0
0
COMMENTARIES ON ISL
Charity
Since the days of Muhammad, followers of Islam have supported many educational, religious, and social welfare causes. Governments and individuals regularly contribute to charitable activities. In the Islamic world, giving serves both social and spiritual purposes.
Setting Aside For Giving
The Arabic word waqf refers to the practice of reserving property and the income it generates for a charitable donation. This custom dates back to ancient times, when the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans dedicated properties for educational and religious purposes. Today variations of waqf and charitable giving exist throughout the world and in all cultures.
Three different types of waqf exist in the Islamic world. Religious waqf includes mosques and real estate that provides funds for their operation. The first religious waqf was the Kaaba in Mecca. Philanthropic waqf promotes the interests of the poor as well as the general public by providing funding for libraries, schools, and health services. It may also be used for loans to small businesses and the construction of roads and bridges. Muhammad initiated philanthropic waqf when he donated seven orchards to assist the poor and needy. The third type, a posterity or family waqf, benefits the family and descendants of its founder.
Several rules govern the creation of a waqf. The property must be something of real or enduring value, such as land, buildings, herds, jewelry, tools, or books. The donation must be an act of charity that is made on a permanent basis. At the time of donation, the founder must be legally fit and able to make the donation. The founder specifies the conditions for waqf and decides who will manage it. These conditions must be followed as long as they are in accordance with Islamic law. All revenues generated by waqf must be used for the original purpose set forth by its founder.
By the early 1800s, corruption had become common in the management of waqf properties. Muslim governments established agencies to regulate the practice. During the colonial period of the 1800s and 1900s, and after independence, many government leaders seized possession of waqf properties. Today however, a growing number of Muslim countries seek to revive the custom of privately-run waqf foundations.
Helping The Poor
Zakat, setting aside a portion of one’s wealth for the poor, is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. Both the Qur’an and sunnah require this form of personal giving. All Muslims who are able must give 2.5 percent of their net worth annually. Wealth counted for zakat includes gold, silver, livestock, crops, currency, and items that can be quickly converted to cash, such as stocks and bonds. Early caliphs decreed that failing to pay zakat violated the law.
Zakat serves both a functional and a religious role in Islamic societies. It helps redistribute some wealth to the poor in order to reduce tension among the classes and promote a greater sense of community. Zakat also stimulates the economy. It encourages wealthy Muslims to invest in physical assets, such as equipment, factories, and tools, because such assets are not included when calculating a person’s net worth. This type of giving also increases the purchasing power of the lower classes. On a religious level, paying zakat provides a sense of completion for satisfying a pillar requirement. In addition, giving enables Muslims to overcome greed and materialism in favor of spiritual advancement.
The secular, or nonreligious, governments set up by colonial powers in the 1800s and 1900s eroded zakat practices. Secular tax systems replaced mandated religious giving. Recently, however, several Muslim states have restored zakat. Since the 1980s, Sudan and Pakistan have established agencies to collect and distribute zakat funds.
Sadaqah is a voluntary offering, above and beyond what is required, that may serve a variety of purposes besides charity. According to the Qur’an, sadaqah can be a way of atoning for offenses. Some Muslims use sadaqah to compensate for failing to perform certain rituals.
Charity And Zakāt
There are three basic forms of charity in Islam: ṣadaqah, zakāt al-fiṭr, and zakāt al-māl.
Initially, ṣadaqah was the basic form of charitable giving introduced at the advent of Islam. The term ṣadaqah was initially synonymous with zakāt, and the two words were used interchangeably in the Qurʾān and primary legal texts. After Muḥammad’s emigration to Medina, zakāt al-fiṭr was instituted as a spiritual cleansing and expiation for sins committed during the holy month of Ramaḍān. Eventually, zakāt al-māl, a systematic method for the calculation, collection, and distribution of charity, was instituted as one of the five pillars of Islam. This article will describe all three of these forms.
