its harvest" (43), in the sequence of His statement: "...and olives and pomegranates" (43). Also, because its yield can be stored, it resembles dates and raisins. From Ahmad, [another view is] that there is no Zakah on it. This is the choice of Abu Bakr and the apparent meaning of al-Khiraqi’s statement. This is also the position of Ibn Abi Layla, al-Hasan ibn Salih, Abu Ubayd (44), and one of the two opinions of al-Shafi'i; because it is not stored in a dried state, so it is like vegetables, and the verse was not intended to refer to Zakah, because it is Meccan and Zakah was only ordained in Medina; that is why pomegranates were mentioned, yet there is no tithe on them. Mujahid said: "When he harvests his crops, he sets aside [a portion] of the stalks for them, and when he harvests (45) his palm trees, he sets aside [a portion] of the date branches for them." Al-Nakha'i and Abu Ja'far said: "This verse is abrogated, assuming it refers to what is harvestable, evidenced by the fact that the pomegranate is mentioned after it, and there is no Zakah on it."

Section: The second ruling is that Zakah is not obligatory upon any crops or fruits until they reach five wasqs. This is the position of most scholars, including Ibn Umar, Jabir, Abu Umamah ibn Sahl, Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, Jabir ibn Zayd, al-Hasan, Ata', Makhul, al-Hakam, al-Nakha'i, Malik, the People of Medina, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, Ibn Abi Layla, al-Shafi'i, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, and the rest of the scholars. We do not know of anyone who disagreed with them except Mujahid, Abu Hanifa, and those who followed him; they said: "Zakah is obligatory on both small and large amounts thereof, due to the generality of his statement - peace be upon him: "On what the sky waters, there is a tithe." And because no hawl (one-year cycle) is considered for it, so no nisaab (minimum threshold) is considered for it. Our evidence is the statement of the Prophet - may Allah bless him and grant him peace -: "There is no Sadaqah on less than five wasqs." This is agreed upon (46). This is a specific text that must be prioritized, and the generality of what they narrated must be restricted by it, just as we restricted his statement: "On pasturing camels, there is Zakah" (47) with his statement: "There is no Sadaqah on less than five heads" (48). And his statement: "On riqqa (silver currency) (49) there is one-quarter of a tenth" (50) with his statement: "There is no Sadaqah on less than five awaq" (48). And because it is wealth upon which Sadaqah is obligatory, it is not obligatory on its small amount, like all other types of wealth subject to Zakah. The hawl is not considered because its growth is completed at the time of harvest, not by its preservation, whereas the hawl is considered for other [wealth] because it is the context for the completion of growth in other types of wealth. The nisaab is considered so that it may reach a limit that can bear the social support [obligatory upon it]; therefore, it is considered. This is confirmed by the fact that Sadaqah is only obligatory upon the wealthy, as we have already mentioned, and wealth is not achieved without the nisaab, just like all other wealth subject to Zakah.