Sun yarda a kan wasu daga cikin nau'ikan dukiya da zakka ta wajaba a kansu, sun kuma sabawa a kan wasu. Nau'ikan da suka yarda a kansu sun hada da nau'i biyu na ma'adanai, wato zinariya da azurfa wadanda ba a yi su kayan ado ba, nau'i uku na dabbobi, wato raƙumi, shanu da tumaki, nau'i biyu na hatsi, wato alkama da sha'ir, da nau'i biyu na 'ya'yan itace, wato dabino da zabibi. An samu sabani a kan zaitun.

They agreed about some of the categories in which zakat is obligatory and disagreed about others. The categories which they agreed upon include two kinds of minerals, namely, gold and silver that are not moulded into jewelry, three categories of animals, namely, camels, cows and sheep, two categories of grains namely wheat and barley, and two categories of fruit, namely dates and raisins. There is some dispute about olives.

Sun sabawa game da zinariya kawai idan tana cikin sifar kayan ado. Wannan shi ne domin malaman shari'a na Hijaz, Malik, al-Layth, da al-Shafi'i, sun tabbatar da cewa babu zakka a kanta idan an yi niyyar yin ado da sakawa. Abu Hanifa da almajiransa kuwa sun ce a kanta ana karbar zakka. Dalilin sabanin yana samuwa ne daga yadda take cikin dukiya ta kasuwanci da zinariya da azurfa, wadanda ake amfani da su musamman a matsayin hanyar musaya ga dukkan sauran abubuwa. Wadanda suka dauke su kamar kayayyaki, wadanda manufarsu ta farko amfani ne, sun ce babu zakka a cikin kayan ado. Wadanda suka dauke su kamar zinariya da azurfa, wadanda manufarsu ta farko ita ce sauƙaƙe musaya, sun ce ana karbar zakka a kansu. Akwai kuma wani dalili na sabanin nasu, shi ne karo da hadisai suka yi a kan wannan batu. An ruwaito daga Jabir daga Annabi ﷺ cewa ya ce: "Babu zakka a cikin kayan ado." (Amr dan Shu'aib ya ruwaito daga mahaifinsa daga kakansa cewa: "Wata mace ta zo wurin Manzon Allah ﷺ tare da 'yarta, sai ga 'yar tana sanye da 'yan kunnuwa biyu na zinariya a hannunta. Ya ce mata: 'Shin kina biyan zakka a kan wadannan?' Ta ce: 'A'a!' Ya ce: 'Shin zai faranta maki rai idan Allah ya sanya maki a hannuwanki, a ranar Alkiyama, 'yan kunnuwa biyu na wuta?' Sai ta cire su, ta ajiye su a gaban Annabi ﷺ, ta ce: 'Su na Allah ne da Manzonsa.'") Dukkan hadisan biyu suna da rauni, musamman hadisin Jabir.

They disagreed about gold only when it is in the form of jewelry. This is so as the jurists of Hijaz, Malik, al-Layth, and al-ShaficT, maintained that there is no zakat on it if it is intended for adornment and wearing. Abu Hanifa and his disciples said that zakat is to be levied on it. The reason for disagreement stems from its vacillation between being goods and being gold and silver that are used primarily as a medium of exchange for all other things. Those who held them to be similar to goods, whose primary purpose is utility, said-that there is no zakat in it (jewelry). Those who considered them similar to gold and silver, the primary purpose of which is to facilitate exchange, said that it is subject to zakat. There is also another reason for their disagreement, and that is the conflict of traditions on the issue. It is related from Jabir from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “There is no zakat in jewelry”. (Amr ibn ShuSiyb has related from his father from his grandfather “that a woman came up to the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) accompanied by .her daughter, who was wearing (two) gold bracelets on her hands. He said to her, ‘Do you pay zakat on these?’ She said, ‘No!’ He said, ‘Would it please you if Allah were to put on your hands, on the Day of Judgment, two bracelets of fire?’ She took them off and placing them before the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon’him) and said, ‘They are for Allah and His Messenger’”. Both traditions are weak, particularly the tradition of Jabir.

