or two hundred dirhams. Malik said, in the case of a man who acquired five dinars from a transaction or in some other way which he then invested in trade, that, as soon as it increased to a zakatable amount and then a year elapsed, he had to pay zakat on it, even if the zakatable amount was reached one day before or one day after the passing of a year. There was then no zakat to pay on it from the day the zakat was taken until a year had elapsed over it. Malik said, in the similar case of a man who had in his possession ten dinars which he invested in trade and which reached twenty dinars by the time one year had elapsed over them, that he paid zakat on them right then and did not wait until a year had elapsed over them, (counting) from the day when they actually reached the zakatable amount. This was because a year had elapsed over the original dinars and there were now twenty of them in his possession. After that there was no zakat to pay on them from the day the zakat was paid until another year had elapsed over them. Malik said, "What we are agreed upon (here in Madina) regarding income from hiring out slaves, rent from property, and the sums received when a slave buys his freedom, is that no zakat is due on any of it, whether great or small, from the day the owner takes possession of it until a year has elapsed over it from the day when the owner takes possession of it." Malik said, in the case of gold and silver which was shared between two co-owners, that zakat was due from any one whose share reached twenty dinars of gold, or two hundred dirhams of silver, and that no zakat was due from anyone whose share fell short of this zakatable amount. If all the shares reached the zakatable amount and the shares were not equally divided, zakat was taken from each man according to the measure of his share. This applied only when the share of each man among them reached the zakatable amount, because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had said, "There is no zakat to pay on less than five awaq of silver." Malik commented, "This is what I prefer most out of what I have heard about the matter." Malik said, "When a man has gold and silver dispersed among various people he must add it all up together and then take out the zakat due on the total sum ." Malik said, "No zakat is due from some one who acquires gold or silver until a year has elapsed over his acquisition from the day it became his

Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman from more than one source that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, assigned the mines of al Qabaliyya, which is in the direction of al-Fur, to Bilal ibn Harith al-Mazini, and nothing has been taken from them up to this day except zakat

Malik said, "In my opinion, and Allah knows best, nothing is taken from what comes out of mines until what comes out of them reaches a value of twenty gold dinars or two hundred silver dirhams. When it reaches that amount there is zakat to pay on it where it is on the spot. Zakat is levied on anything over that, according to how much of it there is as long as there continues to be a supply from the mine. If the vein runs out, and then after a while more becomes obtainable, the new supply is dealt with in the same way as the first, and payment of zakat on it is begun on it as it was begun on the first. Malik said, "Mines are dealt with like crops, and the same procedure is applied to both. Zakat is deducted from what comes out of a mine on the day it comes out, without waiting for a year, just as a tenth is taken from a crop at the time it is harvested, without waiting for a year to elapse over it." Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab and from Abu Salama ibn Abd ar-Rahman from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace ,said, "There is a tax of a fifth on buried treasure

Malik said, "The position which we are agreed upon, and which I have heard the people of knowledge mentioning, is that rikaz refers to treasure which has been found which was buried during the jahiliyya, as long as neither capital is required, nor expense, great labour or inconvenience incurred in recovering it. If capital is required or great labour is incurred, or on one occasion the mark is hit and on another it is missed, then it is not rikaz." Yahya related to me from Malik from Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Qasim from his father that A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to look after the orphaned daughters of her brother in her house. They had jewellery (which they wore) and she did not take zakat from this jewellery of theirs

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to adorn his daughters and slave-girls with gold jewellery and he did not take any zakat from their jewellery. Malik said, "Anyone who has unminted gold or silver, or gold and silver jewellery which is not used for wearing, must pay zakat on it every year. It is weighed and one-fortieth is taken, unless it falls short of twenty dinars of gold or two hundred dirhams of silver, in which case there is no zakat to pay. Zakat is paid only when jewellery is kept for purposes other than wearing. Bits of gold and silver or broken jewellery which the owner intends to mend to wear are in the same position as goods which are worn by their owner - no zakat has to be paid on them by the owner." Malik said, "There is no zakat (to pay) on pearls, musk or amber

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "Trade with the property of orphans and then it will not be eaten away by zakat

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Qasim that his father said, ''A'isha used to look after me and one of my brothers - we were orphans - in her house, and she would take the zakat from our property

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, used to give the property of the orphans that were in her house to whoever would use it to trade with on their behalf

