Distribution of zakat al-fitr and its recipients

Zakat al-fitr raises several distribution questions once it is due: should the payer distribute it himself or hand it over to the imam? Must all eight categories of recipients mentioned in the Quran be covered, or does a single category suffice? May the zakat of several people be given to a single recipient, and what is the case between spouses? The following five sheets of the legal encyclopedia answer by surveying the positions of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Zahiri schools, with their proofs from the Quran, the Sunnah and reason.

Distributing one's zakat al-fitr oneself or handing it to the imam

The jurists agree on the lawfulness of distributing one's zakat al-fitr oneself as well as of handing it to the imam; their difference bears on which is more perfect, and two views emerge (al-Umm 2/23, al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/185, Rawdat al-Talibin 2/225, al-Majmu' 6/118, al-Mughni 3/418 and 3/420, al-Rawd al-Murbi' 1/365, Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat 1/446, Matalib Uli al-Nuha 2/119, al-Insaf 3/185).

First view: personal distribution is preferable; this is the madhhab of the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis. Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: our scholars agreed that what is best is for him to distribute the fitr zakat himself, as al-Shafi'i indicated in his text; if he hands it to the imam, to the collector, or to the one with whom the people's zakat is gathered, with permission to pay it out, that suffices him; but distributing it himself is preferable to all of that, and al-Mawardi, al-Mahamili in al-Tajrid, al-Baghawi, al-Sarakhsi and the rest of the school's scholars stated this explicitly (al-Majmu' 6/118).

Al-Mawardi reports al-Shafi'i's words: "Distributing it myself is dearer to me than depositing it with the one with whom it is gathered" (al-Majmu' 6/118). And Imam al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: the sound position of the school is that distributing the fitr zakat in person is preferable; according to another view, handing it to the just imam is preferable, a position transmitted from al-Marwazi (al-Insaf 3/185).

They advanced three rational arguments in favor of personal distribution:

• Whoever distributes his zakat himself is certain that it reaches those entitled to it, whereas handing it to the ruler gives no such certainty; what is certain to reach its recipient is better than what is not (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/185, al-Mughni 3/420).
• Distributing it in person relieves the recipient's hardship and enriches him with it, giving preference to those of his relatives and kin who need it most, thereby fulfilling the maintenance of family ties; it is therefore better than handing it to the ruler (al-Mughni 3/420).
• The texts of the Law establish that charity given secretly is generally better; such discretion is only properly achieved if the owner distributes his zakat himself, which confirms the preference for distribution in person.

Second view: handing it to the imam is preferable; this is the madhhab of the Malikis and of Imam Ahmad in one narration (al-Muntaqa of al-Baji 2/190, Sharh al-Zurqani on Mukhtasar Khalil 2/189, Sharh al-Kharashi on Mukhtasar Khalil 2/220, al-Taj wa-l-Iklil with Mawahib al-Jalil 2/373, al-Dhakhira 3/170). Imam al-Kharashi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: his words "and to the just imam" mean that handing it to the just imam is recommended; the apparent meaning of the Mudawwana is obligation, but the author may have interpreted it as recommendation; the difference from the zakat of wealth, whose delivery to the just imam is obligatory, lies in the hardship of parting with money, unlike the fitr zakat (Sharh al-Kharashi 2/232, see al-Maruna 2/359).

They first cite the practice of Abdallah ibn Omar:

"From Nafi': Abdallah ibn Omar (may Allah be pleased with them both) used to send the zakat al-fitr to the one with whom it was gathered, two or three days before the festival."reported by Imam Malik in the Muwatta 1/285, chapter on the time for sending the zakat al-fitr, no 629, with an authentic chain (sahih)

This shows that Ibn Omar sent his zakat to the one with whom it was gathered, that is, the imam or his deputy; had personal distribution been preferable, he would not have abandoned it, he who was among the Companions most eager to follow the Sunnah, as is well known. Added to this is that the imam knows the people in need better: they are the ones who come to him.