Wani babban dalili na ƙin jinin su kuma yana samo asali ne daga rashin tabbas game da kayan ado na zinare da azurfa da aka saya don sawa, wanda babban manufarsa shi ne sauƙaƙe ciniki ba amfani ba, tsakanin kasancewarsa zinare ko azurfa, da kuma kasancewarsa kaya, wanda babban manufarsa ta sabanin zinare da azurfa ne, wato amfani ba sauƙaƙe musaya ba. Ina nufin musaya a matsayin kasancewarsu kuɗi. Ra'ayin Malik ya bambanta game da kayan ado da aka saya don haya. Ya taba ɗaukar su kamar kayan ado da aka saya don sawa, sau wani kuma ya ɗauke su kamar ƙarfen zinare da ake amfani da shi wajen ciniki.

Another major reason for their disagreement stems from the vacillation of jewelry acquired for adornment between its being gold and silver, the primary purpose of which is facilitating trade and not utility, and between being goods, whose primary purpose is the opposite of gold and silver, that is, use and not facilitating exchange. I mean by exchange their existence as currencies. Malik’s opinion differed about jewelry that is acquired for renting. He held it once to be similar to jewelry that is acquired for adornment, and on another occasion held it to be similar to gold metal that is used for transactions.

Ikhtilafinsu a kan dabbobi ya haɗa da sabanin su a kan jinsi da kuma sabanin su a kan nau'o'i. Sabanin da ke kan jinsi ya shafi dawakai, domin mafi yawan malamai sun tabbatar da cewa babu zakka a kan dawakai. Abu Hanifa kuwa ya tabbatar da cewa idan an kiwo su a sarari kuma manufar kiwon su ita ce haihuwa, to akwai zakka a kansu, wato idan akwai na namiji da na mace. Dalilin sabanin ya samo asali ne daga rikicin ƙiyas da nassi, da kuma abin da ake zaton rikicin wani nassi da wani nassi. Nassin da ke nuna cewa babu zakka a kansu shi ne faɗin Annabi ﷺ: "Babu sadaka (zakka) ga Musulmi a kan dokinsa da bawansa." Ƙiyasin da ke saɓa wa wannan ma'anar gaba ɗaya shi ne cewa manufar kiwon dawakan da ake yi a sarari ita ce ƙaruwa da haihuwa, wanda saboda haka suke kama da shanu da tumaki. Nassin da ake zaton yana saɓa wa wannan ma'anar gaba ɗaya shi ne faɗin Annabi ﷺ lokacin da "ya ambaci doki, bai kuwa manta da haƙƙin Allah a cikin dawakan kansu ba [a matsayin dabbobin da ake yi wa zakka], haka kuma a cikin ƙaruwarsu a matsayin dukiya." Abu Hanifa ya ce haƙƙin Allah a nan yana nufin biyan zakka a kansu, kuma hakan za a yi amfani da shi ga dawakan da ake kiwon su a sarari daga cikinsu. Alƙadi (Ibn Rushd) ya ce: "Ya fi kyau a ɗauki wannan nassi a matsayin wanda ba a yi bayani a kansa ba (mujmal) maimakon a ɗauke shi a matsayin gaba ɗaya, domin a yi amfani da shi a matsayin hujja ga wajibcin zakka." Abu Hanifa ya samu hamayya daga almajiransa biyu, Abu Yusuf da Muhammad, a kan wannan mas'ala. Duk da haka, an tabbatar daga Umar, Allah ya yarda da shi, cewa yana karɓar zakka a kansu. Saboda haka aka ce an yi hakan ne a matsayin bayar da gudummawa ta son rai daga masu biyan zakkar.

Their disagreement over animals includes their dispute over species and their dispute over categories. The disagreement about species relates to horses, as the majority maintain that there is no zakat in horses. Abu Hanifa maintained that if they pasture freely and their purpose is breeding there is zakat on them, that is, when they are male and female. The reason for the disagreement arises from the conflict of analogy with the text as well as what is believed to be a conflict of one text with another. The text implying that there is no zakat on them is the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “There is no sadaqa (zakat) for a Muslim on his horse and on his slave”. The analogy that conflicts with this general meaning is that the purpose (of keeping) pasturing horses is growth and breeding because of which they resemble cows and sheep. The text that is assumed to conflict with this general meaning is the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) when “he mentioned horse and did not forget the right of Allah in the horses themselves [as animals subject to zakat], as well as in their growth as wealth”. Abu Hanifa held that the right of Allah here means the payment of zakat on them, and this is to be applied to the pasturing horses among them. The Qadi (Ibn Rushd) said: “It is better if this text is treated as unelaborated (mujmal) rather than general, so that it may be used as an argument for zakat'. Abu Hanifa was opposed by his two disciples, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad on this issue. It is, however, established from TJmar, may Allah be pleased with him, that he used to assess zakat on them. It is, therefore, said that this was done as a voluntary contribution by the payees.