Ṣadaqah
Muslim lexicographers traced the meaning of the word ṣadaqah to a root indicating purity and righteousness, while an earlier Hebrew cognate also denotes almsgiving. In standard legal manuals, ṣadaqah is defined as any wealth given voluntarily to gain favor with God. It may be general, such as charity given for any good cause, or restricted, such as charitable endowments that serve specific purposes and/or people. This latter type of ṣadaqah is known as ṣadaqah jāriyah (a perpetual, enduring charity) and falls under the subject of waqf. Qurʾānic injunctions such as the verse “And in their wealth is a known right, for the beggar and outcast” (Qurʾān 51:19) laid out for believers the need to recognize a charitable right over their wealth, without making any one form of charity an obligation.
In a Prophetic tradition, the believer who gave ṣadaqah would be “called to Paradise from the door of ṣadaqah,” connoting the virtuous nature of ṣadaqah. Any permissible form of wealth, whether currency, movable property, or land, can be given as ṣadaqah. Forbidden items such as intoxicants, swine, or stolen property may not be given. Although a person is free to give as much ṣadaqah as he or she sees fit, it is preferred that people with dependents not give more than one-third of their total wealth (based on a Prophetic ḥadīth limiting to one-third the portion of an estate that can be bequeathed at the owner’s discretion). Ṣadaqah can be given by anyone to anyone, the only restriction being on children. For example, when a child gives or receives ṣadaqah, the child’s guardian retains the right of refusal.
Zakāt al-fiṭr
The word zakāt is derived from the Arabic word for purity and accretion. Fiṭr is an Arabic word meaning “to break one’s fast.” Zakāt al-fiṭr was so named because of its institution as a spiritual cleansing and expiation for sins committed during the holy month of Ramaḍān.
It is designated as “a gift to the destitute (masākīn)” (Bukhārī). Zakāt al-fiṭr is to be paid by the head of household for every “slave, freeman, male and female, young and old among the Muslims” (Bukhārī). Moreover, Prophetic tradition dictates that zakāt al-fiṭr is to be paid at the end of Ramaḍān, but before the ʿĪd prayer that takes place on the first day after the month of fasting. If zakāt al-fiṭr is paid after the ʿĪd prayer, then it is considered a form of voluntary ṣadaqah and not purification for the sins and mistakes of Ramaḍān.
During the Prophet’s period, zakāt al-fiṭr was paid as one ṣāʿ (about four and a half pounds, or roughly two kilograms) of wheat, barley, dates, dried yogurt, or raisins, but later was adjusted. It was intended to be the amount of food needed for a full meal for one person. During the caliphate of ʿUmar, when wheat production increased, ʿUmar allowed wheat to be given as zakāt al-fiṭr up to mthe amount of half of all the other staples previously mentioned. Because of this change in how zakāt al-fiṭr was paid, Muslim legal scholars debated whether zakāt al-fiṭr could be given in the form of currency as well. The Ḥanafī school allowed currency to be given, arguing that since ʿUmar had changed the amount of wheat based on need, when that need changed to currency the legal ruling should change with it. The other major schools of Islamic legal thought disagreed with this reasoning. They cited a Prophetic ḥadīth that dictates, “Hold to my sunnah and the sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs after me” (Abū Dāʾūd). Thus, ʿUmar’s change of measurement was sanctioned, while any change to currency after the time of the four “Righteous Caliphs” would not be. Modern Muslim scholars from a variety of legal schools have adopted and advanced the line of reasoning propounded by the Ḥanafī school, allowing for zakāt al-fiṭr in the form of non-food items such as clothes, prepaid cards, gift certificates, and the like.
During the second year of the hijrah, zakāt al-māl was instituted as one of the five pillars of Islam. As mentioned earlier, the word zakāt means “purification” and “increase.” By adding the word al-māl, meaning “wealth,” the compound word zakāt al-māl described a “purification of wealth” achieved by giving specific amounts of certain types of wealth for specific reasons to designated categories. Although the main rulings of zakāt were outlined during the life of Muḥammad, there were several legislative developments after his death. During the caliphate of Abū Bakr, state enforcement of payment was emphasized after considerable dissent from various Arabian tribes. By fighting those who denied the obligation of zakāt al-māl or refused to pay it to the burgeoning state, Abū Bakr reiterated zakāt al-māl as a public right and made it clear that it was not merely a tax or levy on allegiance previously due to Muḥammad alone.