Abu al-Walid al-Baji (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: the people of need and poverty only come to the imam and seek from him because the public treasury (bayt al-mal) is in his hands; if he belongs to the just rulers, handing these dues to him is preferable, so that he may set them aside for the Muslims' emergencies and the necessities that beset them; that is why handing it to the imam is recommended (al-Muntaqa 2/190). Added to this is the following hadith:

"Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with him) reported: the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) put me in charge of guarding the zakat of Ramadan. A man came to me and began scooping up food by the handful, so I seized him and said: by Allah, I will take you to the Messenger of Allah. He said: I am in need, I have dependents and a pressing need. So I let him go. In the morning, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: O Abu Hurayra, what did your captive of last night do? I said: O Messenger of Allah, he complained of great need and of dependents, so I took pity on him and set him free. He said: he lied to you and he will come back. I knew he would return from the Messenger of Allah's words that he would return, and I lay in wait for him. He came and began scooping up food; I seized him and said: I will take you to the Messenger of Allah. He said: leave me, I am in need and have dependents, I will not come back. I took pity on him and set him free. In the morning, the Messenger of Allah said to me: O Abu Hurayra, what did your captive do? I said: O Messenger of Allah, he complained of great need and of dependents, so I took pity on him and set him free. He said: he lied to you and he will come back. I lay in wait for him a third time: he came scooping up food, I seized him and said: I will take you to the Messenger of Allah; and this was the last of the three times."reported by al-Bukhari

Covering the eight categories of recipients or restricting oneself to one

Zakat al-fitr being directed to the eight categories like the zakat of wealth, the question arises: must all the categories be covered, or is it permitted to restrict oneself to a single one? Two views emerge.

This status of the eight categories as recipients is established first by the Sunnah. Ziyad ibn al-Harith al-Suda'i, a companion of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), reported:

"I came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to pledge allegiance to him, and he related a long account. A man then came and said: give me from the charity. The Messenger of Allah said to him: Allah, the Most High, did not accept, concerning the charities, the judgment of any prophet or anyone else until He Himself judged concerning them: He divided them into eight parts; if you are among those parts, I will give you your right."a weak hadith, reported by Abu Dawud 1630 and by al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra 7522

This hadith confirms that the charity is given to the eight categories; the word "charity" in it is general in scope and covers zakat al-fitr like other charities, hence its being directed to the eight categories like the zakat of wealth. Added to this is the rational argument: the analogy of zakat al-fitr with the zakat of wealth through the common factor of obligation weighing in both; the recipients of the zakat of wealth being the eight categories, the same applies to zakat al-fitr.

First view: it is not obligatory to cover the eight categories, and restricting oneself to a single one is permitted; this is the madhhab of the Hanafis, the Malikis and the Hanbalis, and of some Shafi'is; it was also the view of Omar ibn al-Khattab, Ali ibn Abi Talib, Ibn Abbas and Hudhayfa among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), then of Sa'id ibn Jubayr, Ibrahim al-Nakha'i, Omar ibn Abd al-Aziz and Abu al-Aliya among the Successors (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/47, 'Umdat al-Qari 8/238, al-Sharh al-Kabir 1/498, al-Jawhara al-Nayyira 1/487, al-Istidhkar 3/207, Ahkam al-Qur'an of Ibn al-Arabi 2/522, Bidayat al-Mujtahid 1/377, Tafsir al-Qurtubi 8/168, al-Dhakhira 3/170, al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyya 1/70, al-Ifsah 1/359, Mawahib al-Jalil 2/342, al-Mughni 4/63, Kashshaf al-Qina' 2/287). Abu Bakr al-Jassas (may Allah have mercy on him) says: no contrary view is narrated from the Companions, so it became a consensus of the early generations that none may oppose, given its clarity and its wide diffusion among them, with no opposition from any of their peers (Ahkam al-Qur'an 4/344). Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: there is no harm in a man giving the fitr zakat due from himself and his family to a single destitute person (al-Mudawwana al-Kubra 2/359). Al-Dardir (may Allah have mercy on him) adds: it is recommended to give preference to the desperate one, that is, the needy, by giving him more of it without covering the eight categories; this recommendation applies only with the aim of departing from al-Shafi'i's view (al-Sharh al-Kabir 1/498, see Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil by al-Kharashi 2/220). And al-Buhuti (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: if the owner, in paying the zakat, restricts himself to one of the eight categories, or to one of its members, that suffices him; this is stated explicitly, and it is the view of Omar, Hudhayfa and Ibn Abbas (Kashshaf al-Qina' 2/287).

