Islamic Fiqh > Zakat > General rules of zakat > Zakat: status, wisdom and the one who withholds it
Contents
Updated on 24 September 2026 at 4:12 PM
This first series of ten sheets covers the general principles of zakat in fiqh: the definition of zakat and the establishment of its obligation through the Quran, the Sunnah, consensus and rational evidence; the phases of its prescription from the earlier prophets down to the Muslims; the wisdom behind its legislation; the rulings on the one who withholds it, the punishment prescribed against him and the question of taking half of his wealth; fighting those who refuse to pay it; then zakat on the wealth of the minor and the insane, on that of the disbeliever, and the cases of one who is unaware of its obligation or unable to pay it.
Zakat is, according to a cited definition, a specific portion of specific wealth that must be distributed to specific categories, under specific conditions. The term also applies to the wealth itself from which it is paid out, as in the expressions "he set aside the zakat of his wealth" and "the collector receives the zakat". It is said "he purified his wealth" meaning "he paid out its zakat": the muzakki is the one who pays the zakat of his wealth, and the muzakki is also the name for the one entrusted with collecting the zakat. The word zakat is also used for the obligatory and recommended charity, maintenance spending, a due right, and pardon ("Mughni al-Muhtaj" 2/86; "al-Iqna" by al-Shirbini 1/211; "Mawahib al-Jalil" 2/255; "Kashshaf al-Qina" 2/165-166; "Fath al-Bari" 3/262; "Sharh al-Zarqani" 2/128).
The legal (taklifi) ruling of zakat: zakat is an obligation among the obligations of Islam and a pillar among its pillars. Its obligatory nature is established by the Quran, the Sunnah, consensus and rational evidence.
As for the Quran: Allah the Most High says:
"And establish prayer and give zakat."
Surah 2, Al-Baqarah, 43
And He says:
"And those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend it in the way of Allah, give them tidings of a painful punishment: on the Day when it will be heated in the fire of Hell and their foreheads, their flanks and their backs will be branded with it: this is what you hoarded for yourselves, so taste what you used to hoard."
Surah 9, At-Tawbah, 34-35
Allah thus attached a severe warning to whoever hoards gold and silver without spending it in the way of Allah, and such hoarding can only occur through abandoning an obligation.
As for the Sunnah: the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
"Islam is built upon five: the testimony that there is no deity but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establishing prayer, paying zakat, pilgrimage, and fasting Ramadan."
Narrated by al-Bukhari (8) and Muslim (16)
The Prophet (peace be upon him) used to send collectors to receive the charities, and he sent Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him) to the people of Yemen, telling him:
"Inform them that Allah has made it obligatory upon them to give charity from their wealth, taken from their rich and returned to their poor."
Narrated by al-Bukhari (1331) and Muslim (19)
It is narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave a lengthy description of the punishment of the one who withholds zakat:
"There is no owner of gold or silver who does not pay what is due on it, except that on the Day of Resurrection plates of fire will be heated for him in the fire of Hell, and his side, his forehead and his back will be branded with them; every time they cool down they are returned to him, throughout a day whose length is fifty thousand years, until judgment is passed among the servants, and he sees his path, either to Paradise or to the Fire.
It will be said: O Messenger of Allah, what about camels? He said: The same applies to the owner of camels who does not pay what is due on them; among what is due on them is milking them on the day of watering. On the Day of Resurrection, a vast level plain of soft sand will be spread out for them, as ample as possible, in which he will not miss a single one of their young: they will trample him with their hooves and bite him with their mouths; as often as the first of them passes, the last is returned to him, throughout a day of fifty thousand years, until judgment is passed among the servants, and he sees his path, either to Paradise or to the Fire.
It will be said: O Messenger of Allah, what about cattle and sheep? He said: The same applies to the owner of cattle and sheep who does not pay what is due on them: on the Day of Resurrection, a vast level plain will be spread out for them, in which he will lose none of them, with no horned animal, no head-butting animal and no biter among them, goring him with their horns and trampling him with their hooves; as often as the first of them passes, the last is returned to him, throughout a day of fifty thousand years, until judgment is passed among the servants, and he sees his path, either to Paradise or to the Fire.
It will be said: O Messenger of Allah, what about horses? He said: Horses are of three kinds: for one man a burden of sin, for one man a shelter, for one man a reward. As for the one that is a burden of sin for him, it is the man who keeps it in ostentation, vanity and hostility toward the people of Islam. As for the one that is a shelter for him, it is the man who keeps it in the way of Allah and does not forget the right of Allah upon their backs and necks. As for the one that is a reward for him, it is the man who keeps it in the way of Allah for the people of Islam, in a pasture or a garden: whatever it eats of that pasture or garden is recorded for him as good deeds, and the number of its droppings and its urine is recorded for him as good deeds; if its long tether does not break and it crosses a rise or two, Allah records for him the number of its tracks and its droppings as good deeds; and if its owner passes by a river and it drinks from it while he did not intend to water it, Allah records for him the number of its gulps as good deeds.