Yahya related to me from Malik that Yahya ibn Said bought some property on behalf of his brother's sons who were orphans in his house, and that that property was sold afterwards for a great deal of profit. Malik said, "There is no harm in using the property of orphans to trade with on their behalf if the one in charge of them has permission. Furthermore, I do not think that he is under any liability

Yahya related to me that Malik said, "I consider that if a man dies and he has not paid zakat on his property, then zakat is taken from the third of his property (from which he can make bequests), and the third is not exceeded and the zakat is given priority over bequests. In my opinion it is the same as if he had a debt, which is why I think it should be given priority over bequests." Malik continued, "This applies if the deceased has asked for the zakat to be deducted. If the deceased has not asked for it to be deducted but his family do so then that is good, but it is not binding upon them if they do not do it." Malik continued, "The sunna which we are all agreed upon is that zakat is not due from someone who inherits a debt (i.e. wealth that was owed to the deceased), or goods, or a house, or a male or female slave, until a year has elapsed over the price realised from whatever he sells (i.e. slaves or a house, which are not zakatable) or over the wealth he inherits, from the day he sold the things, or took possession of them." Malik said, "The sunna with us is that zakat does not have to be paid on wealth that is inherited until a year has elapsed over it." Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from as-Sa'ib ibn Yazid that Uthman ibn Affan used to say, "This is the month for you to pay your zakat. If you have any debts then pay them off so that you can sort out your wealth and take the zakat from it

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ayyub ibn Abi Tamima as- Sakhtayani that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, when writing about wealth that one of his governors had collected unjustly, ordered it to be returned to its owner and zakat to be taken from it for the years that had passed. Then shortly afterwards he revised his order with a message that zakat should only be taken from it once, since it was not wealth in hand

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yazid ibn Khusayfa that he had asked Sulayman ibn Yasar whether zakat was due from a man who had wealth in hand but also owed a debt for the same amount, and he replied, "No." Malik said, "The position that we are agreed upon concerning a debt is that the lender of it does not pay zakat on it until he gets it back. Even if it stays with the borrower for a number of years before the lender collects it, the lender only has to pay zakat on it once. If he collects an amount of the debt which is not zakatable, and has other wealth which is zakatable, then what he has collected of the debt is added to the rest of his wealth and he pays zakat on the total sum." Malik continued, "If he has no ready money other than that which he has collected from his debt, and that does not reach a zakatable amount, then he does not have to pay any zakat. He must, however, keep a record of the amount that he has collected and if, later, he collects another amount which, when added to what he has already collected, brings zakat into effect, then he has to pay zakat on it." Malik continued, "Zakat is due on this first amount, together with what he has further collected of the debt owed to him, regardless of whether or not he has used up what he first collected. If what he takes back reaches twenty dinars of gold, or two hundred dirhams of silver he pays zakat on it. He pays zakat on anything else he takes back afte rthat, whether it be a large or small amount, according to the amount." Malik said, "What shows that zakat is only taken once from a debt which is out of hand for some years before it is recovered is that if goods remain with a man for trading purposes for some years before he sells them, he only has to pay zakat on their prices once. This is because the one who is owed the debt, or owns the goods, should not have to take the zakat on the debt, or the goods, from anything else, since the zakat on anything is only taken from the thing itself, and not from anything else." Malik said, "Our position regarding some onewho owes a debt, and has goods which are worth enough to pay off the debt, and also has an amount of ready money which is zakatable, is that he pays the zakat on the ready money which he has to hand. If, however, he only has enough goods and ready money to pay off the debt, then he does not have to pay any zakat. But if the ready money that he has reaches a zakatable amount over and above the amount of the debt that he owes, then he must pay zakat on it