During the caliphate of ʿUmar, zakāt revenue increased exponentially because of the expansion of the Islamic state. Several enhancements were added to the governance of zakāt al-māl. For example, zakāt collection was standardized, a centralized accounting system was implemented, and a fiscal year budget was enacted. Moreover, standard regulations were placed on the quality of wealth collected. An example of this standardization is that all wealth not designated for personal use or military service was classified as a business asset. Contrastingly, during the caliphate of ʿUthman, the exploratory powers of the zakāt collectors were limited to collecting publicly displayed wealth, such as crops and livestock. Private forms of wealth like gold and silver were left to the owner to calculate and distribute. As a result, these new regulations lessened the accounting burden on the state, resulted in the easing of local monetary distribution, and protected the public from unscrupulous collectors.
Conditions For Individual Zakāt Obligation
Muslim scholars are in consensus that when four conditions are met, zakāt must be paid. Anyone who is a Muslim, has reached the age of majority, is of sound mind, and has unhindered possession of their wealth, must pay zakāt on that wealth.
The inverse of these conditions is the subject of debate. Muslim scholars debated as to whether non-Muslims must practice the particulars of Islam or not. The majority of Muslim scholars stated that all adults, regardless of faith, are ethically responsible to fulfill the laws of Islam. They are unable to do so if they do not meet a chief condition for any particular Islamic duty to be accepted, namely that they are Muslim. They liken this to a person who, although he must pray, cannot do so when in a state of ritual impurity. Ḥanafī jurists disagreed, insisting that such a person is not expected to make up any particular act of worship from the time before he accepted Islam, therefore proving these acts were not obligatory on him in the first place.
The second condition is a point of disagreement among scholars. The majority require that zakāt be paid on any wealth personally owned, whether owned by the young or old, sane or those of diminished mental capacity. Ḥanafī jurists held that minors and those of diminished mental capacity only pay zakāt on publicly displayed wealth such as livestock and crops, not privately held wealth like gold and silver.
Wealth must be owned and wholly unhindered; in other words, an individual must enjoy full access to his or her wealth in order to be liable for zakāt. This leaves forms of “hindered wealth” (māl ḍimār) up to debate. Hindered wealth is every type of wealth that cannot be benefited from because its owner does 222not control it. Examples include debt, stolen assets, items held in escrow, lost goods, and confiscated and frozen assets. There is general agreement that some sort of control over this wealth must exist in order to be liable for zakāt, as in the case of debt. The applicability of zakāt to the other examples given is an issue of debate.
Types Of Wealth Liable For Zakāt
The Qurʾān and ḥadīth designate several forms of wealth as liable for zakāt: livestock, agricultural yields, rikāz (wealth extracted from the earth), silver, gold, and tradable assets. Each form of wealth must meet its particular niṣāb, or the minimum amount owned by an individual for it to become subject to zakāt.
Livestock
By consensus, zakāt on livestock is only paid on three types of animals: camels, cows, and sheep or goats. In order to be accountable as zakāt wealth, these animals must graze freely (not be feed fed) and not be used for farm labor. The niṣāb for each of these animals is different:
- for every five camels, one sheep is due;
- for every thirty cows, one sheep is due; and,
- for sheep and goats, one sheep or goat is due for every forty head.
More detailed niṣāb schedules beyond this exist for each type, but they are outside the scope of this entry. All animals (including camels, cows, and sheep) that are not free-range, are raised for breeding or trade, and are not for personal use are liable for zakāt as trade assets, not as livestock.