It will be said: O Messenger of Allah, what about donkeys? He said: Nothing was revealed to me concerning donkeys, except this eloquent and comprehensive verse: "So whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it."
Narrated by Muslim (987) and al-Bukhari (4678, 6923)
And other hadiths of a similar nature.
As for consensus: the community agreed upon the obligatory nature of zakat and that it is a pillar of Islam; moreover, the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) agreed upon fighting those who withheld it. Al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him):
"When the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) passed away and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was chosen, some of the Arabs disbelieved. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: How could you fight the people when the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: I have been commanded to fight the people until they say there is no deity but Allah, and whoever says it has protected from me his wealth and his person except by its right, and his reckoning is with Allah? He replied: By Allah, I will certainly fight whoever separates prayer and zakat, for zakat is the due right of wealth; by Allah, if they withheld from me a young she-camel (an 'anaq) that they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), I would fight them over withholding it. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: By Allah, it was nothing other than Allah expanding the chest of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), and I then knew that it was the truth."
Narrated by al-Bukhari (1335, 6526, 6855) and Muslim (20)
Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: as for consensus, it is because the community agreed upon the obligatory nature of zakat ("Bada'i al-Sana'i" 2/3). Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: zakat is an obligation and a pillar by the consensus of the Muslims, and the evidences of the Quran, the Sunnah and the consensus of the community confirm one another in this ("al-Majmu" 5/290).
Imam Badr al-Din al-Ayni (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Ibn al-Mundhir reported that consensus was formed upon the obligation of zakat, which is the third pillar; the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Islam is built upon five...", and he listed among them "paying zakat". Ibn Battal said: whoever denies one of these five, his Islam is not complete; do you not see that Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "I will fight whoever separates prayer and zakat"? Ibn al-Athir said: whoever withholds it while denying its obligation has disbelieved, unless he is a recent convert to Islam who did not know of its obligation. Al-Qushayri said: whoever denies it has disbelieved, and the scholars agreed that it is taken from the withhold by force; if he takes up arms to prevent it, he is killed, as Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) did to the people of apostasy, with the consent of all the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) ("Umdat al-Qari" 8/233-234).
As for rational evidence, it comprises several aspects. One of them: paying zakat falls under supporting the weak, relieving the destitute and strengthening the incapable so that they can fulfill what Allah has imposed upon them of monotheism and acts of worship; and the means to fulfilling the obligatory is itself obligatory. The second: zakat purifies the soul of the payer from the filth of sins and elevates his character through acquiring generosity and largesse and abandoning stinginess and greed, for souls are naturally inclined to stinginess with wealth.
The soul that trains in this becomes accustomed to generosity and is prepared to return deposits and deliver rights to their rightful owners. All of this is contained in the saying of Allah the Most High:
"Take from their wealth a charity by which you purify them and cause them increase by it."
Surah 9, At-Tawbah, 103
The third aspect: Allah has blessed the rich and favored them with kinds of bounties and wealth exceeding their essential needs, so that they enjoy them and taste the sweetness of life. Now gratitude for a blessing is an obligation both by reason and by revelation, and paying zakat to the poor is an act of gratitude for the blessing; it was therefore made obligatory ("Bada'i al-Sana'i" 2/381-382).
The phases of the prescription of zakat: paying zakat was prescribed in the religions of the earlier prophets. Allah the Most High says concerning Ibrahim and his offspring, upon them be prayer and peace:
"And We made them leaders guiding by Our command, and We inspired to them the doing of good deeds, the establishment of prayer and the giving of zakat, and they were worshippers of Us."
Surah 21, Al-Anbiya, 73
For the Muslims, giving charity to the poor was prescribed from the Meccan period, as in the saying of the Most High:
"But he has not broken through the difficult pass. And what can make you know what is the difficult pass? It is the freeing of a slave, or feeding on a day of severe hunger an orphan of near relationship, or a needy person lying in the dust."
Surah 90, Al-Balad, 11-16
Some Meccan verses also made the poor holders of a recognized right over the wealth of the believers, as in the saying of Allah:
"And those in whose wealth there is a recognized right, for the petitioner and the deprived (who does not ask)."
Surah 70, Al-Ma'arij, 24-25
Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: there has been disagreement over the beginning of the time when zakat was made obligatory; the majority view is that it occurred after the Hijrah. It has been said: in the second year, before the obligation of fasting Ramadan, which is what al-Nawawi alluded to in the chapter on military expeditions of the "Rawdah"; and Ibn al-Athir asserted in the "History" that it occurred in the ninth year, an assertion that requires examination. Ibn Khuzaymah claimed in his Sahih that it was made obligatory before the Hijrah, citing what he reported from the hadith of Umm Salamah about the story of their migration to Abyssinia, in which Ja'far ibn Abi Talib said to the Negus, among what he reported to him about the Prophet (peace be upon him): "He commands us to pray, to give zakat and to fast," end of quotation.