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Zurayq ibn Hayyan, who was in charge of Egypt in the time of al-Walid, Sulayman, and Umar ibn Abd al-'Aziz, mentioned that Umar ibn Abd al- Aziz had written to him saying, "Assess the muslims that you come across and take from what is apparent of their wealth and whatever merchandise is in their charge, one dinar for every forty dinars, and the same proportion from what is less than that down to twenty dinars, and if the amount falls short of that by one third of a dinar then leave it and do not take anything from it. As for the people of the Book that you come across, take from the merchandise in their charge one dinar for every twenty dinars, and the same proportion from what is less than that down to ten dinars, and if the amount falls short by one third of a dinar leave it and do not take anything from it. Give them a receipt for what you have taken f rom them until the same time next year." Malik said, "The position among us (in Madina) concerning goods which are being managed for trading purposes is that if a man pays zakat on his wealth, and then buys goods with it, whether cloth, slaves or something similar, and then sells them before a year has elapsed over them, he does not pay zakat on that wealth until a year elapses over it from the day he paid zakat on it. He does not have to pay zakat on any of the goods if he does not sell them for some years, and even if he keeps them for a very long time he still only has to pay zakat on them once when he sells them." Malik said, "The position among us concerning a man who uses gold or silver to buy wheat, dates, or whatever, for trading purposes and keeps it until a year has elapsed over it and then sells it, is that he only has to pay zakat on it if and when he sells it, if the price reaches a zakatable amount. This is therefore not the same as the harvest crops that a man reaps from his land, or the dates that he harvests from his palms." Malik said, "A man who has wealth which he invests in trade, but which does not realise a zakatable profit for him, fixes a month in the year when he takes stock of what goods he has for trading, and counts the gold and silver that he has in ready money, and if all of it comes to a zakatable amount he pays zakat on it." Malik said, "The position is the same for muslims who trade and muslims who do not. They only have to pay zakat once in any one year, whether they trade in that year or not

Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "I heard Abdullah ibn Umar being asked what kanz was and he said, 'It is wealth on which zakat has not been paid

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abdullah ibn Dinar from Abu's-Salih as-Samman that Abu Hurayra used to say, "Anyone who has wealth on which he has not paid zakat will, on the day of rising, find his wealth made to resemble a whiteheaded serpent with a sac of venom in each cheek which will seek him out until it has him in its power, saying, 'I am the wealth that you had hidden away

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had read what Umar ibn al- Khattab had written about zakat, and in it he found: "In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the ompassionate." The Book of Zakat. On twenty-four camels or less zakat is paid with sheep, one ewe for every five camels. On anything above that, up to thirty-five camels, a she-camel in its second year, and, if there is no she camel in its second year, a male camel in its third year. On anything above that, up to forty-five camels, a she- camel in its third year. On anything above that, up to sixty camels, a she camel in its fourth year that is ready to be sired. On anything above that, up to seventy-five camels, a she-camel in its fifth year. On anything above that, up to ninety camels, two she-camels in their third year. On anything above that, up to one hundred and twenty camels, two she-camels in their fourth year that are ready to be sired. On any number of camels above that, for every forty camels, a she-camel in its third year, and for every fifty, a she-camel in its fourth year. On grazing sheep and goats, if they come to forty or more, up to one hundred and twenty head, one ewe. On anything above that, up to two hundred head, two ewes. On anything above that, up to three hundred, three ewes. On anything above that, for every hundred, one ewe. A ram should not be taken for zakat. nor an old or an injured ewe, except as the zakat-collector thinks fit. Those separated should not be gathered together nor should those gathered together be separated in order to avoid paying zakat. Whatever belongs to two associates is settled between them proportionately. On silver, if it reaches five awaq (two hundred dirhams), one fortieth is paid

Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki from Tawus al Yamani that from thirty cows, Muadh ibn Jabal took one cow in its second year, and from forty cows, one cow in its third or fourth year, and when less than that (i.e. thirty cows) was brought to him he refused to take anything from it. He said, "I have not heard anything about it from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. When I meet him, I will ask him." But the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, died before Muadh ibn Jabal returned. Yahya said that Malik said, "The best that I have heard about some one who has sheep or goats with two or more shepherds in different places is that they are added together and the owner then pays the zakat on them. This is the same situation as a man who has gold and silver scattered in the hands of various people. He must add it all u p and pay whatever zakat there is to pay on the sum total." Yahya said that Malik said, about a man who had both sheep and goats, that they were added up together for the zakat to be assessed, and if between them they came to a number on which zakat was due, he paid zakat on them. Malik added, "They are all considered as sheep, and in Umar ibn al-Khattab's book it says, 'On grazing sheep and goats, if they come to forty or more, one ewe.' " Malik said, "If there are more sheep than goats and their owner only has to pay one ewe, the zakat collector takes the ewe from the sheep. If there are more goats than sheep, he takes it from the goats. If there is an equal number of sheep and goats, he takes the ewe from whichever kind he wishes." Yahya said that Malik said, "Similarly, Arabian camels and Bactrian camels are added up together in order to assess the zakat that the owner has to pay. They are all considered as camels. If there are more Arabian camels than Bactrians and the owner only has to pay one camel, the zakat collector takes it from the Arabian ones. If, however, there are more Bactrian camels he takes it from those. If there is an equal number of both, he takes the camel from whichever kind he wishes." Malik said, "Similarly, cows and water buffaloes are added up together and are all considered as cattle. If there are more cows than water buffalo and the owner only has to pay one cow, the zakat collector takes it from the cows. If there are more water buffalo, he takes it from them. If there is an equal number of both, he takes the cow from whichever kind he wishes. So if zakat is necessary, it is assessed taking both kinds as one group." Yahya said that Malik said, "No zakat is due from anyone who comes into possession of livestock, whether camels or cattle or sheep and goats, until a year has elapsed over them from the day he acquired them, unless he already had in his possession a nisab of livestock. (The nisab is the minimum amount on which zakat has to be paid, either five head of camels, or thirty cattle, or forty sheep and goats). If he already had five head of camels, or thirty cattle, or forty sheep and goats, and he then acquired additional camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, either by trade, or gift, or inheritance, he must pay zakat on them when he pays the zakat on the livestock he already has, even if a year has not elapsed over the acquisition. And even if the additional livestock that he acquired has had zakat taken from it the day before he bought it, or the day before he inherited it, he must still pay the zakat on it when he pays the zakat on the livestock he already has " Yahya said that Malik said, "This is the same situation as some one who has some silver on which he pays the zakat and then uses to buy some goods with from somebody else. He then has to pay zakat on those goods when he sells them. It could be that one man will have to pay zakat on them one day, and by the following day the other man will also have to pay." Malik said, in the case of a man who had sheep and goats which did not reach the zakatable amount, and who then bought or inherited an additional number of sheep and goats well above the zakatable amount, that he did not have to pay zakat on all his sheep and goats until a year had elapsed over them from the day he acquired the new animals, whether he bought them or inherited them.This was because none of the livestock that a man had, whether it be camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, was counted as a nisab until there was enough of any one kind for him to have to pay zakat on it. This was the nisab which is used for assessing the zakat on what the owner had additionally acquired, whether it were a large or small amount of livestock. Malik said, "If a man has enough camels, or cattle, or sheep and goats, for him to have to pay zakat on each kind, and then he acquires another camel, or cow, or sheep, or goat, it must be included with the rest of his animals when he pays zakat on them " Yahya said that Malik said, "This is what I like most out of what I heard about the matter." Malik said, in the case of a man who does not have the animal required of him for the zakat, "If it is a two-year-old she-camel that he does not have, a three-year-old male camel is taken instead. If it is a three- or four- or five-year-old she-camel that he does not have, then he must buy the required animal so that he gives the collector what is due. I do not like it if the owner gives the collector the equivalent value." Malik said, about camels used for carrying water, and cattle used for working water-wheels or ploughing, "In my opinion such animals are included when assessing zakat