Agricultural Yields
Agricultural yields are liable for zakāt at the time of harvest. This includes all grains, seeds, and crops that are harvested and stored, for example, corn, wheat, barley, dates, raisins, and similar items. Zakāt is paid on the harvest whenever the seed, grain, or crop becomes ready for consumption or processing. A Prophetic tradition states: “No charity is payable on less than five wasaqs of dates or grain.” The wasaq is a medieval measurement equal to sixty ṣāʿ. One ṣāʿ is equal to 4.5 pounds (2.035 kilograms), making the niṣāb for agricultural yields about 1,345 pounds (610 kilograms). The amount due from any yield after it has reached niṣāb is defined in a Prophetic tradition: “A tenth is payable on what is watered by rain or wells, or from underground moisture, and a twentieth on what is watered by irrigation.” The Ḥanbalī school included honey as a crop yield, and required that a tenth be paid if the yield produced was more than 160 raṭl, a medieval measure of volume.
Rikāz
Rikāz is linguistically anything “fixed or concentrated in the earth.” Scholars differed as to what was meant by this category. Some specified it to mean coinage and treasure buried in the pre-Islamic era. If the unearthed coinage bears the mint of the Islamic state, it is turned over to the state’s treasury. Others defined it as mineral-rich ores. Still others defined rikāz as anything valuable extracted from the earth. Based on the latter opinion, some modern scholars have included fossil fuels, minerals, precious stones, and valuables taken from the sea in the definition of rikāz. Regardless of the opinion, anything judged as rikāz is liable for one-fifth of its value at the time of extraction, regardless of its amount, per Prophetic tradition.
Gold, Silver, And Jewelry
Silver and gold are both liable for zakāt as dictated in primary Islamic texts. There is scholarly consensus that one-fortieth (2.5 percent) is due on both silver and gold. Silver is stated expressly in the ḥadīth literature as having a niṣāb of 200 dirhams, and the niṣāb of gold as 20 dinars. Gold and silver, whether in nugget form or in coins, are both liable for zakāt. The issue of gold and silver jewelry, a germane issue in many Muslim circles, remains debated by scholars. The majority of scholars did not regard gold or silver jewelry as liable for zakāt, citing a lack of any clear or reliable textual or religious prescription. The Ḥanafī school as well as the Ẓāhirī scholar Ibn Ḥazm held that gold and silver jewelry is liable for zakāt. They cite a number of ḥadīths, such as the Prophet stating, “Never does an owner of gold or silver not pay its due, except that it will be heated in the fires of Hell,” as evidence that any gold or silver is liable for zakāt. Other Prophetic traditions are more specific, such as when Muḥammad asked a woman whose daughter was wearing gold bangles, “Have you paid zakāt on them?” (Abū Dāʾūd). In another tradition, after Muḥammad’s wife inquired as to whether gold ornaments were considered a treasure, he replied, “It is not a treasure when you pay the zakāt due on it” (Abū Dāʾūd). Some scholars consider the culture in question: In a society where women keep a great deal of wealth in jewelry, zakāt is owed. Where they do not, it is not owed. This differentiation is seen as ineffective by those who oblige zakāt on all forms of gold and silver, as people who do not keep a great deal of jewelry will ordinarily not reach the niṣāb.
In modern measurements, the weight of the niṣāb for both gold and silver must be approximated. Various methods exist to achieve this. Measuring the silver dirham by its equivalent weight in wheat kernels is the most common method mentioned in premodern Islamic legal texts. This method, however, is highly uncertain, as exemplified by the fact that some scholars held the dirham to weigh 55 kernels, while others held it to be 70 kernels. A more precise conversion method was devised using the median weight of coins minted during the reign of the caliph ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān (d. 705), first issued in A.H. 77 (696–697 A.D.). Although silver was the most common coin, its erosion rate is higher than that of gold, making it an unworthy candidate for approximating the niṣāb. There is agreement that during the time of Muḥammad, ten dirhams were exchanged for every seven dinars, or a ratio of 7:10. With an abundance of gold dinars extant, these specimens were gathered, weighed, and the total median weight determined, being 0.15 ounces (4.24 grams) for each dinar. This made the niṣāb for gold about three ounces (84.8 grams). With a ratio of seven dinars to every ten dirhams, each dirham would weigh about 0.10 ounces (2.97 grams), making the niṣāb for silver about 20.1 ounces (594 grams). These metric weights are then compared to market prices for the same precious metals, which gives the current value of the niṣāb.