This inference requires examination, for the five prayers had not yet been made obligatory, nor the fasting of Ramadan. It is therefore possible that Ja'far did not say this at his first arrival to the Negus, but rather informed him after a period in which the obligation of prayer and fasting had already occurred and the news had reached Ja'far, who then said "he commands us" in the sense of "he commands his community"; this is very far-fetched. The soundest interpretation of the hadith of Umm Salamah, if it is authentic in its chain, is that his saying "he commands us to pray, to give zakat and to fast" is general, without requiring that the prayers be the five prayers, nor the fasting that of Ramadan, nor the zakat this specific zakat tied to the nisab and the hawl; Allah knows best.
Among what establishes that the obligation of zakat occurred after the Hijrah is their agreement that the fasting of Ramadan was made obligatory after the Hijrah, for the verse establishing that obligation is Medinan without disagreement, as was established by Ahmad and Ibn Khuzaymah, and also by al-Nasa'i and Ibn Majah, on the authority of al-Hakim, from the hadith of Qays ibn Sa'd ibn Ubadah:
"The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) commanded us to give the zakat of breaking the fast before zakat was revealed; when zakat was revealed, he neither commanded us nor forbade us anything, and we continued to do it."
Its chain is authentic; its narrators are those of the Sahih, except Abu 'Ammar who narrates it from Qays ibn Sa'd, a Kufan named 'Arib with an open hamzah, son of Humayd, authenticated by Ahmad and Ibn Ma'in
This hadith indicates that the obligation of zakat al-fitr preceded that of zakat, which entails that zakat was made obligatory after the fasting of Ramadan, that is, after the Hijrah; this is the sought conclusion ("Fath al-Bari" 3/267-268).
The wisdom behind the legislation of zakat: know that most of what is reported concerning zakat comes down to two benefits.
A benefit relating to the discipline of the soul: zakat brings stinginess to the surface, the ugliest of traits, harmful in the Hereafter. The stingy man, when he dies, leaves his heart attached to wealth and is punished for it; whoever trains through zakat and removes stinginess from his soul thereby gains the most beneficial of traits for the Hereafter, after reverential fear of Allah, namely largeness of soul. Just as hardship prepares the soul for the posture of overreaching ambition, generosity prepares it for freedom from base, worldly postures, for the root of generosity is subduing animalistic possessiveness, so that ownership does not prevail and bestial nature does not take on its tint and its judgment. Among what awakens one to this: spending wealth despite one's need for it, pardoning the wrongdoer, and enduring severe trials, so that the pain of this world becomes light through certainty of the Hereafter. The Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded all of this and regulated the greatest of it: spending wealth within defined limits; moreover, zakat was paired with prayer and faith in many passages of the Quran. Allah the Most High says about the people of the Fire:
"We were not of those who prayed, nor did we use to feed the poor, and we used to enter into vain discourse with those who entered vain discourse."
Surah 77, Al-Mursalat, 43-45
Furthermore, when the destitute person is in dire need and Allah's providence wills that his lack be filled by inspiring a man with the desire to spend on him, that man's heart expands to the inspiration, he thereby attains spiritual expansion, and he becomes prepared for the mercy of Allah, which is greatly beneficial for disciplining his soul. The general inspiration addressed to people in the revealed laws follows the specific inspiration in its benefits. A sound temperament is also naturally inclined to gentleness of disposition: this is a trait upon which most of the manners of good conduct toward people depend, and whoever lacks it has a deficiency that he must repair. Moreover, charities expiate misdeeds and increase blessings.
A benefit relating to the city: zakat necessarily gathers the weak and the needy; such calamities befall one people and bypass another; if the Sunnah of relieving the poor and the needy were not among them, they would perish and die of hunger. Moreover, the order of the city depends upon wealth by which the livelihood of its defenders who protect it and its administrators who govern it is sustained; these serve the city beneficially, occupied to the point that they cannot earn their living, so their sustenance must necessarily come from it. Shared expenses are not easy for some of them, or exceed their capacity; it therefore became necessary that the collection of funds from the subjects be a Sunnah.
Since nothing was easier or more conducive to the public interest than to join one of the two benefits to the other, the Law incorporated one into the other. Then the need arose to determine the amounts of zakat: without determination, the negligent would fall short and the aggressor would overstep. The portion had to be neither so light that they attach no weight to it and it does not counter their stinginess, nor so heavy that paying it is hard for them. The period in which the zakats are harvested also had to be determined: neither so short that it turns over too quickly and makes its collection difficult, nor so long that it does not counter their stinginess and does not reach the needy and the defenders except after severe waiting. The best course for the Law in collection was what the people were accustomed to in the collections of just kings over their subjects: imposing what the Arabs and non-Arabs were accustomed to, which became like a necessity in which they feel no distress; and the accepted custom whose familiarity has removed the burden is closer to the people's acceptance and more conducive to mercy toward them ("Hujjat Allah al-Balighah" 1/497, 499, by al-Dahlawi).
The rulings of the one who withholds zakat. The Hereafter sin of the withhold: whoever withholds zakat commits a forbidden act, and it is one of the major sins; the Noble Quran mentions it, and the noble Messenger (peace be upon him) warned the withhold of zakat of a severe punishment in the Hereafter, in order to awaken by this warning the heedless hearts, stir the stingy souls toward spending, and lead them by the staff of encouragement and warning to fulfill the obligation willingly; otherwise they are driven to it by the staff of the law and the sword of authority, unwillingly. Al-Bukhari narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave warning against that.
