Islamic Fiqh > Zakat > The eight categories of zakat recipients > The eight categories from A to Z
Contents
Updated on 24 September 2026 at 4:12 PM
This selection from the Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence (al-Mawsua al-Fiqhiyya) examines the recipients of zakat and the rules governing their eligibility, starting from the eight categories designated in Surah 9, verse 60. It gathers the positions of the four Sunni schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali) on the rich person forbidden to take charity, the poor person able to earn a living, the student devoted to knowledge, the amount granted to each recipient, and then the categories of zakat collectors, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, the freeing of slaves, and the debtors. Each view is accompanied by its classical references and the hadiths supporting it, with their numbers in the collections of Bukhari and Muslim.
The Hanafis and the Malikis say: the miskin (needy person) is one who finds nothing at all, so that he needs to ask for charity, and it is permissible for him to take it. (Fath al-Qadir, 2/15; Majma' al-Anhar, 220; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/493; al-Sharh al-Saghir, 1/425)
Their views then differ concerning the faqir (poor person). For the Hanafis: the poor person is one who owns something below the legal nisab of zakat; if he owns a nisab of any zakatable wealth, he is rich and entitled to nothing of the zakat, whereas if he owns less than a nisab, he is entitled to it. It is the same if he holds a non-growing nisab while being burdened by essential need: if he is not so burdened, zakat is withheld from him, like one who owns clothing worth a nisab that he does not need, for zakat then becomes unlawful for him.
And if the value of what he owns reaches a nisab while his assets are entirely absorbed by essential need, he remains among those entitled to zakat, like one who owns books needed for his teaching, or tools of a craft, or the like. (Fath al-Qadir, 2/15; Majma' al-Anhar, 220)
The Malikis say: the poor person is one who owns something that does not suffice for his subsistence for a year. (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/493; al-Sharh al-Saghir, 1/425)
The wealth that prevents taking zakat: the agreed-upon principle among the jurists is that zakat is not paid, from the share of the poor and the needy, to a rich man, for Allah, the Most High, made it for the poor and the needy, and the rich person does not fall among them. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) announced that it:
"Is taken from among their rich and returned to their poor."Authentic hadith, narrated by Bukhari (1331) and Muslim (19)
And he said: "The rich person has no share in it," for the rich man's taking it prevents it from reaching its rightful people and defeats the wisdom of its obligation, which is to enrich the poor through it. (Authentic hadith, narrated by Abu Dawud, 1633, and others; al-Mughni, 3/446-447)
But the scholars differed concerning the wealth that forbids taking it: the majority of jurists, namely the Malikis, the Shafi'is and Ahmad in one narration, hold that the criterion is sufficiency: whoever finds, from sale proceeds or otherwise, what suffices him and those he supports is rich, and zakat is not lawful for him; the same applies to one who owns nothing while not being in need. If he does not find that and is in need, charity becomes lawful for him even if what he owns reaches a nisab, indeed a zakatable nusub. On this view, nothing prevents a man on whom zakat is due from simultaneously being entitled to zakat.
al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Malik and al-Shafi'i said that there is no defined, known limit for wealth; rather, a man's situation is considered according to his means and capacity: as soon as he is content with what he has, charity is forbidden to him, and as soon as he is in need, it becomes lawful for him.
al-Shafi'i said: it may happen that a man is rich with a dirham plus earnings, while a thousand does not enrich him, because of his personal weakness and the large number of his dependents. (Ma'alim al-Sunan, 2/227)
Among what supports this view:
First, the hadith in which the Prophet said to Qabisa ibn al-Mukhariq, who came to him seeking help for a debt he had incurred:
"O Qabisa, asking is not lawful except for three men: a man who incurred a debt, asking is lawful for him until he obtains it, then he holds back his hand; a man struck by a calamity that swept away his property, asking is lawful for him until he obtains a means of subsistence, or, in another wording, a settled means of living; and a man struck by destitution, until three men of sound judgment from his people testify: so-and-so has been struck by destitution, asking then becomes lawful for him until he obtains a means of subsistence. Any asking other than these, O Qabisa, is illicit gain that its owner consumes."Authentic hadith, narrated by Muslim (1044)
Second, need is poverty, and wealth is its opposite: whoever is in need is a poor man who falls under the generality of the text, and whoever is self-sufficient falls under the generality of the texts forbidding charity. The proof that poverty is need is the saying of Allah, the Most High:
"O mankind, it is you who are the poor (in need) of Allah."
Surah 35 (Fatir), 15
That is: you are in need of Him. The poet likewise said: "I am truly poor for her kindness," that is: truly in need.