With gold and silver virtually absent from use as currency in world markets, and fiat currencies being used in their place, two issues have arisen. First, are fiat currencies analogous to gold and silver, so that an individual is required to pay zakāt on them? Second, if one is required to pay zakāt on them, then which niṣāb is used as a benchmark, gold or silver? Modern Muslim scholars for the most part consider all fiat currencies to be independent currencies and wholly analogous to gold and silver, not only because of their circulation, but also because they are stores of value like gold and silver.
Those scholars who have disagreed with this analogy do not obligate a person to pay zakāt on fiat currencies because they store no real intrinsic value in and of themselves. These scholars rely on the medieval principle of “no zakāt on fils,” or the worthless metal bits used to stand in for portions of dinars or dirhams in daily, small-value transactions. This camp of modern Muslim scholars has also permitted ribā (interest) in fiat currencies on the basis of that same analogy.
Although modern fiat currencies do share some traits of fils, there are several differences between the two. Strictly speaking, the value of fils was ultimately determined by its weight, a wholly intrinsic value, in comparison to fiat currencies, whose value is wholly an extrinsic, state-regulated value. Furthermore, scholarly consensus states that to trade quantities of a fungible item asynchronously is forbidden, as it constitutes a form of ribā. Since both fiat currencies and fils are fungible, even if they were seen as wholly analogous to each other, all rules of ribā would still apply to modern fiat currencies, a position promoted by the majority of modern Muslim scholars. A direct correlation to this logic is that zakāt must be paid on fiat currencies and fils, but as fungible trade assets, not as currencies. Perhaps the most compelling argument advanced against the “no zakāt on fiat currency” camp is that it is clearly currencies that are the basis against which the prices of precious metals are measured, not vice versa. Treating fiat currencies like fils is thus an inaccurate analogy.
The second question is, which niṣāb to apply as a benchmark for valuing fiat currencies. Three opinions on this issue are posited by modern Muslim jurists: (1) promoting gold as the ideal niṣāb; (2) using silver; (3) using the lower of the two niṣābs at any given time. The scholars who defend gold as the niṣāb standard claim that gold prices are historically stable and that the niṣāb of gold is closest to the niṣāb of other forms of wealth (such as camels and sheep) when they are approximated in cash value. Those who promote silver as the niṣāb standard defend it as supported by both authentic scriptural texts and scholarly consensus. Additionally, using silver is better for the poor, as the niṣāb is lower and thus a larger number of people would be liable to pay zakāt. The third opinion, that the lower of the two niṣābs is used, is perhaps more applicable, as it maximizes the total number of individuals accountable for paying zakāt, thus increasing the total zakāt revenue taken in at any given time.
Tradable Assets
Assets liable for zakāt are those held by a merchant as inventory or posted for sale. This is the position of the vast majority of Muslim scholars, with only the Ẓāhirī school dissenting. Tradable assets are valued in either silver or gold, and 2.5 percent of their value is given as zakāt. Excluded from these are assets held for personal use (such as furniture) or business operations (such as production equipment). Illiquid assets and long-term investments are given special consideration. They are seen as analogous to unattainable debt or hindered wealth, and thus one year’s zakāt is due on their sale price at the time of sale. If illiquid assets and long-term investments are purchased to evade zakāt liability, then zakāt must be paid for each year.