As for the providential (qadari) punishment administered by the Supreme Decree, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:
"No people withhold zakat except that Allah afflicts them with years (of drought)."
Narrated by al-Tabarani in "al-Awsat" (5/26, 72, 40) from Buraydah, by al-Hakim in "al-Mustadrak" (2/136) and by al-Bayhaqi (3/346); these two have the variant: "no people withhold zakat except that Allah withholds rain from them"; hadith authenticated by al-Albani in "as-Sahihah" (107)
That is the plural of year, meaning famine and drought.
In another hadith:
"And they did not withhold the zakat of their wealth except that rain was withheld from them from the sky; and were it not for the animals, they would not have been given rain."
Hasan hadith: narrated by Ibn Majah (4019) and al-Tabarani in "al-Awsat" (5/62)
The legal punishment of the withhold of zakat: whoever withholds zakat while under the authority of the imam, it is taken from him by force, according to the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
"I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify that there is no deity but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish prayer and pay zakat; when they do that, they protect from me their blood and their wealth except by the right of Islam, and their reckoning is with Allah."
Narrated by al-Bukhari (25) and Muslim (21)
Zakat is among the due rights of wealth: Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) declared with the approval of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them): "Zakat is the right of wealth," and he said: "By Allah, if they withheld from me an 'iqal (a hobbling rope) that they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), I would fight them over withholding it," and the Companions endorsed him. Al-Baghawi reported that Abu Ubayd said: "the 'iqal" means the charity of a year; others said: it is the rope with which the camel is hobbled, and the owner must hand it over with the camel when the latter cannot be handed over without it ("Sharh al-Sunnah" 5/493-494). This hadith is authentic, mentioned previously.
The jurists disagreed concerning the one who withholds zakat: is only the zakat taken from him, or is he punished by having half of his wealth taken? Al-Shafi'i in the old school (al-qadim), Imam Ahmad in one narration, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, the view chosen by Abu Bakr ibn Abd al-Aziz, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim, held that from the one who withholds zakat half of his wealth is taken as a punishment, in addition to the zakat, according to the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
"In every grazing herd of camels (sa'imah) reaching forty, there is a bint labun (a two-year-old pregnant she-camel), and the camels are not separated from their count. Whoever gives them seeking the reward (Ibn al-'Ala, the narrator of the hadith, said: seeking the reward through them) shall have its reward; and whoever withholds them, we take them and half of his wealth as an obligation imposed by our Lord; none of it belongs to the family of Muhammad."
Hasan hadith: narrated by Abu Dawud (1575) and others
Al-Hafiz Shams al-Din Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said in "Hashiyat Ibn al-Qayyim 'ala Sunan Abi Dawud": "we take them and half of his wealth": most of the scholars hold that misappropriation (ghulul) in charity and war spoils does not entail a financial penalty, and they said: this applied at the beginning of Islam, then it was abrogated. Al-Shafi'i argued for its abrogation by the hadith of al-Bara ibn 'Azib whose she-camel died: it was not reported that the Prophet (peace be upon him) lightened the loss; rather only his ruling of liability (daman) was reported in it.
On the apparent meaning of the hadith stand al-Awza'i, Imam Ahmad and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, as detailed above. Al-Shafi'i said in the old school: whoever withholds the zakat of his wealth, it is taken from him and half of his wealth is taken as a punishment for his withholding, and he cited this hadith as evidence. He said in the new school: only the zakat is taken from him, nothing else, and he declared this hadith abrogated, saying: that was at the time when punishments upon wealth existed, then they were abrogated, end of his words. Whoever holds Bahz ibn Hakim to be reliable needs to excuse this hadith by what precedes; whoever holds that his hadith carries no proof needs none of these efforts. Al-Shafi'i said of Bahz: "he is not a proof"; it is therefore possible that this judgment became clear to him after excusing the hadith, or that he answered it assuming its authenticity.
Abu Hatim al-Razi said of Bahz ibn Hakim: he is a shaykh who writes down hadith but is not relied upon as proof. Al-Basti said: he erred often; as for Imam Ahmad and Ishaq, they rely on him and narrate from him, whereas a group of our imams abandoned him; "were it not for his hadith: we take them and half of his wealth as an obligation imposed by our Lord, we would have counted him among the trustworthy"; he is among those concerning whom Allah was consulted (istikharah), and his narrating of this hadith prevented his being counted among the trustworthy, end of his words. 'Ali ibn al-Madini said: the hadith of Bahz ibn Hakim from his father from his grandfather is authentic. Imam Ahmad said: the hadith of Bahz ibn Hakim from his father from his grandfather is authentic, and whoever rejects this hadith has no proof; the claim of its abrogation is a false claim, for it is claiming something for which there is no evidence. The legality of financial punishments is established by several hadiths of the Prophet (peace be upon him) whose abrogation was never proven by any evidence, and the caliphs after him acted upon them. As for objecting by the hadith of al-Bara concerning his she-camel, it is of the utmost weakness: punishment is only justified when the one punishing oversteps by withholding an obligation or committing a prohibition; what arises without his transgression or intent, no one justifies punishing him for. The saying of whoever interprets this as a mere threat without real force is of the utmost corruption, and the word of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is far above such; and the saying of whoever interprets it as the taking of the remaining half after the loss is void, for it grossly contradicts the meaning of the text and departs from its understanding, given his saying (peace be upon him): "we take them and half of his wealth".
