Question:
Recently, I wrote an article in Urdu arguing that gold, rather than silver, should be adopted as the standard for determining niṣāb in zakāh. In response, the well-known Qur’an teacher, Dr Farhat Hashmi, forwarded the following question to me:
Piyari Ustazah ji The reply by esteemed sheikh in itself is very pragmatic and full of Hikmat الحمد لله Two humble questions here: 1) The government always announces nisaab each year on the basis of silver (not gold). The consequent deductions through banks are calculated according to the same nisaab. 2) If gold is made the basis for nisaab then a large amount of zakat contributors will be exempted. On the other hand the number of fuqara and masakeen and other zakat applicable persons and factors is increasing day by day. How will the gap be bridged?
Answer:
The questions raised touch upon an important intersection of fiqh, public policy and social justice, and therefore need to be addressed with clarity and balance.Click Here To Follow Our WhatsApp Channel
With regard to the first point, when a Muslim government officially announces a niṣāb and organises the collection of zakāh through institutional means, such as bank deductions, this falls under the sphere of siyāsah sharʿiyyah (administrative authority exercised for public order). Once such a mechanism is in place, individuals are not entitled to interfere with, obstruct or invalidate that collection, even if they personally hold a different juristic opinion. Compliance in practice is therefore required in order to preserve order and avoid chaos. At the same time, this does not mean that scholarly discussion is closed. Scholars and concerned citizens may, and indeed should, convey well-reasoned and sincere advice to the authorities, explaining the fiqhi implications and possible long-term consequences of adopting one standard over another. Obedience in implementation and advice in counsel are two separate matters, and both have their proper place in the Sharīʿah.
As for the second issue, it is essential to recall the foundational principle upon which zakāh is built. Zakāh is not meant to be taken from the poor and redistributed among the poor; rather, it is taken from the rich and given to the poor. This is clearly established in the well-known ḥadīth in which the Prophet ﷺ instructed that zakāh is taken from the wealthy of a community and returned to its needy. The objective of zakāh, therefore, is not merely the circulation of money, but the transfer of surplus wealth from those who can afford it to those who cannot.
When silver is adopted as the universal standard for niṣāb in the modern economic context, the monetary threshold becomes extremely low due to the drastic decline in the value of silver. As a result, many people who are themselves financially strained, struggling with inflation and rising living costs, and barely meeting their basic needs, are classified as zakāh payers. In reality, such individuals are closer to being deserving recipients than obligated contributors. Making them pay zakāh reduces their already limited resources and, instead of alleviating hardship, risks entrenching it further. In this way, the very mechanism intended to ease poverty can inadvertently contribute to its growth.
It is also important to correct a common misconception: the belief that the zakāh system is meant to eradicate poverty entirely. This was never its sole purpose. Even during the time of the Khulafā’ al-Rāshidūn, when justice and piety were at their height, poor people still existed. Zakāh did not eliminate poverty, but it did ease its burden, prevent desperation, and preserve human dignity. Its role is remedial and protective, not utopian.
The persistence of poverty in many Muslim societies today is therefore not primarily a failure of the zakāh system itself, but of its implementation and the broader economic environment. A major problem is that many wealthy individuals do not pay their zakāh correctly, honestly or consistently. Others treat zakāh as the maximum of their responsibility rather than its minimum. Furthermore, zakāh alone cannot compensate for weak economic policies, lack of employment opportunities and the absence of sustainable projects that enable the poor to earn a living with dignity.
Islam does not place the entire burden of social welfare on zakāh alone. When zakāh proves insufficient, voluntary charity becomes a moral and religious necessity. The Prophet ﷺ explicitly stated that there is a right in wealth beyond zakāh. This principle becomes especially relevant when need persists despite the fulfilment of obligatory dues. Alongside this, governments bear a clear responsibility to adopt sound economic policies, invest in projects that generate employment and empower the poor to become self-sufficient rather than perpetually dependent.
In conclusion, where the government collects zakāh on the basis of a particular niṣāb, that collection should not be obstructed, even if one holds a different scholarly view. At the same time, it is both legitimate and necessary to convey thoughtful advice to policymakers. Using silver as a universal standard in the present context risks shifting the burden of zakāh onto those who are not truly wealthy, contrary to the spirit of the Sharīʿah. Zakāh lightens poverty but does not abolish it; honest payment by the rich, generous voluntary charity, and just economic policies together are what truly uphold social balance.
May Allah grant us understanding rooted in wisdom, justice tempered with mercy, and the ability to fulfil the rights of wealth in a manner that brings relief rather than hardship. آمين
You Might Also Like:
Al-Tilmeez: A Pioneering Arabic Literary Journal from Jammu and Kashmir
Professor Mufti Abdul Ghani Azhari: Scholar, Sufi, Historian, and Social Reformer of Kashmir
Mirwaiz Mohammad Ahmad son of Mufasir-e-Quran Moulana Mohammad Yousuf Shah Dies in Islamabad