Two consequences follow from this:
Thus, whoever owns merchandise worth a thousand dinars or more, but whose profit does not provide his sufficiency because of a market slump or the large number of his dependents, may take from zakat. Whoever owns livestock reaching the nisab, or a crop reaching five awsuq without that covering all his sufficiency, may take from zakat, and this does not prevent zakat from being due on his property. The wealth that makes zakat obligatory is indeed the ownership of a nisab under specific conditions, whereas the wealth that forbids taking it is that through which sufficiency is obtained: no necessary link binds the two. (Sharh Ghayat al-Muntaha, 2/135)
al-Maymuni said: I discussed with Abu Abdillah (Ahmad ibn Hanbal): it may happen that a man owns camels and sheep on which zakat is due while he is poor; he has forty sheep and a farm that does not suffice him: may he be given from zakat? He answered: yes. He mentioned the saying of Umar: "Give them, even if such and such camels pass on them." (al-Mughni, 3/440)
Ahmad said in the narration of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Hakam: if a man owns a building or an estate worked for ten thousand or more, and it does not suffice him, he takes from zakat. He was asked: a man has standing crops and owns nothing to harvest them with: may he take from zakat? He answered: yes. (al-Mughni, 3/440; Sharh Ghayat al-Muntaha, 2/135)
It is said in "Sharh al-Ghaya": whoever owns books needed for memorization and study, or jewelry to wear or to rent out that he needs, that does not prevent him from taking zakat. (Sharh Ghayat al-Muntaha, 2/135)
It is not permissible for him to pay the zakat of his own property to himself when he is in need. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) poses the question: may the poor man who has dependents and on whom zakat is due pay it to himself and to his family? The answer is that this is not permitted, for it is not a discharge paid as it is due; but the imam or the collector may hand him his zakat after collecting it from him, according to the sounder of the two narrations from Ahmad. If it is then asked whether it may be waived from him, the answer is that no text establishes that, and the difference between the two questions is clear. (Zad al-Ma'ad, 5/336-337)
Imam Ahmad, in the second narration, which also carries the apparent meaning of the school: whoever finds his sufficiency is rich; if he does not find it and holds fifty dirhams, or their equivalent in gold only, he is rich even if it does not suffice him, by virtue of the hadith:
"Whoever asks people for something while having enough to suffice him will come on the Day of Resurrection with his begging as scratches, or gashes, or wounds on his face. It was said: O Messenger of Allah, what suffices him? He answered: fifty dirhams, or their equivalent in gold."Authentic hadith, narrated by Abu Dawud (1626), al-Tirmidhi (3/650), al-Nasa'i (2591), Ibn Majah (1840) and others
The distinction between sale proceeds and other wealth was made only in following this hadith. (al-Mughni, 3/437; al-Insaf, 3/223; Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat, 1/424; al-Ifsah, 1/373; Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 1/380; al-Sharh al-Saghir, 1/425; al-Majmu', 7/325-326; Majmu' al-Fatawa, 11/20; Jawahir al-'Uqud, 1/396)
The Hanafis, for their part, hold that the wealth which forbids taking and receiving charity is one of two things. The first: owning a zakatable nisab of any kind of wealth, such as a fifth of freely grazing camels, two hundred dirhams, or twenty dinars (approximately 85 grams of 24-karat gold); for the Law divided people into two classes: a rich man from whom zakat is taken and a poor man to whom it is returned, according to the hadith "it is taken from among their rich and returned to their poor" cited above (Bukhari, 1331; Muslim, 19), and it is not possible to be rich and poor at the same moment.
Whoever owns a nisab on which zakat is due, but a large number of dependents who need many expenses, may neither be given zakat nor lawfully take it.
The second wealth that forbids: owning, among the wealth on which zakat is due, what exceeds his need, the surplus reaching a value of two hundred dirhams. Such is the case of one who acquires, beyond his needs, clothing, furnishings, riding animals, books, houses, shops or the like, all for use and not for trade or hoarding: if what remains reaches a value of two hundred dirhams, taking charity becomes unlawful for him. Whoever owns two houses and is content with one, which, if sold, equals the money nisab, may not take zakat; the same applies to one who holds inherited books, or craft tools worth a nisab, while he has no need of them, for he is neither a man of knowledge nor a practitioner of that craft.
al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the measure of need is what al-Karkhi mentioned in his "Mukhtasar": there is no harm in giving zakat to one who owns a dwelling, the furnishings of his house, a servant, a horse, a weapon, clothing for his body and books of knowledge if he is a man of knowledge. If he owns beyond that a surplus whose value reaches two hundred dirhams, taking charity becomes unlawful for him; it is indeed narrated from al-Hasan al-Basri that he said: "They used to give zakat to one who owned ten thousand dirhams in horses, weapons, servants and houses." For these things are among the indispensable needs without which a man cannot manage, so that it makes no difference whether he owns them or not. (Bada'i' al-Sana'i', 2/498-499)
It is mentioned in "al-Fatawa" that whoever owns shops and houses for rent, whose yield does not suffice him or his dependents, is a poor man to whom taking charity is lawful according to Muhammad and Zufar, but not according to Abu Yusuf; and the same applies if one owns land and a vineyard whose yield does not suffice.
If he holds subsistence food worth two hundred dirhams: if it constitutes his sufficiency for a month, charity is lawful for him; if it constitutes that of a year, some say it is not, and others say it is, for it deserves being redirected toward sufficiency, and the rightful claimant is attached to nonexistence; the Prophet moreover stored up for his wives the food of a year. And if he owns a winter garment that he does not need in summer, taking charity remains lawful for him. al-Kasani said: such is the view of our companions. (al-Bada'i', 2/500; Radd al-Muhtar, 2/348)
Ibn Abidin (may Allah have mercy on him) reports in "al-TatarKhaniyya", from "al-Sughra": whoever dwells in a house that exceeds his need, provided he does not dwell in all of it, may take charity according to the sound view. Muhammad was asked there about one who owns land he farms, shops he runs, or a house producing three thousand, without that sufficing for his expenses and those of his family for a year: he answered that taking zakat is lawful for him even if its value reaches thousands, and the fatwa rests on that; according to the other two (Abu Yusuf and Zufar), it would not be lawful. (Radd al-Muhtar, 2/348)
The jurists differed concerning one who is able to earn his sufficiency and that of those he supports: may zakat be given to him?
