What is the ruling regarding treasure found in the property of a protected Muslim or Dhimmi?
Chapter on Zakat on Gold and Silver
Al-Mughni
Book of Zakat
Primary text
There is evidence from Ahmad suggesting that the treasure belongs to the owner of the house. This is based on his ruling that if one hires a digger who finds ancient treasure while digging in the house owner's property, the treasure belongs to the house owner. This is the position held by Abu Hanifa and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. However, another narration attributed to Ahmad suggests the treasure belongs to the finder, based on his ruling when a worker is hired to dig in the owner's house and finds treasure, that it belongs to the laborer. This latter view is considered correct by Al-Qadi and aligns with the positions of Al-Hasan ibn Salih and Abu Thawr, and was favored by Abu Yusuf. The justification for this latter view is that the treasure is not owned by possessing the land, meaning it belongs to the one who discovers it. Yet, if the owner claims it, his word is accepted due to his possession over the site. If he does not claim it, it belongs to the finder. Al-Shafi'i holds that it belongs to the house owner if he acknowledges it, otherwise it belongs to the original owner because it was within his possession.
Supporting text
If a laborer is hired specifically to search for treasure and finds it, the laborer receives no share, and the finder is the employer, as this resembles hiring someone to gather fodder or hunt, where the resulting acquisition belongs to the employer. If the laborer is hired for a purpose other than seeking treasure, the finder is the laborer. Al-Awza'i concurs that if one hires a laborer to dig in his house and he finds treasure, it belongs to the employer. If the employer says, 'I hired you to dig here hoping to find treasure,' and this was stated, the laborer receives his wages, and what is found belongs to the employer.