Ra'ayin su kan nau'ikan dabbobi ya shafi kiwon raƙuma, shanu, da tumaki cikin 'yanci, idan aka bambanta su da dabbobin da ba a kiwon su cikin 'yanci ba. Wata ƙungiyar malaman fiqhu ta wajabta zakka a kan waɗannan nau'ikan uku, ko suna kiwo cikin 'yanci ko ba su yi ba. Wannan ita ce ra'ayin al-Layth da Malik. Sauran malaman fiqhu na yankunan sun ce babu zakka a kan dabbobin da ba a kiwon su cikin 'yanci a cikin waɗannan nau'ikan uku.

Their disagreement over categories (of animals) relates to (freely) pasturing camels, cows, and sheep as distinguished from the non-pasturing animals. A group of jurists imposed zakat on these three categories irrespective of their being pasturing or non-pasturing animals. This was the opinion of al-Layth and Malik. The remaining jurists of the provinces held that there is no zakat on the non-pasturing animals in these three categories.

Dalilin sabanin su ya samo asali ne daga karon ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya (mutlaq) da ma'ana ta takaita (muqayyad), da kuma karon qiyas da ma'anar gaba ɗaya ta nassi. Ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya take a faɗin Annabi (tsira da amincin Allah su tabbata a gare shi) ﷺ, "A cikin tumaki arba'in akwai tunkiya ɗaya". Ma'ana ta takaita kuwa tana cikin faɗin Annabi (tsira da amincin Allah su tabbata a gare shi) ﷺ, "A kan tumakin kiwo akwai zakka". Waɗanda suka ba ma'anar gaba ɗaya fifiko a kan ta takaitaccen, sun ce akwai zakka a kan dabbobin kiwo da waɗanda ba na kiwo ba, yayin da waɗanda suka ba ta takaitaccen fifiko suka ce zakka tana kan dabbobin kiwo kawai. Ana iya cewa dalilin sabanin yana iya kasancewa daga karon fahimtar alamar nassi ta hanyar kishiya (dalil al-khitab) da ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya. Alamar nassi ta kishiya a faɗin Annabi ﷺ, "A kan tumakin kiwo akwai zakka", tana nuna cewa babu zakka a kan tumakin da ba na kiwo ba, alhali ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya a faɗin Annabi ﷺ, "A cikin tumaki arba'in akwai tunkiya ɗaya", tana nuna cewa tumakin kiwo suna da matsayi ɗaya da waɗanda ba na kiwo ba. Amma ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya (a ƙa'ida) ta fi ƙarfi fiye da alamar nassi ta kishiya, kamar yadda fifikon ma'ana ta takaita a kan ta gaba ɗaya ya fi sanannu. Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm kuwa ya ce ma'ana ta gaba ɗaya ce ke mulkin ta takaita, cewa a kan tumaki, na kiwo ko ba na kiwo ba, akwai zakka, haka kuma a kan raƙuma, saboda faɗin Annabi ﷺ, "Babu sadaka a kan abin da ya gaza raƙuma biyar". Tun da kuwa babu hadisi ingantacce game da shanu, sai a dogara da ijma'i wanda ya ce zakka tana kan shanun kiwo kawai. Don haka, da bambance shanu daga sauran dabbobi, wannan ya zama ra'ayi na uku.