The Hanafis and the Malikis hold that it is permissible for him to take zakat, even if he is strong and able to earn, by virtue of the saying of Allah "charities are only for the poor and the needy" (Surah 9, al-Tawba, 60): yet this man is a poor man. What was permitted to the legally accountable person in his state of poverty is not forbidden to him because of his strength in the other state, like the fasting of an expiation once permitted for lack of money: his capacity to earn what would free him is not taken into account to forbid it. Since the reality of need cannot be determined in advance, the ruling was tied to its indicator, which is poverty.
Some Hanafis, who as above permit giving to the working poor, add that taking it is not proper for him: for the lawfulness of giving does not entail the lawfulness of taking, as when one gives to a rich man believing him poor: the giving is valid and the taking is unlawful.
The majority of Hanafis say: taking is not unlawful, but abstaining is preferable for one who has a means of livelihood. (Majma' al-Anhar, 220; al-Bada'i', 2/501; Fath al-Qadir, 2/28; al-Ishraf, 1/192; Nayl al-Awtar, 5/162) Some Malikis likewise hold that giving to the one able to earn is not permitted. (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/494)
The Shafi'is, the Hanbalis and some Malikis hold that whoever among the poor and the needy is able to earn his sufficiency and that of those he supports, or complete sufficiency, may not take from zakat; nor is it permissible for the zakat payer to give it to him if he knows his situation, and the gift does not count if he does:
"The rich person has no share in it, nor the strong one able to earn."Authentic hadith, narrated by Abu Dawud (1633)
And in another wording: "Charity is not lawful for the rich man, nor for the one of sound strength." Al-mira means strength, and al-sawi the well-balanced man, sound of limb. No reliance is placed on physical capacity and bodily vigor as long as they are not accompanied by earnings that enrich and suffice: strength without earnings neither clothes anyone from nakedness nor feeds anyone from hunger.
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if the worker finds no one to employ him, zakat becomes lawful for him, for he is incapable. (al-Majmu', 7/321)
What is meant by "earning" is earning the amount of sufficiency; otherwise the man remains among those entitled to zakat. Incapacity for the basis of earning is not a condition, and it is not correct to suspend zakat on the helpless, the sick and the disabled alone. The criterion, as al-Nawawi said, is an earning befitting his situation and his dignity: what does not befit him is as if it did not exist. (al-Majmu', 7/317; see al-Ifsah, 1/373; Kashshaf al-Qina', 2/334; al-Mughni, 3/440)
al-Ghazali (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about the strong men from families of notables, whose custom was never to earn their living by bodily labor: may they take zakat from the share of the poor and the needy? He answered: yes. Imam al-Nawawi comments: this is sound, in line with what preceded: the criterion is a craft that befits him, and Allah knows best. (al-Majmu', 7/348)
The one devoted to knowledge takes from zakat: he who is able to earn a living but is occupied with some religious sciences, such that were he to turn to earning, the pursuit of knowledge would be cut off: zakat becomes lawful for him to the extent of what helps him fulfill his mission and satisfies his needs, including the books of knowledge indispensable for his religious and worldly interest.
If the student of knowledge is given, it is because he performs a collective obligation (fard kifaya), and because the benefit of his knowledge is not limited to him but embraces the community as a whole: he therefore has the right to be supported from the zakat funds. Zakat indeed belongs to one of two men: either the Muslim who needs others, or the Muslim whom others need; and this one combines the two.
Some Shafi'is require that the student be promising, whose fiqh and benefit for the Muslims are hoped for; otherwise he has no right to take zakat as long as he is able to earn. (al-Majmu', 7/317-318; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/308; Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat, 1/425; al-Insaf, 3/219; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/59; Hashiyat al-Rawd al-Murbi', 1/400; Fiqh al-Zakat, 2/572; Asna al-Matalib, 1/394; al-Fatawa al-Fiqhiyya al-Kubra, 4/76)
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: they said that even if he is able to earn in a manner befitting his situation, but is occupied with acquiring some religious sciences such that turning to earning would cut off the pursuit, zakat is lawful for him, for acquiring knowledge is a collective obligation. As for one from whom the pursuit cannot be expected, zakat is not lawful for him if he is able to earn, even if he resides in the madrasa: such is the sound and famous view.