Yahya said that Malik said, concerning two associates, "If they share one herdsman, one male animal, one pasture and one watering place then the two men are associates, as long as each one of them knows his own property from that of his companion If someone cannot tell his property apart from that of his fellow, he is not an associate, but rather, a co-owner " Malik said, "It is not obligatory for both associates to pay zakat unless both of them have a zakatable amount (of livestock). If, for instance, one of the associates has forty or more sheep and goats and the other has less than forty sheep and goats, then the one who has forty has to pay zakat and the one who has less does not. If both of them have a zakatable amount (of livestock) then both of them are assessed together (i.e the flock is assessed as one) and both of them have to pay zakat. If one of them has a thousand sheep, or less, that he has to pay zakat on, and the other has forty, or more, then they are associates, and each one pays his contribution according to the number of animals he has - so much from the one with a thousand, and so much from the one with forty. Malik said, "Two associates in camels are the same as two associates in sheep and goats, and, for the purposes of zakat, are assessed together if each one of them has a zakatable amount (of camels). That is because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'There is no zakat on less than five head of camels,' and Umar ibn al-Khattab said, 'On grazing sheep and goats, if they come to forty or more - one ewe.' " Yahya said that Malik said, "This is what I like most out of what I have heard about the matter." Malik said that when Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "Those separated should not be gathered together nor should those gathered together be separated in order to avoid paying zakat," what he meant was the owners of livestock. Malik said, "What he meant when he said, 'Those separated should not be gathered together' is, for instance, that there is a group of three men, each of whom has forty sheep and goats, and each of whom thus has to pay zakat. Then, when the zakat collector is on his way ,they gather their flocks together so that they only owe one ewe between them. This they are forbidden to do. What he meant when he said, 'nor should those gathered together be separated,' is, for instance, that there are two associates, each one of whom has a hundred and one sheep and goats, and each of whom must therefore pay three ewes. Then, when the zakat collector is on his way, they split up their flocks so that they only have to pay one ewe each. This they are forbidden to do. And so it is said, 'Those separated should not be gathered together nor should those gathered together be separated in order to avoid paying zakat.' " Malik said, "This is what I have heard about the matter." Yahya related to me from Malik from Thawr ibn Zayd ad-Dili from a son of Abdullah ibn Sufyan ath-Thaqafi from his grandfather Sufyan ibn Abdullah that Umar ibn al-Khattab once sent him to collect zakat. He used to include sakhlas (when assessing zakat), and they said, "Do you include sakhlas even though you do not take them (as payment)?" He returned to Umar ibn al-Khattab and mentioned that to him and Umar said, "Yes, you include a sakhla which the shepherd is carrying, but you do not take it. Neither do you take an akula, or a rubba, or a makhid, or male sheep and goats in their second and third years, and this is a just compromise between the young of sheep and goats and the best of them." Malik said, "A sakhla is a newborn lamb or kid. A rubba is a mother that is looking after her offspring, a makhid is a pregnant ewe or goat, and an akula is a sheep or goat that is being fattened for meat." Malik said, about a man who had sheep and goats on which he did not have to pay any zakat, but which increased by birth to a zakatable amount on the day before the zakat collector came to them, "If the number of sheep and goats along with their (newborn) offspring reaches a zakatable amount then the man has to pay zakat on them. That is because the offspring of the sheep are part of the flock itself. It is not the same situation as when some one acquires sheep by buying them, or is given them, or inherits them. Rather, it is like when merchandise whose value does not come to a zakatable amount is sold, and with the profit that accrues it then comes to a zakatable amount. The owner must then pay zakat on both his profit and his original capital, taken together. If his profit had been a chance acquisition or an inheritance he would not have had to pay zakat on it until one year had elapsed over it from the day he had acquired it or inherited it." Malik said, "The young of sheep and goats are part of the flock, in the same way that profit from wealth is part of that wealth. There is, however, one difference, in that when a man has a zakatable amount of gold and silver, and then acquires an additional amount of wealth, he leaves aside the wealth he has acquired and does not pay zakat on it when he pays the zakat on his original wealth but waits until a year has elapsed over what he has acquired from the day he acquired it. Whereas a man who has a zakatable amount of sheep and goats, or cattle, or camels, and then acquires another camel, cow, sheep or goat, pays zakat on it at the same time that he pays the zakat on the others of its kind, if he already has a zakatable amount of livestock of that particular kind." Malik said, "This is the best of what I have heard about this

Yahya said that Malik said, "The position with us concerning a man who has zakat to pay on one hundred camels but then the zakat collector does not come to him until zakat is due for a second timeand by that time all his camels have died except five, is that the zakat collector assesses from the five camels the two amounts of zakat that are due from the owner of the animals, which in this case is only two sheep, one for each year. This is because the only zakat which an owner of livestock has to pay is what is due from him on the day that the zakat is (actually) assessed. His livestock may have died or it may have increased, and the zakat collector only assesses the zakat on what he (actually) finds on the day he makes the assessment. If more than one payment of zakat is due from the owner of the livestock, he still only has to pay zakat according to what the zakat collector (actually) finds in his possession, and if his livestock has died, or several payments of zakat are due from him and nothing is taken until all his livestock has died, or has been reduced to an amount below that on which he has to pay zakat, then he does not have to pay any zakat, and there is no liability (on him) for what has died or for the years that have passed. Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban from al-Qasim ibn Muhammad that A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Sheep from the zakat were brought past Umar ibn al-Khattab and he saw amongst them a sheep with a large udder, ready to give milk, and he said, 'What is this sheep doing here?' and they replied, 'It is one of the sheep from the zakat.' Umar said, 'The owners did not give this sheep willingly. Do not subject people to trials. Do not take from the muslims those of their animals which are the best food-producers