The reason for their disagreement comes from the conflict of an absolute meaning with a qualified meaning, and the conflict of analogy with the general implication of a text. The absolute meaning is in the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “In forty sheep is [the zakat of] one sheep”. The qualified meaning is in the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “On pasturing sheep there is zakat”. Those who gave predominance to the absolute implication over the qualified said that there is zakat in pasturing as well as non-pasturing (animals), while those who gave predominance to the qualified meaning said zakat is levied on the pasturing animals alone. It is possible to say that the reason for disagreement stems also from the conflict of the indirect indication of the text (dalil al- khitab) with the general implication. The indirect indication of the text in the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “On pasturing sheep there is zakat”, implies that there is no zakat on a non-pasturing sheep, while the general meaning in the saying of the Prophet, “In forty sheep is one sheep”, implies that pasturing sheep here have the same status as the non­ pasturing sheep, but the general meaning (as a rule) is stronger than the indirect indication of the text, just as the predominance of the qualified meaning over the absolute meaning is better known. Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm, however, held that the absolute meaning governs the qualified meaning, and that on sheep, pasturing or non-pasturing, there is zakat, so also on camels, because of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “There is no sadaqa on what is less than five camels”, and as there is no established tradition about cows it is necessary to rely upon consensus which says that zakat is levied on pasturing cows alone. Thus, with the distinction of cows from the rest this becomes a third opinion.

Qiyasin da ya saba wa ma'anar gaba ɗaya ta maganar Annabi (ƙasƙanci da albarka su tabbata a gare shi), "A cikin tumaki arba'in akwai tunkiya ɗaya", yana nuna cewa dabbar kiwo ce wadda manufarta ita ce ƙaruwa da riba, wannan kuma yana nan a cikinta sosai. Haka kuma, ana karɓar zakka a kan dukiya fiye da buƙata, kuma fiye da buƙata sau da yawa tana samuwa a cikin dukiyar kiwo (dabbobi), kuma saboda wannan aka tsara hawl (shekara guda ta wucewa) gare ta. Waɗanda suka takaita ma'anar gaba ɗaya da wannan qiyasi ba su wajabta zakka a kan dabbobin da ba na kiwo ba, amma waɗanda ba su takaita ta ba, suka ce ma'anar gaba ɗaya ita ce mafi ƙarfi, sun wajabta ta a kan nau'o'in biyu daidai.

The analogy that is in conflict with the general implication of the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “In forty sheep is one sheep”, implies that it is the pasturing animal whose purpose is growth and profit, which is present here to the maximum. Moreover, zakat is levied on surplus wealth and surplus is usually found in pasturing wealth (animals), and it is because of this that hawl (passage of one year) has been prescribed for it. Those who restricted the general meaning with this analogy did not impose zakat on animals other than pasturing animals, but those who did not restrict it and held that the general meaning is stronger imposed’ it equally on both categories.

Wannan ne, to, abin da suka sabani a kai game da dabbobin da ake biyan zakka a kansu. Sun yarda baki ɗaya cewa babu zakka a kan abin da ake samu daga dabbobi, sai dai game da zuma, inda suka sabawa juna. Mafi yawan malamai sun tabbatar da cewa babu zakka a kanta. Wasu malaman fiqhu sun ce ana biyan zakka a kanta. Dalilin sabanin nasu ya samo asali ne daga takaddama game da tabbatar da ingancin hadisin da ya zo a kan wannan batu, wato faɗar Annabi ﷺ: "Ga kowane buhu goma, akwai buhu ɗaya." Al-Tirmidhi da wasu ne suka ruwaito shi.

This, then, is what they differed' over in the case of animals on which zakat is levied. They agreed unanimously that there is no zakat on what is derived from animals, except in the case of honey, over which they differed. The majority maintained that there is no zakat on it. A group of jurists said that zakat is levied on it. The reason for their disagreement stems from their dispute over the authentication of the tradition regarding on this subject, and that is the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “For every ten bags is one bag”. It is recorded by al-TirmidhT and others.

Amfanin gona (tsirrai) da malamai suka sabawa a kansu, bayan yarjejeniyarsu a kan nau'o'i huɗu da muka ambata, ya shafi irin amfanin gona. Wasu daga cikinsu ba su wajabta zakka a kan wani abu banda waɗannan nau'o'i huɗu ba. Wannan ra'ayin Ibn Abi Layla ne, da Sufyan al-Thawri, da Ibn al-Mubarak. Wasu kuma sun tabbatar da cewa ana wajabta zakka a kan duk wani tsiro (amfanin gona) da za a iya adanawa a matsayin abinci. Wannan ra'ayin Malik ne da al-Shafi'i. Wasu kuma sun ce ana wajabta zakka a kan duk abin da ƙasa ke samarwa, sai dai ciyawa, da itace, da sanda. Wannan shi ne ra'ayin Abu Hanifa.