The supporters of this view argue from the Quran, the Sunnah and reason. First, the Quran. Allah, the Most High, says:

"If you disclose the charities, that is well; but if you hide them and give them to the poor, it is better for you, and He will absolve you of some of your misdeeds. Allah is, of what you do, fully aware."

Surah al-Baqara, 271

The verse establishes the permissibility of giving the charities to one single category, because of the mention "and give them to the poor": the explicit text mentions one category only, the poor; had covering all the categories been obligatory, the verse would not have restricted itself to the poor. Moreover, the word "charities" in it is general in scope, covering zakat al-fitr like other charities. Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: whenever charity is mentioned unrestrictedly in the Quran, it means the obligatory charity (Tafsir al-Qurtubi 8/168).

Then comes the Sunnah, with three texts. The first is the hadith of Mu'adh. Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), sending him to Yemen, said to him:

"Call them to bear witness that there is no deity but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah; if they obey you in that, tell them that Allah has made five prayers obligatory upon them every day and night; if they obey you in that, tell them that Allah has made charity on their wealth obligatory upon them, taken from their rich and returned to their poor."authentic hadith (sahih), cited earlier in the work

This hadith establishes that covering the eight categories is not obligatory and that restricting oneself to a single category is permitted, because of his words: "taken from their rich and returned to their poor": one single category is spelled out, the poor, which permits directing the charity to them alone.

Then the hadith of Qabisa ibn Mukhariq al-Hilali:

"Qabisa said: I had incurred a debt, and I came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to ask him about it. He said to me: stay until the charity comes to us, and we will then order a share of it for you."reported by Muslim 1044

This hadith likewise establishes the permissibility of restricting the payment of the charity to one single category: the Prophet announced that he would order a share of the charity for Qabisa when it arrived; now Qabisa is one single individual; if giving the charity to one single individual is permitted, that proves that covering the eight categories is not obligatory.

Finally, the account of Salama ibn Sakhr:

"Salama ibn Sakhr reported: I was a man whom women tempted as no one else. When the month of Ramadan entered, I feared that my wife would lead me into a sin that would go on until morning, so I abstained from her by oath until the month of Ramadan ended. Then one night, while she was serving me, something of her was uncovered to me, and I was not long in drawing near to her. In the morning I went out to my people, told them what had happened and said: come with me to the Messenger of Allah. They said: no, by Allah. So I set off alone to the Prophet and informed him. He said: is it you, O Salama? I said twice: yes, O Messenger of Allah, and I am patient with the decree of Allah, so judge for me whatever Allah shows you. He said: free a slave. I said: by Him who sent you with the truth, I own no slave except this one, and I struck the side of my neck. He said: then fast two consecutive months. I said: was I not afflicted with what afflicted me only because of fasting? He said: then feed a wasq of dates among sixty destitute people. I said: by Him who sent you with the truth, we spent the night hungry with no food. He said: then go to the collector of the charity of Banu Zurayq and let him hand it over to you."a hasan hadith, reported by Abu Dawud 2213, al-Tirmidhi 3299 and Ibn Majah 2062

In this account the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered the charity of Banu Zurayq to be given to one single man; had covering all the categories been obligatory, he would not have ordered it. Imam al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: this hadith is an argument for whoever holds that a man may place his charity in one single of the six categories, without distributing it among the shares (Ma'alim al-Sunan 3/217).