As for al-Harbi's reading, "wa shuturu" with a dammah (on the pattern of "shughl"), it is of the utmost corruption and no hadith scholar knows it: it is a scribal error. Ibn Hibban's saying, "were it not for this hadith, we would have counted him among the trustworthy", is a highly fallacious statement: if his weakness has no cause other than his narrating of this hadith, and this hadith was only rejected for its weakness, then this is a vain circular argument; and nothing in his narrating of it entails his weakness, for he does not contradict the trustworthy in it. This resembles the rejection of the hadith of Abd al-Malik ibn Abi Sulayman by the one who rejected it on the basis of the hadith of Jabir concerning the preemption right of neighbors, weakening him merely because he narrated this hadith; yet that in no way entails weakness. Allah knows best ("Hashiyat Ibn al-Qayyim 'ala Sunan Abi Dawud" 4/318, 320).
The majority of the scholars, namely the Hanafis, the Malikis, the Shafi'is in the later school and the Hanbalis in the school, held that when zakat is taken from the withhold by force, nothing else is taken from his wealth. Evidence: what is narrated from the Prophet (peace be upon him): "There is no right in wealth other than zakat" (weak hadith: narrated by Ibn Majah 1789 and others); and the fact that the Arabs withheld zakat, yet it was never reported that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) took anything extra from them. They answered the hadith "we take them and half of his wealth" by saying it is abrogated and dated from the time when punishment was carried out upon wealth; however, al-Nawawi, Shaykh al-Islam and Ibn al-Qayyim responded to that (see "Bahr al-Ra'iq" 2/227; "al-Hawi al-Kabir" 3/134; "Hashiyat al-Adawi" 1/473; "al-Dhakhirah" 3/135; "al-Majmu" 6/472-473; "al-Kafi" 1/278; "Tafsir al-Qurtubi" 4/260; "Hashiyat Ibn al-Qayyim 'ala Sunan Abi Dawud" 4/318-320; "al-Insaf" 3/189-190; "al-Furu" 2/414-415; "al-Mughni" 3/337; "Majmu al-Fatawa" 20/384, 28/111, 115).
Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the authors agreed that the correct view is that nothing is taken from him, and they, together with al-Shafi'i and al-Bayhaqi in "Ma'rifat al-Sunan wa-l-Athar", answered the hadith of Bahz ibn Hakim by saying it is abrogated and dated from the time when punishment was carried out upon wealth, as the author mentioned; but this answer is weak for two reasons. The first: what they claimed, namely that punishment was carried out upon wealth at the beginning of Islam, is neither established nor known. The second: abrogation is only resorted to when the dating is known, and here there is no knowledge of that; the correct answer is the weakening of the hadith, as preceded from al-Shafi'i and Abu Hatim; Allah knows best ("al-Majmu" 5/301).
Islam did not stop at punishing the withhold of zakat with a financial fine or other discretionary punishments: it made it obligatory to unsheathe the swords and declare war on every armed group that rebels against paying zakat, not caring in that to take lives and shed blood, even though it came to preserve and protect them. Blood shed for the truth was not made cheap, and the life that is killed in the way of Allah and for the establishment of His justice on earth has not died and will not die.
This is when we consider the souls of the believers fighting for the truth, defenders of the law of Allah; as for the souls of the others, who disobeyed Allah and His Messenger, refused to pay His due and neglected the trust of the wealth with which He entrusted them, they themselves, by their conduct, forfeited the inviolability granted to them, and nullified by their behavior the protection that their lives and wealth enjoyed.
Fighting the withholding rebels is established by the authentic hadiths on the matter and by the consensus of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), such as the hadith of al-Bukhari and Muslim from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) cited above, in which Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) declared: "By Allah, I will certainly fight whoever separates prayer and zakat, for zakat is the right of wealth" (al-Bukhari 1335, 6526, 6855; Muslim 20).
This concerns the one who affirms the obligation of zakat but withholds it out of stinginess or through a false interpretation, without being judged a disbeliever: if he dies in the fighting waged against him, his Muslim relatives inherit from him and the funeral prayer is performed over him. In one narration from Imam Ahmad: he is judged a disbeliever, he is not inherited from and no prayer is performed over him; for it is reported that when Abu Bakr fought the withhold of zakat and war raged, they said: we will pay it; he said:
"I will not accept it from them until they testify that our dead are in Paradise and your dead are in the Fire."
Narrated by al-Khallal in "as-Sunnah" (477)
Umar concurred with him, and it was not reported from any Companion that he disapproved of this, which establishes their disbelief.