al-Darimi mentioned three views concerning the student devoted to knowledge: he is entitled to zakat even if he is able to earn; he is not entitled to it; or he is entitled if he is promising, whose fiqh and benefit for the Muslims are hoped for, otherwise not. (al-Majmu', 7/317-318)
It is said in "al-Durr al-Mukhtar": the student of knowledge may take zakat, even if he is rich, when he devotes himself to acquiring knowledge and benefiting from it, because of his incapacity to earn; need is what drives toward the indispensable. (al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 2/340)
Ibn Abidin said: in "al-Mabsut": zakat is not given to one who owns the nisab, except to the student of knowledge, the fighter setting out on an expedition, and the interrupted pilgrim. He then explains the meaning: a man needs things he cannot do without; if accepting zakat were forbidden without the possibility of earning, he would spend what he owns and remain in need, cutting himself off from transmitting and receiving knowledge, and religion would weaken for lack of bearers. This branch contradicts their general rule of prohibition for the rich man, and no one adopted it: the sounder course is to restrict it to the poor man, and the pursuit of knowledge permits asking for zakat and other things, even for one who is able to earn, for without it asking is not lawful for him. (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/340)
The Hanafis state explicitly that the student of knowledge may ask for zakat, being occupied with knowledge away from earning; this is why they say that his maintenance falls upon his father, even if he is sound and able to earn. (al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/269; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/335; Durrar al-Hukkam, 2/416)
A group of Hanafis declared explicitly that the saying of Allah "and in the cause of Allah" (Surah 9, al-Tawba, 60) refers to the students of knowledge.
Ibn Nujaym the Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his phrase "the interrupted fighters" is what is meant by the saying of the Most High "and in the cause of Allah" (Surah 9, 60), and this is his choice following Abu Yusuf, while according to Muhammad it is the interrupted pilgrim; it is also said: the students of knowledge, and he restricted himself to that in "al-Fatawa al-Zahiriyya". (al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/260)
Imam Ibn Abidin (may Allah have mercy on him) reports: his phrase "it is said: the students of knowledge" appears thus in "al-Zahiriyya" and in al-Marghinani; al-Suruji deemed it improbable, because the verse was revealed while no group called "students of knowledge" existed. In "al-Shurnbulaliyya" it is answered that this objection is far from sound: seeking knowledge is nothing other than acquiring the religious rulings; does the student reach the rank of the one who kept the company of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to receive the rulings from him, like the people of the Suffa? The interpretation by the students of knowledge is therefore apt, especially since "al-Bada'i'" says: "in the cause of Allah" designates all forms of drawing near to Allah: every man who strives in obedience to Allah and in the ways of goodness, if he is in need, falls under it. (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/343; Durrar al-Hukkam, 2/394)
al-Buhuti and al-Ruhaybani say: one who is able to earn and devotes himself to religious knowledge, even if it is not obligatory for him and combining knowledge and earning is difficult, is given from zakat according to his need; but one who devotes himself to worship, although able to earn, is given nothing from zakat, because of the limited benefit of worship, unlike knowledge. (Kashshaf al-Qina', 2/273, ed. Dar al-Fikr; Matalib Uli al-Nuha, 2/137)
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about one who has nothing with which to buy books of knowledge to occupy himself with: he answered that he may take from zakat what he needs of the books of knowledge indispensable for his religious and worldly interest. al-Buhuti said: this is perhaps not outside the categories of recipients, for it is part of what the student of knowledge needs, like his maintenance. (Kashshaf al-Qina', 2/273; al-Furu', 2/445)
The Malikis specify that if the zakat funds are abundant, it is permissible to support through them one who wishes to marry. (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/494; Bulghat al-Salik, 1/426; al-Majmu', 7/318; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/106; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/31; Kifayat al-Akhyar, 241; Hashiyat al-Rawd al-Murbi', 1/400; margin of Matalib Uli al-Nuha, 2/147)
The schools of jurisprudence differed concerning the amount of zakat given to the poor and the needy.
The Malikis, the Hanbalis of the school, and some Shafi'is, such as al-Baghawi and al-Ghazali, hold that the one entitled by poverty or need is given sufficiency, or its fullness, for himself and for those he supports, for a complete year, with no increase. They fixed the year because zakat usually recurs every year, so that sufficiency is obtained year after year, and because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) "stored up for his family the food of a year" (narrated by Bukhari, 5042, and Muslim, 1757).
It makes no difference whether what suffices him reaches a nisab or a nusub; if he owns or obtains part of his sufficiency, he is given the fullness of sufficiency for a year. (Sharh al-Kharashi, 2/215; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/494; al-Majmu', 7/322; al-Insaf, 3/238)
The Shafi'is of the school and the Hanbalis in one narration hold that the poor man and the needy man are given what eradicates the trace of their poverty and brings them from hardship to wealth: that through which sufficiency is obtained on a lasting basis, without their needing zakat again.
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) reports the second question: the amount to be paid to the poor man and the needy man. Our Iraqi companions and many of the Khorasanians say that they are given what brings them from need to wealth: that through which sufficiency is obtained on a lasting basis; such is the explicit text of al-Shafi'i. The companions argue from the hadith of Qabisa ibn al-Mukhariq (may Allah be pleased with him), cited above, in which the Messenger of Allah permits asking until the man obtains what closes his need. They say that the three cases are mentioned in the manner of an oath for emphasis, not as conditions. (Muslim, 1044; al-Majmu', 7/321-322)
In his explanation of this hadith, al-Khattabi says: the limit of giving in charity is the sufficiency by which life stands upright and one's condition is settled; this is assessed for each man according to his situation and standard of living, and there is no defined limit that all people should bear despite the diversity of their situations. (Ma'alim al-Sunan, 2/239)
Our companions say: if his custom is a craft, he is given what he buys his craft or the tools of his craft with, whether their value is small or large, in a measure such that its profit provides him approximately his usual sufficiency; this varies according to the craft, the country, the times and the persons. Some of our companions approximated the matter: the vegetable seller is given five or ten dirhams, and the jeweler, for instance, ten thousand dirhams, if sufficiency cannot be reached with less.