Two rational arguments are finally added. The first: just as it is not obligatory to cover all the individuals of one category, it is not obligatory to cover all the categories. Ibn al-Arabi the Maliki said: what we take as a criterion between them and us is that the umma agreed that if he gave every individual his share, covering them all would not be obligatory; likewise covering the categories (Ahkam al-Qur'an of Ibn al-Arabi 2/522, Tafsir al-Qurtubi 8/168).

The second: covering all the categories involves hardship and difficulty, which the Law excludes. Allah, the Most High, says:

"Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship."

Surah al-Baqara, 185

To those who object with the word of Allah, the Most High:

"Charities are only for the poor and the destitute..."

Surah at-Tawba, 60

drawing from it three arguments, it is answered:

• The verse refers to the categories toward which spending is permitted, not to the obligation of giving to each of them (al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/360, Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 2/344). Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) says: the categories are mentioned here only to indicate the destinations, not to make covering all the recipients obligatory (Tafsir Ibn Kathir 2/365).
• The restrictive formula does not establish the obligation of covering the categories: it establishes those mentioned and negates any other category. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the restriction establishes what is mentioned and negates what goes beyond it; the meaning is that charity is not lawful for anyone besides these, but is lawful for them; what is established is of the same kind as what is negated, and it is known that he did not intend to clarify ownership but to clarify lawfulness, that is, that charity is not lawful for anyone besides them; the meaning is therefore that it is lawful for them (Majmu' al-Fatawa 25/77).
• The particle (lam) in "for the poor" does not express ownership but specification and entitlement: these alone are entitled to it, to the exclusion of others. Al-Zabidi the Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: the particle here indicates the party entitled, not partnership or division; every category that Allah has mentioned may receive all of a man's charity, to the exclusion of the other categories, and it is also permitted to give it to a single individual of the category; indeed, each category is countless, and attribution to the countless does not express ownership but indicates the direction aimed at, which embraces the genus and hence the individual. Consider the one who vows not to drink the water of the Tigris: if he drinks a single gulp of it, he breaks his vow, for he cannot drink all of it. It is thus known that these eight categories, taken together, are to the zakat what the Ka'ba is to prayer: each category is like a part of the Ka'ba, and facing a single part of the Ka'ba suffices. The restrictive formula establishes what is mentioned and negates what goes beyond it: it restricts the genus of charities to these numbered categories, reserved to them exclusively, as if He said: they are only for them, not for others (al-Jawhara al-Nayyira 1/487).

Second view: covering the eight categories is obligatory in zakat al-fitr; this is the madhhab of the Shafi'is, of Dawud and Ibn Hazm the Zahiris, and of one narration of Ahmad chosen by Abu al-Khattab and other Hanbalis (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387, Mukhtasar al-Muzani 1/55, Rawdat al-Talibin 2/329, Tarh al-Tathrib 4/62, Asna al-Matalib 1/402, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/116, al-Muhalla 6/144, al-Furu' of Ibn Muflih 2/473). Al-Mawardi (may Allah have mercy on him) reports that al-Shafi'i said: "he divides it among those among whom the zakat of wealth is divided", meaning that the recipients of zakat al-fitr are the same as those of the zakat of wealth among the categories mentioned in the Book of Allah (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387).

Abu Sa'id al-Istakhri specifies: if he undertakes to distribute it himself, he may restrict himself to one of the eight categories and give it to three persons of whichever categories he wishes, but he may not restrict himself to fewer than three; if he hands it to the imam, the latter gives it only across all the categories. The distinction between the two cases lies in necessity: the imam can distribute it among all of them without hardship, wealth being ample and charities numerous, whereas the owner, if charged with that, would find it hard: distributing a sa' among twenty-four portions gives each one a share with no effect on his situation, and its smallness may even lead him to refuse to take it (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387).

Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) sets out the rules: covering the eight categories is obligatory when it is possible; if he distributes it himself, or the imam distributes it while there is no collector ('amil) there, he divides it among seven categories; a reported view holds that if he distributes it himself, the share of those whose hearts are to be reconciled also falls away, but the well-known view is the former; if a category is missing, it is best to divide the wealth among the rest; if none of the categories exists, the zakat is kept until they exist or some of them exist. When the imam divides it, he must cover the individuals of every category, and restricting himself to some of them is not permitted, because covering them is not impossible for him: the intent is not that he cover them with the zakat of each individual, but from the mixed zakat in his hand, and he may assign one kind of wealth to some and another kind to others. As for the owner, if covering is possible for him because the recipients in the town are limited in number and the wealth suffices them, the author states categorically in his Tatimma that covering is obligatory; in al-Tahdhib, it is obligatory if we allow the transfer of the charity from one town to another, and if we do not allow it, it is not obligatory but remains recommended; if it is impossible, the obligation and the recommendation fall away (Rawdat al-Talibin 2/321 and 2/329).

He continues: those whom Allah, the Most High, mentioned in the plural (the poor and others) must not fall below three persons, except the collector, who may be a single man. Does one traveller (ibn al-sabil) suffice? Two views exist, the sounder being the negative, as with the poor; some say the two views may extend to the fighters, the word of Allah being "in the cause of Allah", without a plural form. If he directs what he owes to two persons while able to cover a third, he must guarantee the third's share. As for the amount of this guarantee, there are two views: the explicit text in zakat is that he guarantees a third of that category's share; analogy holds that he guarantees what would have sufficed had he given it at the outset, for he is the one who fell short; if he directed it to one person, the first view requires two-thirds of him, and the second the least that it is permitted to give him. The author of al-'Udda said: we hold that he guarantees a third, with two readings: the first, that the intent is their equality in need, to the point that the need of this third, at the time distribution becomes due, equals the need of all the others, and he is then guaranteed half a share so that, with it, he becomes their like, for distribution according to the measure of their needs is recommended; the second: no difference. If fewer than three persons of a category are found, it is obligatory to give to three of them, and this is the sound view: if the three are specified, one gives to those found. Should the remaining share be directed to this recipient, or transferred to another town? Al-Mutawalli says it is like the case where some categories are absent from the town; the sounder position is to direct it to him, a view that shaykh Nasr al-Maqdisi considered sound and which he, the author of al-'Udda and others reported from al-Shafi'i's explicit text (Rawdat al-Talibin 2/321 and 2/329).

A derived case: equality between the categories is obligatory, even if the need of some is greater, except that the collector is not given more than the wage of his work. As for equality between the individuals of one category, whether they are all covered or one restricts oneself to some of them, it is not obligatory but recommended when needs are equal: this when the owner divides it. In his Tatimma the author specifies that if the imam divides it, preferring some of them at equal need is not permitted, because general coverage is required of him and therefore equality is, whereas the owner has no coverage to fulfil and so no equality. This distinction, though strong in its argument, goes against the import of the majority's statement recommending equality where covering is not obligatory. The school's masters finally say: it is permitted to give to recipients among the residents of the town as well as among passing strangers, but the residents are preferable, for they are his neighbours (Rawdat al-Talibin 2/321 and 2/329).

The supporters of this second view likewise argue from the Quran, the Sunnah and reason. First, the Quran:

"Charities are only for the poor, the destitute, those who work upon it, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, for the freeing of slaves, for those in debt, in the cause of Allah, and for the wayfarer. An ordinance from Allah, and Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise."

Surah at-Tawba, 60

This noble passage of the verse establishes the obligation of covering the eight categories mentioned in it, through three routes: Allah made everything over which the name of charities is stated an entitlement for those the verse mentions (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387); the restrictive formula confines the charities to the eight categories mentioned; and the particle (lam) in "for the poor" expresses ownership, followed by conjunction with the waw of partnership, as in "the wealth belongs to Zayd, Amr and Bakr", whence the obligatory equality between those mentioned (Ahkam al-Qur'an of Ibn al-Arabi 2/521, Tafsir al-Qurtubi 8/167, al-Furuq of al-Qarafi 3/15, al-Muqni' 2/224).