As for the one who withholds zakat while denying its obligation: if he is ignorant, and such people are ignorant of it due to being recent in Islam, or because he grew up in a remote desert region far from the cities or the like, he is informed of the obligation and is not judged a disbeliever, for he is excused. If he is a Muslim raised in the lands of Islam, living among the people of knowledge, he is judged a disbeliever: he is an apostate and the rulings of the apostate apply to him, for denying something known of the religion by necessity ("al-Majmu" 6/468-469; "al-Mughni" 3/336, 341; "al-Kafi" 1/278; "al-Furu" 2/170; "al-Mubdi" 2/402; "Kashshaf al-Qina" 2/258).
Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: when one man or a group withholds zakat and resists by fighting, it becomes obligatory upon the imam to fight them... It is established in the two Sahihs, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) at first differed over fighting the withhold of zakat; Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) adopted the view of fighting them and argued against them; when the proofs became clear to them, they followed him, and their fighting became a matter of consensus. The scholars of legal theory reported agreement that when the Companions differ and then agree upon one of the two views before the disagreement settles, that constitutes consensus, and they illustrated it with their disagreement over Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) followed by their consensus; Allah knows best ("al-Majmu" 5/301).
Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the Companions agreed upon this and fought the withhold of zakat as they had fought the people of apostasy; some of them called them people of apostasy in the broad sense, because they had apostatized from paying zakat; it is indeed well known that they said: "we did not abandon our religion, but we were stingy with our wealth". Just as it was permissible, by the consensus of the Companions, to fight them for withholding zakat, that fell for them within the meaning of his saying (peace be upon him): "except by its right" ("al-Tamhid" 21/282). Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: they agreed upon fighting the withhold of zakat ("al-Kafi" 1/95).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the Companions and the imams after them agreed upon fighting the withhold of zakat, even if they performed the five prayers and fasted the month of Ramadan; these had no tolerable misinterpretation, and that is why they were apostates and were fought over withholding it, even while affirming its obligation, as Allah commanded; he reports from them that they said: Allah commanded His prophet to take zakat by His saying "Take from their wealth a charity" (Surah 9, At-Tawbah, 103), and that it fell away with his death ("Majmu al-Fatawa" 28/419). Al-Ayni (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the scholars agreed that it is taken from the withhold by force; if he takes up arms to prevent it, he is killed, as Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) did to the people of apostasy, with the consent of all the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) ("Umdat al-Qari" 8/233-234).
Upon whom is zakat obligatory? The jurists agreed that zakat is due from every Muslim who is adult, of sound mind, free, aware that zakat is an obligation, owner of the nisab in full ownership, able to pay the zakat, with the conditions fulfilled in the wealth ("Bidayat al-Mujtahid" 1/339; "al-Majmu" 6/456). They disagreed on the rest as follows.
A. Zakat on the wealth of the minor and the insane: the jurists disagreed concerning the minor and the insane: is zakat due on their wealth as on that of the adult of sound mind, or not? The majority of the jurists, namely the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, held that zakat is due on the wealth of every minor and insane person, male or female, based on several evidences:
They said: it is general for young and old, sane and insane, for all of them need the purification of Allah and His elevation, and all of them are among the believers."Take from their wealth a charity by which you purify them and cause them increase by it."
Surah 9, At-Tawbah, 103
They said: this being established, the guardian pays it on their behalf from their wealth, for it is an obligatory zakat whose payment is due like the zakat of the adult of sound mind; the guardian stands in his place in paying what is due upon him, for it is a right obligatory upon the minor and the insane: its payment is incumbent upon the guardian on their behalf, like the maintenance of relatives; the intention of the guardian at the time of payment is taken into account, as is the intention of the owner of the wealth ("al-Mughni" 3/403; "al-Majmu" 6/462). If the guardian does not pay the zakat, it becomes incumbent upon the minor and the insane, after puberty and recovery, to pay the zakat of what has passed, for the right attached to their wealth and the guardian disobeyed by delaying: what is addressed to them does not lapse ("al-Majmu" 6/462).
Some Malikis said: the guardian is only ordered to pay the zakat on behalf of the minor if he is confident that his act can be verified, and it is attributed to him; otherwise not. If he pays it, he has it witnessed; if he does not witness it, Ibn Habib said: if he is trustworthy, he is believed ("Sharh al-Risalah" by Ibn Naji 1/428). If the guardian fears that the minor, after puberty, or the insane, after recovery, will demand from him a penalty for what he paid from their wealth, according to the school of Abu Hanifah and those who followed him, it is appropriate, as some Malikis proposed, to refer the matter to a judge who rules on the obligation of zakat upon their wealth, until he rules that zakat is binding upon them, so that no judge can overturn this ruling, the first ruling having removed the disagreement ("Balghat al-Salik" 1/380; see "al-Dhakhirah" 2/421; "al-Ifsah" 1/304; "Bidayat al-Mujtahid" 1/339; "Mawahib al-Jalil" 2/292; "Mukhtasar Ikhtilafat al-Bayhaqi" 2/438; "al-Tahqiq" 314; "al-Insaf" 3/4; "al-Sharh al-Kabir" 4/455).