The merchant, the baker, the perfumer or the money changer is given accordingly; the tailor, the carpenter, the fuller, the butcher and other craftsmen are given what buys the tools suited to their kind. If he is one of the people of farms, he is given what buys a farm or a share in a farm whose yield suffices him on a lasting basis.
And if he is not a craftsman, knowing no craft, nor trade, nor any of the forms of earnings, he is given the sufficiency of the average life expectancy of his like in his country, without reducing it to the sufficiency of one year. al-Nawawi concludes: giving the sufficiency of the whole life thus is the sound view on which the Iraqis and many of the Khorasanians settled, and the text of al-Shafi'i. (al-Majmu', 7/321-322)
Shams al-Din al-Ramli clarifies it in his commentary on al-Nawawi's "Minhaj": the poor man and the needy man who know neither how to earn by a craft nor by trade are given the sufficiency of the remainder of the average life expectancy of their like in their country; for the aim is to enrich them, and that is obtained only in this way; if life exceeds this amount, it is given year after year.
Giving to one who does not know how to earn does not mean handing him a sum of money covering his usual life expectancy, but giving him the price of an income: for example, a property is bought for him that he operates and that enriches him to the point of dispensing with zakat; he becomes its owner and bequeaths it to his descendants. As al-Zarkashi discusses, the closest view is that the imam, rather than the giver, may buy for him, or compel him to buy without removing the property from his ownership: he may then not dispose of it, so that it is neither lawful nor valid, apparently. If he acquires this property below the sufficiency of the average life span, he is given his sufficiency from zakat, and it is not required that he be poor or needy at the time of giving.
Imam al-Mawardi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if he holds ninety that does not suffice him except with the profit of one hundred, he is given the remaining ten; and if the ninety suffices him, spent without deriving earnings from it, for years that do not reach the average life expectancy.
All of this concerns one who does not know how to earn; as for one who masters a befitting craft that suffices him, he is given the price of the tools of his craft, however high they may be, and one who masters trade is given capital whose profit generally suffices him, according to the custom of his country; this varies according to persons and regions. If he masters several crafts, each of which suffices him, he is given the price of the least, or the capital of the least; if only part of them suffices him, he is given that; if none suffices him alone, he is given a craft and the purchase of a property is added to complete his income for the rest of his sufficiency. (Nihayat al-Muhtaj, 6/159, 162)
In the school of Imam Ahmad there is a narration resembling the text of al-Shafi'i: it is permitted for the poor man to take the fullness of his lasting sufficiency by means of a shop or the tools of a craft; some Hanbalis adopted this narration and prefer to act upon it. (al-Insaf, 3/238; al-Mubdi', 2/416; al-Furu', 2446)
The Hanafis hold that one who does not own a complete zakatable nisab may be given less than two hundred dirhams or their full amount (that is, the money nisab), and more than that is refused to him. Zufar said: the full two hundred, nor more, is not permitted. This, in their view, applies to one who has neither dependents nor debt: if he has dependents, each of them receives two hundred dirhams (the money nisab), and the debtor is given what settles his debt, even beyond the two hundred. (al-Mabsut, 3/13; al-Bada'i', 2/502; al-Ikhtiyar, 1/129; Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 1/305; al-Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya, 3/219)
The third category is that of the workers in charge of zakat: it is permitted to give them from it, by virtue of the saying of Allah "and those employed to collect it" (Surah 9, al-Tawba, 60). Poverty is not required in one who takes from zakat among these workers, for he takes for his work, not for his poverty.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:
"Charity is not lawful for the rich man, except in five cases: the fighter in the cause of Allah, the worker in charge of its collection, the debtor, the man who bought it with his own money, or the man who had a poor neighbor to whom charity was given and the poor man gave it as a gift to the rich man."Authentic hadith, narrated by Abu Dawud (1635, 1636, 1637), Ibn Majah (1841) and others
The Hanafis say: the worker is paid according to his work: he is given what suffices him and his assistants, without a fixed monetary assessment, and one does not exceed half of the zakat he collects, even if his work is greater. (Bada'i' al-Sana'i', 2/489; Fath al-Qadir, 2/263; al-Ikhtiyar, 1/119; al-Bunaya, 3/530; Radd al-Muhtar, 2/339)
The Shafi'is and the Hanbalis say: the imam may hire the worker through a valid employment contract, for a known wage, for a known term or a known task. The Shafi'is then add: the worker is not given more than an eighth of the zakat, in accordance with their view of equality among the eight categories; if his wage exceeds the eighth, it is completed for him from the bayt al-mal outside of zakat, or, in another view, from the remaining shares. The imam may also pay him from the bayt al-mal, or send him without a contract and then give him the wage of the equivalent.
If the imam, the provincial governor, or the judge appointed by the imam takes charge of collecting and distributing the zakat, he may take nothing from it, for he receives his sustenance from the bayt al-mal. (al-Majmu', 7/283, 313; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/327-328; al-Minhaj and Hashiyat al-Qalyubi, 3/196; al-Mughni, 6/327, ed. Dar al-Fikr, Beirut)
Imam Malik said: the worker of charity has no fixed, named due; that is up to the imam, who exercises his judgment in the matter. (al-Tamhid of Ibn Abd al-Barr, 17/386; al-Dasuqi, 1/495)
The jurists differed concerning what the worker of the charities takes: is it zakat, or a wage for his work?