Then comes the Sunnah, with the hadith of Ziyad ibn al-Harith al-Suda'i cited earlier, in which the words "He divided them into eight parts" make the charities eight parts, each belonging to a category, as confirmed by his words "if you are among those parts, I will give you your right": every part, that is, every category, has a right in the charities that must reach it. Imam al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: in his words "if you are among those parts, I will give you your right" lies the proof that it is not permitted to gather all the charity in one single category and that what is obligatory is to distribute it among the people of the shares according to their shares; had the meaning of the verse been to indicate the destinations without indicating the shares, the division into parts would have had no meaning; his words "I will give you your right" attest it: each category has, on its own, a right (Ma'alim al-Sunan, Sharh Sunan Abi Dawud 2/50).

Giving the zakat of several people to a single recipient

Added to this is the rational argument of the analogy of zakat al-fitr with the zakat of wealth through the common factor of obligation: zakat al-fitr must not be restricted to one category while others exist, like the zakat of wealth (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387).

The jurists differ over giving the zakat of several people to one single recipient, and two views emerge.

First view: it is permitted; this is the madhhab of the Hanafis, the Malikis and the Hanbalis (Tabyin al-Haqa'iq 1/299, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/260, al-Mudawwana al-Kubra 2/359, Mawahib al-Jalil 2/374, Mukhtasar Khalil no 66, Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi no 49, al-Mughni 4/63, Sharh al-Zarkashi 1/409, Kashshaf al-Qina' 2/254). Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said: there is no harm in a man giving the fitr zakat due from himself and his family to a single destitute person (al-Mudawwana al-Kubra 2/359, see al-Taj wa-l-Iklil 2/375). Khalil (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote: "and handing one sa' to several poor men, and several sa' to one". Al-Kharashi comments: this means it is permitted to give a single sa' of the fitr zakat to a group of poor men, and likewise to give several sa' to a single poor man, even though this is contrary to what is best (Sharh al-Kharashi 2/232). He also says it is permitted to give one man what is due to a group. Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) notes: Malik, Abu Thawr, Ibn al-Mundhir and the partisans of opinion said this (al-Mughni 4/63, Kashshaf al-Qina' 2/254).

They rely on three rational arguments:

• The zakat is not owed to any specified person, so giving it to one man is lawful, for the payers have discharged what was due from them.
• The analogy with the zakat of wealth: both are obligatory charities, and in the zakat of wealth it is permitted to give a group's charity to one man; likewise zakat al-fitr.
• No proof has come forbidding the giving of a group's zakat to one man, so the matter returns to the default rule, which is permission.

Second view: it is not permitted; this is the madhhab of the Shafi'is (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387, Rawdat al-Talibin 2/329). Al-Mawardi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: it is not permitted, in each category, to restrict oneself to fewer than three persons (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/387).

The verse and reason also confirm the reverse: distributing one single person's zakat to a group of recipients. This noble passage of the charity verse (Surah at-Tawba, 60) establishes that the charities are spent only on the eight categories, among which is zakat al-fitr; the verse's unrestricted wording shows that whoever hands the zakat to one entitled person discharges his duty, and that whoever gives his zakat al-fitr to a group gives it to its recipients, so it is permitted. Three rational arguments support this: whoever pays out his zakat al-fitr and distributes it among a group has done what he was commanded toward those entitled, his responsibility is discharged and the act is valid; distributing it among a group makes it possible to relieve more than one poor man, while concentrating it risks restricting the zakat to some poor men at the expense of others, and relieving the greater number is better than relieving the fewer; and no proof from the Quran or the Sunnah forbids distributing it, the texts rather coming in the plural, as in the surah of Bara'a and the hadith of Mu'adh, hence the permission to distribute one person's zakat among many.

May a husband give his zakat al-fitr to his poor wife?