The crops (vegetation) over which they disagreed, after their agreement over the four categories we have mentioned, relates to the species of crops. Some of them did not uphold zakat on anything besides these four categories. This was the opinion of Ibn Abi Layla, Sufyan al-Thawn, and Ibn al-Mubarak. Some of them maintained that zakat is to be levied on any vegetation (crop) that can be stored as food. This is the opinion of Malik and al-ShaficT. Some said that zakat is to be levied on all that is produced from the land, except for grass, wood, and cane. This was Abu HanTfa’s the opinion.

The reason for disagreement between those who restricted zakat to the categories agreed upon and those who extended it to storable food is related to their dispute over whether zakat on these four categories is specific to their substance or is due to an underlying cause they represent, which is that they are used as food. Those who maintained that it is for the categories in themselves restricted the obligation to them, and those who said that it is because of the underlying cause that they are food extended the obligation to all kinds of food. The reason for disagreement between those who restricted the obligation to food and those who extended it to everything produced from land, except those over which there is consensus, such as grass, wood, and cane, is based on the conflict of analogy with a general text. The text implying a general application is the saying of the Prophet (God's peace and blessings be upon him), "There is ^ushr in what is watered by the sky, but in that which is irrigated by the watering-can there is one-half of ^ushr." Ma (what), a relative pronoun like the term alladhi, implies generality. The other text implying the general meaning is the words of the Exalted: "He it is Who produceth gardens trellised and untrellised, and the date-palm, and crops of divers flavour, and the olive and the pomegranate, like and unlike. Eat ye of the fruit thereof when it fruiteth, and pay the due thereof upon the harvest day." Analogy implies that the purpose of zakat is the elimination of need, and this is usually done through what is food. Those who restricted the general meaning with this analogy waived zakat on what is other than food, but those who gave predominance to the general implication extended it to what is besides it, except the things excluded by consensus.

The reason for disagreement among those who restricted zakat to the categories agreed upon and those who extended it to storable food, is related to their dispute over whether zakat on these four categories is specific to their substance or is due to an underlying cause they represent, which is that they are used as food. Those who maintained that it is for the categories in themselves restricted the obligation to them, and those who said that it is because of the underlying cause that they are food extended the obligation to all kinds of food. The reason for disagreement among those who restricted the obligation to food and those who extended it, to everything produced from land, except those over which there is consensus, like grass, wood, and cane, is based on the conflict of analogy with a general text. The text implying a general application is the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “There is ^ushr in what is watered by the sky, but in that which is irrigated by the watering-can there is one-half of <ushr”. Ma (what), a relative pronoun like the term alladhi, implies generality. The other text implying the general meaning are the words of the Exalted, “He it is Who produceth gardens trellised and untrellised, and the date-palm, and crops of divers flavour, and the olive and the pomegranate, like and unlike. Eat ye of the fruit thereof when it fruiteth, and pay the due thereof upon the harvest day”.193 Analogy implies that the purpose, of zakat is the elimination of need, and this is usually done through what is food. Those who restricted the general meaning with this analogy waived zakat on what is other than food, but those who gave predominance to the general implication extended it to what is besides it, except the things excluded by consensus.

Waɗanda suka amince a kan abinci sun sami saɓani a wasu abubuwa game da ko waɗannan suna cikin rukunin abinci, da kuma ko ana iya yin kiyasi bisa abin da aka yarda a kansa. Wannan yana kama da saɓanin Malik da al-Shafi'i game da zaitun. Malik ya tabbatar da wajabcin zakka a kan zaitun, yayin da al-Shafi'i ya hana hakan a ra'ayinsa na ƙarshe da ya bayar a Masar. Dalilin saɓanin shi ne saɓaninsu game da ko zaitun abinci ne da ake iya adanawa. Irin wannan ne saɓanin almajiran Malik game da wajabcin zakka a kan ɓaure. Wasu daga cikinsu sun ce ana karɓar zakka a kan 'ya'yan itatuwa amma ba a kan kayan lambu ba, kuma wannan shi ne ra'ayin Ibn Habib, saboda faɗin Maɗaukaki: "Shi ne wanda ya samar muku da gonaki masu tsari da waɗanda ba su da tsari, da dabino, da amfanin gona iri-iri na ɗanɗano, da zaitun da rumman, masu kama da waɗanda ba su kama ba. Ku ci daga 'ya'yansu idan sun yi 'ya'ya, kuma ku biya haƙƙinsu a ranar girbi."{194} Waɗanda suka bambanta tsakanin 'ya'yan itace da zaitun ta hanyar fassarar wannan ayar ba su da wata hujja, sai dai hujja mai rauni sosai.