Abu Hanifa and Ahmad say that it is for his work, and not from the zakat: it is part of its administrative expenses, like its fodder; the Prophet used to send collectors of charity and gave them their remuneration; besides, zakat is not collected when the owners of wealth bring their zakat themselves to the imam. (Fath al-Qadir, 2/262-263; Ibn Abidin, 2/339; al-Mughni, 6/326; al-Ifsah, 1/364)
al-Shafi'i says that it is from the zakat, because the Prophet refused to appoint Ali and his family to this charge. Muslim narrates from Abd al-Muttalib ibn Rabia ibn al-Harith ibn Abd al-Muttalib that he said:
"Rabia ibn al-Harith and al-Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib met and said: By Allah, if we sent these two young men, meaning thereby one of me and al-Fadl ibn Abbas, to the Messenger of Allah to speak to him, he would appoint us collectors over these charities, and we would receive what people receive. While we were pondering this, Ali ibn Abi Talib came and stopped by us; we told him about it, and Ali ibn Abi Talib said: Do not do it, for by Allah he will not do it. Rabia ibn al-Harith seized him and said: By Allah, you do this only out of begrudging jealousy toward us; by Allah, you married the daughter of the Messenger of Allah and we did not begrudge you. Ali said: Send them. They set off, and Ali lay down. When the Messenger of Allah had prayed Dhuhr, they reached the room ahead of him and stood there until he came; he took hold of our ears and said: Bring out what you are holding back. Then he entered, and we entered with him, and that day he was staying with Zaynab bint Jahsh; we indulged in conversation, then one of us spoke: O Messenger of Allah, you are the most righteous of people and the best of them to his kin; marriage has reached us, and we have come so that you appoint us over some of these charities, and we would bring to you what people bring and receive what they receive. He remained silent for a long time, to the point that we wanted to speak to him, while Zaynab kept signaling to us from behind the veil not to speak to him. Then he said: Charity does not befit the family of Muhammad; it is only the impurities of the people."Narrated by Muslim (1072)
He likewise refused Abu Rafi' this charge and said to him: "The freed client of a people belongs to them, and charity is not lawful for us." (Authentic hadith, narrated by Abu Dawud, 1650, and others) This proves that the worker's remuneration is taken from the zakat. (al-Majmu', 7/280; al-Ifsah, 1/364)
The jurists differed concerning this category.
The relied-upon view among the Malikis and the Shafi'is, and one narration among the Hanbalis, is that their share was abolished with the strength of Islam: they are no longer given anything today, but if the need to win them over arises at certain times, they are given. Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the meaning of Ahmad's saying, "their share has ceased", is most likely that they are not needed for the most part; or he meant that the imams give them nothing today. If the need to give them arises, paying them is permitted: giving them is therefore permitted only in case of need. (al-Mughni, 6/328; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/495; Bulghat al-Salik, 1/427; al-Majmu', 7/329-330; al-Ifsah, 1/362)
The Hanafis say that their share disappeared from zakat after the death of the Messenger of Allah, under the caliphate of Abu Bakr, when Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) withheld it from them and the consensus of the companions formed on that: the cause, which was exalting the religion, had vanished, and a ruling ends with the vanishing of its remote cause for which the payment took place. The payment was made for exaltation, and Allah has exalted Islam and become self-sufficient of them in this. (Bada'i' al-Sana'i', 2/491; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/258; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/342)
They then differed: are these reconciled ones disbelievers or Muslims? Among the Malikis, one view holds that they are disbelievers who are given in order to draw them toward Islam so that they support the Muslims: zakat is therefore not given to one who has already embraced Islam.
The Shafi'is, in the sound view of the school, say that nothing of this share is given to a disbeliever at all, for zakat is not given to a disbeliever, by virtue of the hadith "it is taken from among their rich and returned to their poor"; it is given rather to one who has already embraced Islam, though other views exist among them. The Hanbalis, and this is one view among the Malikis and the Shafi'is, say that it is permissible to give zakat to the reconciled one, whether Muslim or disbeliever.
Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the reconciled ones are of two kinds, disbelievers and Muslims, all of them leaders obeyed among their peoples and tribes. He then mentions the Muslims among them and makes them four types:
He then mentions the disbelievers and makes them two kinds: the one whose Islam is hoped for, who is given so that his soul inclines toward Islam; and the one whose evil is feared, for whom it is hoped that the gift will curb his evil and that of those with him. Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) mentions something close to this. (al-Mughni, 6/328-329; al-Majmu', 7/329-330; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/314; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/495; al-Sharh al-Saghir with al-Sawi's commentary on it, 1/427)
The Hanafis say that the reconciled ones fell into three classes: disbelievers whom the Prophet used to give in order to win them over to Islam; those whom he gave in order to ward off their harm; and those who had embraced Islam with weakness, whom he won over so that they would stand firm.