The scholars do not differ: it is not permitted for a husband to give his zakat al-fitr to his wife even if she is poor, because she is rich by his wealth, that is, because her maintenance is his responsibility. Ibn al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: they agreed that a man does not give his wife from the zakat, because her maintenance is his responsibility and she is rich by his wealth (al-Ijma' p. 120). Ibn Hubayra (may Allah have mercy on him) said: they agreed that it is not permitted for a man to give his zakat to his wife (al-Ifsah 1/378). Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote: it is not permitted for a man to give the zakat to his wife, by consensus (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/49). And Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) specifies: as for the wife, giving the zakat to her is not permitted by consensus (al-Mughni 3/424); he says elsewhere that zakat al-fitr must not be given to one to whom the zakat of wealth may not be given (al-Mughni 4/62).

What is forbidden is giving her the zakat to spend on herself; as for handing her what she will pay toward her debt or distribute to other entitled recipients, there is no harm in it, as the Malikis stated explicitly; close to this is the Shafi'i position that what is forbidden is giving it to her from the share of the poor and the destitute, but not from another share to which she is entitled. This is also understood from the words of shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya, and the issue was already treated in the zakat rulings (al-Mabsut of al-Sarakhsi 3/11-12, al-Ikhtiyar 1/127, Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 2/62, Fath al-Qadir 2/22, Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/49, al-Dhakhira 3/142, Hashiyat al-Dasuqi on al-Sharh al-Kabir 1/499, Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil 2/221, al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/388, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/108, al-Furu' 2/478, al-Mughni 3/424 and 4/62, Majmu' al-Fatawa 25/90 and 25/92).

May a wife give her zakat al-fitr to her poor husband?

The scholars differ, and two views emerge.

First view: it is permitted; this is the view of Abu Yusuf and Muhammad among the Hanafis, of the Malikis, the Shafi'is, the Hanbalis in one narration, and of the Zahiris (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/40, 'Umdat al-Qari 9/32, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/262, al-'Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya 3/206, Mawahib al-Jalil 2/377, Hashiyat al-'Adawi 1/645, al-Sharh al-Kabir with al-Dasuqi's Hashiya 1/509, Minh al-Jalil 1/509, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/108, al-Amwal p. 588, al-Mughni 3/425, Nayl al-Awtar 4/246, Sharh Ibn Battal 3/492, al-Ifsah 1/374, al-Insaf 3/261, Fath al-Bari 3/329). Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) reports that Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: the wife gives her zakat to her husband (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/40). Imam al-Tahawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: some held that a woman may give her husband from the zakat of her wealth, among them Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (Sharh Ma'ani al-Athar 2/22). Al-Dardir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the wife may give it to her poor husband (al-Sharh al-Kabir 1/509). Al-Dasuqi (may Allah have mercy on him) comments: what is affirmed here categorically is the permission to give it to her poor husband, to the exclusion of the zakat of wealth, for which there are two views of prohibition and disapproval; this rests on the little benefit found in the zakat of wealth (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 1/509). And al-Khatib al-Shirbini (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: the wife may give to her husband, a free man (not a slave), from the share of the poor and the destitute when such is his case; indeed it is a sunnah, as al-Mawardi said (Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/108, al-Hawi al-Kabir 8/537).

The supporters of this view argue from the Sunnah and reason. The Sunnah is the hadith of Zaynab, the wife of Abdallah:

"Zaynab, the wife of Abdallah, reported that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had said: Give in charity, O assembly of women, even from your jewellery. She said: I returned to Abdallah and said to him: you are a man of little means, and the Messenger of Allah has commanded us to give charity; go and ask him whether this suffices for me, otherwise I will give it to someone other than you. Abdallah said to me: you rather should go to him. I set out and found at the door of the Messenger of Allah a woman of the Ansar whose need was the same as mine. The Messenger of Allah had been invested with awe. Bilal came out to us and we said to him: go to the Messenger of Allah and tell him that two women are at his door asking him: does the charity suffice for them with regard to their husbands and the orphans in their homes? But do not tell him who we are. Bilal went in and asked him. The Messenger of Allah said: who are they? He said: a woman of the Ansar and Zaynab. He asked: which Zaynab? He said: the wife of Abdallah. He said: they both have two rewards: the reward of kinship and the reward of charity."reported by al-Bukhari 1397 and Muslim 998

This hadith establishes the permissibility for the wife to give her zakat to her poor husband, through two routes. First his question: "does the charity suffice for them?"; now the word "suffice", in the jurists' usage, is only said of obligation: a woman may therefore give her zakat to her poor husband. Second, when the Prophet was asked about the charity, he was not asked whether it was voluntary or obligatory; the omission of detail counts as generality, as if he said: it suffices for you, whether obligatory or voluntary.