Conditions For Zakāt Liability
In addition to the stipulations mentioned above for specific form of wealth as well as the condition of meeting the niṣāb, there are other general conditions that apply to all wealth for it to be liable for zakāt. First, wealth liable for zakāt must be privately owned. Public goods, government funds, charitable endowments, and similar entities are not liable for zakāt, as there is no one particular owner of this wealth. Second, the wealth, if invested or cultivated, should be expected to increase in quantity and/or value. Personal effects are not liable, because they are not held for investment or cultivation. This is based on a Prophetic tradition stating, “A Muslim is not liable for zakāt on his slave or his horse.” Wealth that is liable for zakāt must be in surplus of Pointing to this condition, the Qurʾān dictates, “They ask you how much they are to spend; say: ‘What is beyond your needs’” (Qurʾān 2:219). Also, a Prophetic tradition states, “The best of charity is that given from surplus wealth” (Bukhārī). Both of these texts indicate that zakāt is always paid from net worth after expenses, never from the gross amount earned. This varies quite a bit from the Christian Bible where we are to give ten percent. Rather than saying that it should come from the surplus, I believe a God wants it to come from the heart, the heart of a cheerful giver.
Another condition is the passing of one lunar year. Although Muslim scholars debate the authenticity of the Prophetic tradition “There is no zakāt on wealth unless a lunar year passes,” its meaning is a point of consensus among scholars (Ibn Rushd, 3:270). Calculation of the lunar year begins when the wealth held by an individual reaches the niṣāb. One year after the niṣāb is reached, the zakāt must be paid on the quantity of wealth present at that moment. If, during the interim period of the year, the amount of that wealth falls below the niṣāb, the lunar year starts over when and if the amount once again exceeds the niṣāb. Ḥanafī scholars did not consider minor decreases in a person’s wealth, causing it to fall below the niṣāb, to affect the lunar year, as religious rulings are not based on rare occurrences. If the amount decreased significantly, then the lunar year would recommence.
Although zakāt is expected to be paid on time, there is some leeway for prepayment and late payment. The majority of scholars allowed for zakāt to be prepaid by any number of years (useful for encouraging people not to be too stingy in calculating zakāt, since any annual overage can simply be applied to the next year), while others allowed no more than one year. A minority view restricted prepayment to one month before zakāt is due. Proponents of all three opinions, however, made it a condition that the person’s wealth must be equal to or greater than the niṣāb at the time of prepayment. They differ as to whether a person may prepay zakāt on wealth they have yet to earn.
Delay in payment after one lunar year has passed is permitted if and when there is a valid reason for doing so. If not, then zakāt must be paid immediately, according to the majority of scholars. A minority held that zakāt is like fasting, and, as such, if missed it may be paid at any time before it becomes obligatory again. Many Muslims pay zakāt during Ramaḍān, as any charity during the month is considered more virtuous.
Lastly, for any wealth to be determined as liable for zakāt, it must be free of claims, such as debt claims and court injunctions. Documented debt and injunctions against one’s personal estate will only eliminate or reduce one’s zakāt liability if two conditions are met: first, they were incurred or issued before one’s wealth became liable for zakāt, and, second, if that debt or injunction reduces the gross amount to below the niṣāb. To prevent further prevarication, the debtor’s property should be surveyed for surplus assets beyond his principal needs, as they may be used to evade both the payment of zakāt and debt.
Categories Of Zakāt Recipients
The categories of people who are eligible to receive the zakāt al-māl charity are specified in the Qurʾānic verse, “Charity is only paid for:
- 11am the destitute;
- the poor;
- those working to collect it, to soften the hearts;
- in manumission, those in debt, in God’s path, and the wayfarer;
- an obligation from God.
God is Omnisciente, All-Wise” (Qurʾān 9:60). Benefitting the poor (fuqarāʾ) and destitute (masākīn) is the primary aim of zakāt, and Muslim exegetes have understood the six other categories as supporting social welfare needs. Although the exact difference between the poor and the destitute is a matter of extensive debate, generally the poor person may own property but is unable to support his family because of a lack of liquidity. A destitute person is one who has “no possessions, regardless of whether he asks of others or not” (Ibn Zanjawayh, 1986, p. 436). This differentiation applies to zakāt al-māl as well as to zakāt al-fiṭr.