Ibn Abidin (may Allah have mercy on him) said: that was a legislated ruling, established by the text: there is no need to answer the one who asks how it is permissible to pay zakat to disbelievers, for it was part of the struggle of the poor in that time, or of struggle in general, sometimes by the point of the spear and sometimes by kindness. (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 2/342; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/258)
This category comprises three kinds. The first: the Muslim slaves under manumission contracts (mukatab). The majority of jurists, the Hanafis, the Shafi'is and Ahmad according to the more apparent of the two narrations, hold it lawful to pay zakat to them to help them break their bonds. They argue from the generality of the saying of Allah "and for freeing the slaves" (Surah 9, al-Tawba, 60), which includes the mukatab, for he is a slave: the term "raqaba" applies to the mukatab as well as to the slave.
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) reports the objection: "al-riqab" is the plural of "raqaba", and every mention of the term in the Book means its complete emancipation. The companions answer that "raqaba" applies to the outright slave as well as to the mukatab; if only the outright slave is meant in the expiation, that is by a contextual indicator, emancipation occurring only for him, according to the saying of Allah "then the freeing of a slave" (Surah 4, al-Nisa', 92). This indicator being absent from our question, the verse was interpreted as referring to the mukatab for the reason stated.
If it is objected that, had the mukatab been meant, they would have been named specifically, the answer is that this is refuted by "and in the cause of Allah" (Surah 9, 60), which refers to certain volunteer fighters with no right to the state register, who were not named specifically. And if it is objected that the debtors alone would have sufficed since they belong to the same group, the answer is that neither of the two categories is understood from the other: Allah joined them to indicate that one may not restrict oneself to one of them and that each has an independent share, just as He joined the poor and the needy, although each of them stands in the place of the other outside zakat; and Allah knows best. (al-Majmu', 7/333)
Consequently, help is given to the mukatab if he is unable to pay part of what has become due upon him; if he finds nothing at all, he is given everything he needs to discharge his obligation.
The Hanafis say that it is not permitted from the outset to free a slave with the intention of discharging zakat: the obligation is to "give" zakat, and giving is a transfer of ownership; the payment to the mukatab is a transfer of ownership, whereas emancipation is not.
Imam Malik, and Ahmad in one narration, hold that it is not permitted to pay zakat to the mukatab, for "al-riqab" designates the outright slaves, that is, those of pure servitude. The Maliki qadi Abd al-Wahhab (may Allah have mercy on him) said: our proof is the saying of Allah "and for freeing the slaves" (Surah 9, 60): "al-riqab" is the plural of "raqaba", and every mention of the term means the complete emancipation of the person.
The second type of the category "for freeing slaves" is the emancipation of Muslim slaves. The statement of the qadi Abd al-Wahhab, begun in the previous section, continues here: "every mention of the term means the complete emancipation of the person; had the mukatab been meant...", and the sheet breaks off at this point in the source: the rest of the discussion appears in the following part (2/2) of the encyclopedia.
The debtors entitled to zakat are of three kinds. The first: one who owes a debt for his own interest, such as one who borrows to clothe himself, to marry, to obtain medical treatment for an illness, to build a dwelling, to buy furnishings, or to marry off his child, or who has damaged the property of another by mistake or forgetfulness. This type is unanimously agreed upon in principle: he is given what settles his debt, but conditions accompany this gift.
They differed concerning the sinner who has repented: is paying him permitted so that he settles his debt? The Malikis in the preferred view and the Shafi'is in the sound view say that if he repents, paying him is permitted; the Malikis in another view and the Shafi'is in another view say that it is not. The Shafi'is count extravagance in spending among the acts of disobedience that prevent giving zakat, for extravagance in lawful things to the point of indebtedness is forbidden to the Muslim, by virtue of the saying of Allah:
"O children of Adam, wear your adornment at every place of prostration, and eat and drink, but do not be excessive: He does not love those who are excessive."
Surah 7 (al-A'raf), 31
One does not give to the debtor in disobedience because the gift would assist him in disobeying Allah and would tempt others to follow him in his sin, while he is capable of repenting. If he repents, he is given from zakat, for repentance wipes out what precedes it, and the one who returns from a sin is like one who committed none. Some jurists require that a period pass after the announcement of his repentance, during which he shows the uprightness of his situation; others say it suffices that the sincerity of his repentance be strongly presumed for him to be given, even with a short period.
Finally, the debt must be currently due: the Shafi'is stated this explicitly. If it is deferred, three views exist: the soundest is that he is not given, for he does not need it now; the second is that he is given, for he bears the name of debtor and falls under the generality of the text.
Its origin is the hadith of Qabisa ibn al-Mukhariq, traced up to the Prophet: "asking is not lawful except for three: a man who incurred a debt, asking is lawful for him until he obtains it..." (narrated by Muslim, 1044). The Shafi'is and the Hanbalis hold that this kind of debtor is given from zakat, whether he is rich or poor: if poverty were required, the desire to benefit from this generosity would lessen. The Hanbalis restrict the gift to the period before actual payment, unless he has already settled a debt he incurred by borrowing, for the loss remains.
The Hanafis say that one who has assumed a debt for another is given from zakat only if he does not own a nisab surplus to his debt, like the other debtors.
The third type is the debtor by reason of a guarantee or a surety. The Hanbalis say: whoever has stood guarantee or surety for the wealth of another has the same ruling as one who incurred a debt for himself. If the guarantor and the principal debtor are both insolvent, payment to each of them is permitted, for each is a debtor; if both are solvent, or if one of the two is, payment to both or to either of them is not permitted.