Three rational arguments are added. The first: the husband is poor, and poverty is the very quality that entitles one to zakat; the cause being established, the ruling stands, unless there is proof to the contrary; no text of the Quran or the Sunnah establishes that a woman may not give her zakat to her husband; the rule states that whoever bears the quality of entitlement is a recipient, and an impediment is only conceivable for one who, upon receiving this charity, would thereby be released from a duty binding on him. The second: it is agreed that giving zakat to relatives whose maintenance is not obligatory is permitted; the bond of kinship is stronger than the marital bond, for it cannot be severed while the marital bond can; if giving to relatives whose maintenance does not bind us is permitted and recommended, then so is the wife's giving of her zakat to her husband, since his maintenance is not binding on her (al-Hawi al-Kabir 3/388). The third is Ibn Qudama's word (may Allah have mercy on him) explaining the reason for the permission: the husband is not chargeable to his wife, so nothing prevents giving the zakat to him, like a stranger; as for the husband, giving it to his wife is forbidden because her maintenance is binding on him; the default is permission to give, the husband falling within the general scope of the categories named for zakat, and no prohibition is established by any text or by consensus; the analogy with the case where prohibition is established is unsound because of the manifest difference between the two, so the permission to give remains established (al-Mughni 3/425).

Second view: it is not permitted; this is the view of Abu Hanifa, al-Thawri, al-Hasan al-Basri, and Ahmad in the second narration (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/40, 'Umdat al-Qari 9/32, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/262, al-'Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya 3/206, Sharh Ma'ani al-Athar 2/22, al-Ifsah 1/374, al-Mughni 3/425, al-Insaf 3/261, al-Furu' 2/478). Badr al-Din al-Ayni (may Allah have mercy on him) reports that al-Hasan al-Basri, al-Thawri, Abu Hanifa, Ahmad in one narration and Abu Bakr among the Hanbalis said: it is not permitted for a woman to give her husband from the zakat of her wealth ('Umdat al-Qari 9/32). Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) writes: as for the wife, there are two narrations; the first is that giving it to him is not permitted, and this is Abu Bakr's choice and Abu Hanifa's madhhab (al-Mughni 3/425). Ibn Muflih (may Allah have mercy on him) said: may a woman give her zakat to her husband? There are two narrations; the first, it is not permitted, and this is the sound view (al-Furu' 2/478).

They rely on two rational arguments. The first is the analogy of the wife with the husband, each of the two spouses being the counterpart of the other: just as it is agreed by consensus that the zakat is not given to her, the wife may not give it to her husband; this because of their customary sharing of benefits, and because the testimony of each is not accepted for the other: the legal punishment for theft is not applied to a husband who steals his wife's property. The second: the wife benefits from giving it to him; if he is unable to spend on her, receiving the zakat enables him to do so and the maintenance becomes all the more binding on him; if he is not unable, the gift lightens his burden while he is bound to a wealthy man's spending; she benefits in both cases, so it is not permitted for her (al-Mughni 3/425).

This disagreement concerns only the zakat of wealth. As for zakat al-fitr, it only arises according to the view of the Hanafis, the Zahiris and those who agree with them, who hold that zakat al-fitr is obligatory on the wife for herself; according to the majority, who place the wife's zakat al-fitr upon her husband, the question does not arise, unless the husband is insolvent and unable to pay the zakat on behalf of his wife while she is rich: in that case the disagreement reverts to the view of those who hold that the zakat is due from her herself.