As a standard to apply in zakāt distribution, a ceiling for eligibility was set for these two categories (the poor and destitute). The majority of jurists opined that any person without sufficient means to live may be given zakāt, regardlesst of other forms of wealth owned. This characterization is akin to the “working poor” — those who pay taxes (or in this case, zakāt), yet still receive assistance. The Ḥanafī school argued that if a person possesses the niṣāb in any form of wealth, then he is no longer eligible for zakāt, that is, he is wealthy. The Ḥanbalī school sees anyone who possesses fifty dirhams (one-fourth of the niṣāb of silver) or its equivalent in gold as ineligible for zakāt on the basis of a questionable ḥadīth stating this.]
The third category of zakāt recipients are those employed in the collectio and distribution of zakāt. They receive a portion of the zakāt to fund and ]]compensate them (see below). Such individuals or organizations must meet certain key criteria. They should be Muslim, be of age and sound mind, be trustworthy, be knowledgeable in zakāt law, and be technically qualified for the position. Additionally, a state employee charged with zakāt collection should abide by the ethical staneerfdrf,dards for the position, such as avoiding kickbacks and maintaining proper etiquette while distributing zakāt to those in need.
One of the objectives of Islam is to preserve faith, which includes both the preservation of the faith of those who are Muslim and the nurturing of faith among those who are newly introduced to Islam. Because of this, “softening the hearts” was designated as a category for zakāt. Although the Qurʾānic verse refers to former enemies of the Prophet newly embracing Islam, the majority of Muslim scholars held that this category is applicable in all times and places. They understand the reason for this category of zakāt recipients as the benefit, both communal and individual, of subsidizing new or potential converts. In a dissenting view, the Ḥanafī school considered this category void and obsolete after the specific circumstances of the Prophet’s time.
-Another use for zakāt is the manumission of slaves. Modern scholars include in this the abolishment of all forms of subjugation; peonage and human trafficking are included in this. Debt relief is yet another specified use for zakāt. In order to be eligible, the person applying must lack sufficient funds to settle his debts, the debt must have been incurred for permissible ends, must be currently due, and if not paid would become a civil offense. Debts incurred as a result of sinful behavior (like gambling) are not eligible for debt relief from zakāt. Some scholars have I expanded the applicability of this category to any sort of assistance that promotes the general welfare of society, such as assisting those affected by personal or natural disasters. When paying the debts of those eligible, it is preferred to pay the debt directly to the creditor, for expediency and to avoid abuse.
The Qurʾānic specification of “in God’s path” as a zakāt use was understood by the majority of premodern Muslim scholars as those fighting in God’s path, that is, engaged in some form of physical struggle for the success of Islam and its defense. This category only applied to those in voluntary military service with the state, and was not considered suitable for enlisted soldiers in the armed forces. The Ḥanbalī school considered funding the expenses of religious pilgrimage to Mecca as “in God’s path” as well, because of the Prophetic tradition, “Ḥajj and ʿumrah are in God’s path” (Ibn Hanbal, 45/260). A number of modern Muslim scholars have extended the meaning of this category to every legitimate act that promotes God’s word as the highest. This would include activities for the propagation of Islam, such as proselytization (daʿwah), and Islamic education.
The wayfarer is a traveler who has traveled from his land and does not have enough money to return. Social stability is served through this category by offering relief to travelers in need. Because believers are encouraged to fulfill God’s command to travel in search of knowledge and God’s bounty, they are given a support structure to fall back on in times of need. To be eligible, the person seeking assistance should be in a position of instability during travel and not have traveled for sinful purposes. Modern Muslim scholars have included in this category exiled individuals as well as refugees.
When distributing zakāt al-māl to any of the eight categories, all scholars agree that “each locality is most worthy of its own zakāt,” following the practice of Muḥammad and his Companions.