This type is also mentioned by the Shafi'is: the criterion is that the guarantor and the guaranteed debtor be both insolvent; if both are solvent, payment to either of them is not permitted. If one of the two is solvent, the gift to the guarantor is a matter of disagreement: if the guarantor is insolvent while the guaranteed debtor is solvent, he is not given if he stood guarantee with the latter's permission, for the debt falls back upon him; if he stood guarantee without his permission, two views exist, the soundest being that he is given. There are two views on the guarantor: one is that he is given, for he is indebted for his own interest and thus resembles the debtor for reconciliation; the soundest is that he is not given, for payment to the guaranteed debtor is possible, and when the principal is released, the guarantor is released as well, unlike the debtor for his own interest. (al-Majmu', 7/339, 345; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/317; Asna al-Matalib, 1/397; Kifayat al-Akhyar, 243; Fath al-Qadir, 2/17; Ibn Abidin, 2/60; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/496-497; al-Sharh al-Saghir with Bulghat al-Salik, 1/428-429; Tafsir al-Qurtubi, 3/271; al-Istidhkar, 3/212; al-Kafi of Ibn Abd al-Barr, 1/114; al-Mughni, 6/433; al-Kafi, 1/334; al-Furu', 2/466; al-Insaf, 3/233; Kashshaf al-Qina', 2/324-325; al-Ifsah, 1/368)
When the debtor dies without leaving sufficient funds in his estate, may his debt be settled from zakat, as that of the living? The jurists differed into two views. The Hanafis, the Hanbalis, the Shafi'is according to one of the two views, and Ibn al-Mawwaz among the Malikis, hold that his debt cannot be settled from zakat: the debtor is the deceased, and it is impossible to pay him; if one pays the creditor, the payment goes to the creditor, not to the debtor. (al-Majmu', 7/339, 345; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/317; Asna al-Matalib, 1/397; Kifayat al-Akhyar, 243; Fath al-Qadir, 2/17; Ibn Abidin, 2/60; Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 1/496-497; al-Sharh al-Saghir with Bulghat al-Salik, 1/428-429; Tafsir al-Qurtubi, 3/271; al-Istidhkar, 3/212; al-Kafi of Ibn Abd al-Barr, 1/114; al-Mughni, 6/433; al-Kafi, 1/334; al-Furu', 2/466; al-Insaf, 3/233; Kashshaf al-Qina', 2/324-325; al-Ifsah, 1/368)
Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the debt of the living is settled from zakat, not that of the deceased, for the deceased cannot be a debtor. It was said to him: so it is given to his family? He answered: if it falls upon his family, yes. (al-Mughni, 3/442; see al-Zurqani, 2/178; al-Dhakhira, 3/148; Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit, 5/61; al-Majmu', 7/347; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/318; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 2/344; Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 1/300; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/261; Hashiyat al-Tahtawi, 1/474)
This view rests on the principle that zakat requires a transfer of ownership. al-Sarakhsi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the principle is that what is required is the act of giving over a part of wealth, and giving is obtained only through a transfer of ownership: every act of worship devoid of a transfer of ownership does not count as zakat, like settling the debt of the deceased, for the deceased owns nothing, and what the creditor takes, he takes in compensation for his due. The same applies to the shrouding of the deceased: there is no transfer of ownership from him, for he is neither among the owners nor among the heirs, the latter not owning what is occupied by the need of the deceased. (al-Mabsut, 2/202)
The Malikis, the Shafi'is according to the second view, and Imam Ahmad in a narration adopted by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him), hold it lawful to pay zakat to settle the debt of the deceased who left nothing, if the conditions of the debtor are met, by virtue of the generality of the verse; for voluntary giving to settle his debt is valid as for the living. Some Malikis even say that it has more right than the debt of the living: no repayment is expected from it, unlike the living.
Imam al-Kharashi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on Khalil's "Mukhtasar": there is no difference between the living debtor and the deceased: the authority takes from it to settle the debt of the deceased; some even say that the debt of the deceased has more right to zakat, for no repayment is expected from it, unlike that of the living. (Sharh al-Kharashi with al-Adawi's commentary on it, 2/218)
Imam al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) reports: our scholars and others have said that the debt of the deceased is settled from zakat, for he is among the debtors; the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:
"I am nearer to every believer than his own self: whoever leaves wealth, it belongs to his heirs; whoever leaves a debt or helpless dependents, they come to me and are my responsibility."Narrated by Muslim (867)
al-Nawawi argued for this view by the generality of the debtors in the shares of zakat, and because voluntary giving to settle his debt is valid as for the living. (al-Majmu', 7/346)
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the debt of the deceased may be settled from zakat according to one of the two views of the scholars, one of the two narrations from Ahmad; for Allah said "and the debtors" (Surah 9, al-Tawba, 60), without saying "for the debtors": the transfer of ownership in favor of the debtor is therefore not required. One may thus pay on his behalf, and transfer ownership to his heir or to another, but the deceased himself is not given so that he recovers his debt. (Majmu' al-Fatawa, 25/80; al-Mughni, 3/442; al-Zurqani, 2/178; al-Dhakhira, 3/148; Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit, 5/61; al-Majmu', 7/347; Rawdat al-Talibin, 2/318; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 2/344; Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 1/300; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 2/261; Hashiyat al-Tahtawi, 1/474)