The Hanafis held that zakat is not due on the wealth of the minor and the insane, but that the tithe ('ushr) is due on their crops and fruits, as well as zakat al-fitr on their behalf. They cited the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
"The pen is lifted from three: the sleeper until he awakens, the minor until he reaches puberty, and the insane until he recovers."
Authentic hadith, mentioned previously
The lifting of the pen is a metaphor for the lapse of the obligation, for obligation belongs to the one who understands the address of the Lawgiver, and childhood and insanity are an obstacle to that. Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: there is no way to impose it upon the minor, for the pen is lifted from him by the hadith, and imposing zakat means imposing an act upon one incapable of acting, that is, imposing what is beyond his capacity; there is likewise no way to impose it upon the guardian to pay it from the wealth of the minor, for the guardian is forbidden to make offerings from the latter's wealth except in the best manner, while the name of charity applies to maintenance spending, as the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "A man's spending on himself is charity, and on his family it is charity" (narrated by Ibn Majah 2138 from Miqdam ibn Madikarib; authenticated by al-Albani in "Sahih Ibn Majah" 1739); and a hadith likewise indicates it: "Seek to grow the wealth of the orphans until charity does not consume it", for he tied consumption to the wealth as a whole, and it is spending that consumes the whole, not zakat; otherwise, charity and zakat are carried to zakat al-fitr, which is called zakat ("al-Bada'i" 2/388; "al-Mabsut" 2/163). The same meaning is established by the version: "The best earning of a man is the work of his hand, and every spending he makes on himself, his family, his children and his servant is charity."
They said: zakat is pure worship like prayer, and worship requires intention; the minor and the insane have no verifiable intention, so worship is not due from them and they are not addressed with it; prayer lapsed from them for lack of intention, so zakat must lapse for the same cause ("Radd al-Muhtar" 2/4). Al-Sarakhsi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: once it is established that it is worship, it requires intention and resolve from the one liable for it at the time of payment; now guardianship over the minor is established by law without his choice, and such guardianship does not allow worship to be fulfilled through it, unlike when he is delegated to pay after puberty: that is an agency in place of a choice, from which intention and resolve emanate.
By this, zakat al-fitr is distinguished, for its obligation is a burden to the point that it is due from another because of another, and the father has a right in it: if we did not make it obligatory upon his wealth, we would have to impose it upon the father, unlike the case where the minor has no wealth, in contrast to zakat; and by this it is distinguished from the tithe, which is the burden of the producing land, like the kharaj ("al-Mabsut" 2/163). And Allah said:
"Take from their wealth a charity by which you purify them and cause them increase by it."
Surah 9, At-Tawbah, 103
Purification occurs only from the filth of sins, and there is no sin upon the minor and the insane requiring purification and elevation: they are therefore both excluded from those from whom zakat is taken.
Ibn Rushd (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the cause of their disagreement is their disagreement over the conception of legal zakat: is it an act of worship like prayer and fasting, or an obligatory right of the poor over the wealth of the rich? Whoever says it is worship requires puberty and reason; whoever says it is an obligatory right of the poor and the needy over the wealth of the rich does not take puberty into account. As for the one who distinguishes between what the land produces and what it does not, and between the hidden and the visible, I know of no basis for that at this time ("Bidayat al-Mujtahid" 1/340; see "Sharh Fath al-Qadir" 2/157; "al-Ikhtiyar" 1/106; "Tabyin al-Haqa'iq" 1/25; "Bahr al-Ra'iq" 2/217; "Umdat al-Qari" 8/237).
B. Zakat on the wealth of the disbeliever: the jurists agreed that zakat is not due from the original disbeliever, whether at war with the Muslims (harbi) or under their protection (dhimmi); for it is a right to which he did not commit himself, so it does not bind him (in the sense that if they committed themselves to it and accepted it, there would be no problem); for it is due as purification of the one who pays it, and the disbeliever has no purification as long as he remains in disbelief; for it is a branch of Islam, which he lacks, so it is not demanded of him while he is a disbeliever, just as it does not constitute a debt in his liability (dhimmah); he pays it if he converts ("al-Ijma" by Ibn al-Mundhir 33; "al-Ifsah" 1/303; "Bidayat al-Mujtahid" 1/339; "al-Majmu" 6/858).
The scholars cited the hadith of Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) reported in the two Sahihs: when the Prophet (peace be upon him) sent Mu'adh to Yemen, he said to him:
"You will come to a people of the People of the Book: invite them to the testimony that there is no deity but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah; if they obey you in that, inform them that Allah has made five prayers obligatory upon them every day and night; if they obey you in that, inform them that Allah has made obligatory upon them a charity taken from their wealth, taken from their rich and returned to their poor; if they obey you in that, beware of their most prized possessions; and fear the supplication of the oppressed, for there is no veil between it and Allah."
Narrated by al-Bukhari (1425) and Muslim (19), according to the wording of al-Bukhari
This hadith indicates that demanding the obligations in this world occurs only after Islam, and this is a matter of consensus ("Sharh Muslim" 1/196, 198).