When any region or locality has surplus zakāt, then scholars agree that to transfer that zakāt to another area would be permissible, but it should be distributed to the closest geographical area in need. If an area’s zakāt recipients have not been taken care of, then according to the majority opinion, if a person transfers his or her zakāt outside the area, the zakāt would be invalid and the person would be liable to pay it again. This issue has become contentious in recent times, as many zakāt organizations have formed to tend specifically to troubled areas overseas. The Ḥanafī school makes a dispensation in regard to this, allowing zakāt to be transferred if it is to be given to one’s immediate family.
Although there are no primary texts of the Qurʾān or ḥadīth designating how much a recipient of zakāt should get, some scholars have concluded that a recipient should receive enough money to suffice him for life. Others have held that he be given only enough for the year. Still others have favored following whatever the custom and convention in that time and place might be on how much should be given and when (fear of specific sorts of abuse of zakāt funds are pertinent here). Cash may be given to zakāt recipients, but seeing that the reasoning behind disbursement of zakāt is to reduce poverty and restore dignity to the less fortunate, some scholars have allowed for tools or training in lieu of cash disbursements.
The one category where restrictions on receiving zakāt funds have been applied is those working to collect, manage, and distribute zakāt. Most scholars have insisted that they receive a fair wage, while the Shāfiʿī school limited people or organizations in this category to receiving no more than an aggregate one-eighth (12.5 percent) of the total zakāt wealth they collect. Since this category is one of eight named in the Qurʾānic verse, this practice essentially ring-fences the remaining seven-eighths, protecting the rights of the poor from administrative waste.
Those Ineligible For Zakāt
Five categories of people are not eligible to receive zakāt:
- the rich;
- the able-bodied;
- non-Muslims at war with Muslims;
- a person’s immediate family members; and,
- the members of the “Family of the Prophet.”
The first two are mentioned specifically in a Prophetic tradition: “Zakāt is not permissible for the rich, nor the able-bodied and capable” (Tirmidhī). The exceptions to this rule are those rich individuals who are fighting in God’s path and those who are wayfarers. The able-bodied worker is deemed ineligible when the following conditions are present: permissible employment opportunities are available, engaging in employment would not cause undue hardship, and the job he is performing fulfills his basic needs (including that of dependents).
As for giving zakāt to non-Muslims, there is general agreement that zakāt is not to be given to anyone who is fighting against Islam and Muslims. As for non-combatants, Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 931) mentions in his influential work al-Ijmāʿ that scholars have achieved consensus on not giving a dhimmī anything from zakāt al-māl. There are some exceptions, however, upheld by some later Muslim scholars. The standard position of all Sunnī madhhabs except the Ḥanafīs (who consider the category obsolete) is that non-Muslims can be given zakāt if they are among “those whose hearts are softened.” Another position found among Muslim jurists (attributed to the Companion Ibn ʿAbbās) is that non-Muslims may be given zakāt from any of the eight categories, but only in the absence of eligible Muslims. Yet a fourth opinion allows any person fitting any of the eight categories to receive zakāt regardless of faith and without preference for one faith over the other. This last opinion was related from early scholars such as the caliph ʿUmar, as well as Zufar (d. 775), an early pillar of the Ḥanafī school.
Muslim scholars are in agreement that a person’s direct family members, those whom they are responsible to maintain financially, are not permitted to receive zakāt from that person in particular. Allowances were made for women to give their zakāt to their spouses, as only the husband has a requirement to maintain his wife financially and not vice versa.
The “Family of the Prophet” (ahl al-bayt) is the last category of people ineligible for zakāt, based on a Prophetic ḥadīth to that effect. Although its exact boundaries are debated and shift with local custom, the Family of Muḥammad is generally held among Sunnīs to be the patrilineal descendants of Muḥammad’s agnates up the generation of his grandfather, as well as Muḥammad’s descendants through his daughter’s sons. In the absence of the khums, the fifth of the spoils of war that the Qurʾān specifies for maintaining Muḥammad’s family and that several Sunnī madhhabs considered payable to the ahl al-bayt descendants, a problem developed. This was solved through a compromise: allowing the poor members of the ahl al-bayt to receive zakāt from rich members.
Charity
401 – 004
Last Update: 02/2021