Those who agreed about food differed over certain things with reference to their dispute over whether these are in the category of food, and whether analogy can be constructed upon that which is agreed upon. This is like the disagreement of Malik and al-ShaficT over olives. Malik upheld the obligation of zakat on them, while al-Shafi T disallowed this c in his later opinion rendered in Egypt. The reason for disagreement is based on their dispute over whether olives are storable food. Of the same nature is the disagreement of Malik’s disciples about the obligation of zakat on figs. Some of them held that zakat is to be levied on fruits but not vegetables, and this is the opinion of Ibn Habib, because of the words of the Exalted, “He it is Who produceth gardens trellised and untreliised, and the date-palm, and crops of divers flavour, and the olive and the pomegranate, like and unlike. Eat ye of the fruit thereof when it fruiteth, and pay the due thereof upon the harvest day”.194 Those who distinguished between fruit and olives through the interpretation of the verse have no basis, except a very weak one.

Sun yarda cewa babu zakka a kan dukiyar da ba a yi niyyar kasuwanci da ita ba (kaya, har da bayi), amma sun sabawa juna game da wajabcin zakka a kan kayan da ake amfani da su wajen kasuwanci. Malaman yankuna sun tabbatar da wajabcinta, amma Zahiriyyah sun hana ta. Dalilin sabanin nasu ya samo asali ne daga takaddamarsu game da wajabta zakka ta hanyar kiyasi (qiyas), da kuma sabanin da suke yi game da ingancin hadisin Samura ibn Jundub, wanda ya ce: "Manzon Allah ﷺ yana umurtar mu da mu fitar da zakka a kan kayan da muka sanya cikin kasuwanci." Haka kuma an ruwaito daga Annabi ﷺ cewa ya ce: "Ku biya zakkar alkama." Kiyasin da mafi yawan malamai suka dogara da shi shi ne cewa kayan da aka sayo don kasuwanci manufarsu ita ce riba da karuwa, saboda haka sun yi kama da nau'o'in uku da zakka ke wajaba a kansu bisa ijma'i, wato amfanin gona, dabbobi, da zinariya da azurfa. Al-Tahawi ya yi imani cewa zakka a kan kaya ta tabbata daga Umar da kuma daga Ibn Umar, kuma babu wani daga cikin sahabbai da ya saba musu. Wasu sun dauka cewa wannan lamari yana nufin ijma'in sahabbai, wato idan an ruwaito ra'ayi daga daya daga cikinsu, ba a kuma ruwaito wani sahabi yana adawa da shi ba, amma wannan ra'ayi rauni ne.

They agreed that there is no zakat on goods (chattel includes slaves) that are not intended for trade, but they disagreed about the imposition of zakat on goods that are employed in trade. The jurists of the provinces upheld its obligation, but the Zahirites disallowed it. The reason for their disagreement arises from their dispute about the imposition of zakat ’through analogy, and also their dispute over the authenticity of the tradition of Samura ibn Jundub, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to order us to set aside zakat on goods that we included in trade”. It is also related from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, “Pay zakat on wheat”. The analogy on which the majority relied is that the goods acquired for trade have growth as their purpose and therefore resemble the three species on which zakat is levied by agreement, that is, crops, cattle, and gold and silver. Al-TahawT believed that zakat on goods is established from TJmar and from Ibn TJmar and none of the Companions opposed them. Some thought that such a situation amounts to a consensus of the Companions, that is, when an opinion is transmitted from one of them, and nothing is transmitted from another Companion against it, but this is weak.