All of this concerns the original disbeliever. As for the one who was tempted and apostatized (may Allah protect us from it), if zakat had become obligatory upon him during his Islam, it does not lapse from him by apostasy according to the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis; for it is a right whose obligation was established and does not lapse by his apostasy, like the indemnity for destroyed property and debt: the imam takes it from his wealth as he takes zakat from the resisting Muslim; if he then converts, it no longer binds him. The Hanafis held that zakat lapses by apostasy, for intention is a condition, as with prayer, and the intention of worship while he is a disbeliever is not counted; it therefore lapses by apostasy, like prayer, including the zakat of what the land produces.
If the apostasy occurs shortly before the completion of the hawl upon the nisab, the obligation is not established according to the majority, namely the Hanafis, the Hanbalis and one report in the Shafi'i school; for Islam is a condition for the obligation of zakat, and its absence during part of the hawl causes the zakat to lapse, like ownership and the nisab; if he returns to Islam before the hawl is completed, the hawl resumes. The soundest view in the Shafi'i school is that his ownership of his wealth is suspended: if he returns to Islam, his ownership continues and zakat becomes obligatory upon it; if he does not return to Islam, it is ruled that his ownership lapses and zakat is no longer due from him. A third view in the Shafi'i school: his ownership does not lapse and zakat is due from him, for it is a right to which he committed himself through Islam and which does not lapse by apostasy, like the rights of human beings ("Bada'i al-Sana'i" 2/384-385; "Fath al-Qadir" 2/13; "Hashiyat Ibn Abidin" 2/4; "Majma al-Anhar" 1/192; "al-Majmu" 6/458-459; "al-Mughni" 2/347-348, ed. Dar al-Fikr).
C. One who does not know that zakat is obligatory: the jurists disagreed concerning the one who did not know that zakat is obligatory: must he pay it after learning of it? The Malikis, the Shafi'is, the Hanbalis and Zufar among the Hanafis held that knowledge of the obligatory nature of zakat is not a condition for its obligation: zakat is therefore due from the harbi who converts to Islam in the land of war while possessing herds, without emigrating to us, remaining there for years without knowledge of Islamic law, and he is addressed with paying it when he leaves for the land of Islam. Abu Hanifah and his companions Abu Yusuf and Muhammad held that knowledge of the obligatory nature of zakat is a condition for its obligation: in the described scenario, zakat is not due from him ("al-Bada'i" 2/385; "al-Majmu" 6/474; "al-Mughni" 2/688).
D. One who cannot pay zakat: the Malikis, the Shafi'is and Imam Ahmad in a narration chosen by Ibn Qudamah held that the ability to pay is a condition for the obligation: if the hawl passes and then the wealth perishes before its owner can pay, no zakat is due from him if he was not negligent, for zakat is due on the path of mutual support and cannot be due in a situation where its payment is required while the one liable has neither wealth nor means. The meaning of negligence: being able to pay it and not paying it; if he cannot pay it, he is not negligent, whether because of the absence of an eligible recipient, the distance of the wealth from him, the fact that the obligation does not yet exist in the wealth and requires a purchase with nothing to buy with, or any similar obstacle arising in seeking the purchase; Imam Malik even said: if the owner destroys the wealth after the hawl before being able to pay, no zakat is due from him if he did not intend to flee from zakat. He argued this view by the fact that zakat is an act of worship whose obligation requires the ability to pay, like prayer and fasting.
The Hanbalis in the school held that the ability to pay is not a condition for the obligation: if the wealth perishes after the hawl and before the ability to pay, the zakat does not lapse, for it is wealth whose obligation became fixed in the liability (dhimmah) and does not lapse by the destruction of the nisab, like debt. The Hanbalis excepted from this the mu'ashsharat, that is, grains and fruits, if they perish by a heavenly calamity, because they were not under his hand: they are like debt destroyed before its receipt; if what is subject to zakat remains after the calamity, he purifies it. As for the Hanafis, they said: the ability to pay is not a condition, and zakat lapses with the destruction of the wealth after the hawl, whether one was able to pay or not, for the obligation of zakat is one of deferred option ('ala al-tarakhkhi), due to the generality of the command of zakat: the unrestricted command does not imply immediacy, so it is permissible for the liable person to defer; and if part of the nisab perishes, it lapses from what is owed to the measure of what perished, for zakat is attached to the thing itself and not to the liability ("Bada'i al-Sana'i" 2/431, 513; "Fath al-Qadir" 2/114; "Hashiyat Ibn Abidin" 2/20, 73; "Majma al-Damanat" 53; "Hashiyat al-Dasuqi" 1/443, 454, 503; "Mawahib al-Jalil" 2/363; "al-Mudawwana" 1/449; "al-Umm" 2/44; "Rawdat al-Talibin" 2/82; "Mughni al-Muhtaj" 2/177; "al-Majmu" 6/467; "al-Ifsah" 1/305; "al-Mughni" 3/456; "Kashshaf al-Qina" 2/182; "al-Insaf" 3/39, 40; and "al-Jami li-Ahkam al-Kafalah wa-l-Damanat 'ala al-Madhahib al-Arba'ah" 1/169).