Islamic Fiqh > Zakat > Zakat al-fitr > Delaying zakat al-fitr
Contents
Updated on 25 September 2026 at 3:23 PM
This part belongs to the full section: All sections of this part.
The people of knowledge differed over the legal status of delaying the payment of zakat al-fitr in 3 opinions.
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: these 2 hadiths imply that it is not permitted to delay it after the Eid prayer and that it lapses once the prayer is finished; this is the correct view, for nothing contradicts these 2 hadiths, neither abrogating nor a consensus averting their meaning; and our master upheld it and stated it explicitly (Zad al-Ma'ad 2/21-22). Imam al-Shawkani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his statement "it is a charity among the charities" designates that given outside the prescribed times, whose acceptance remains subject to the will of Allah the Exalted; it appears that whoever pays the fitra after the Eid prayer is like one who did not pay it, both sharing in the neglect of this obligatory charity (Nayl al-Awtar 4/256).
The second opinion: it is permitted to delay the payment of zakat al-fitr after the Eid prayer and to pay it during the day of Eid, while delaying it beyond that is forbidden; this is the view of the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis in the doctrine, and of Ibn al-Humam among the Hanafis (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin on al-Dar al-Mukhtar 2/359, al-Dhakhira 3/158, Bulghat al-Salik 1/349, Sharh al-Zarqani on the Muwatta of Malik 2/202, al-Majmu 6/105-106, al-Mughni 4/46, Sharh al-Zarkashi 1/405, al-Mughni al-Muhtaj 2/364, Matalib Uli al-Nuhha 2/110, Nayl al-Awtar 4/256, al-Insaf 3/178).
Al-Qarafi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Sand said: he does not sin by delaying it so long as the day of breaking the fast lasts; if he delays it beyond that, he sins, if able; this is the view of al-Shafi'i and Ibn Hanbal (al-Dhakhira 3/158). Al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his statement "it is permitted during the rest of the day" expresses the doctrine followed by the companions, and many of them affirmed it decisively. He then noted: the author's statement "it is permitted during the rest of the day" may mean permissibility without dislike, which is remote and is one of the 2 views chosen by the qadi, or permissibility with dislike, the second view, which is the correct one. In al-Kafi and al-Majd's commentary on it, it is stated that he left the choice aside; and in al-Furu: the view of dislike is the most apparent (al-Insaf 3/178). Al-Buhuti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: whoever delays it beyond it, that is, beyond the day of Eid, sins, for it is permitted throughout that day; the rest of the day, that is, after the prayer, is disliked out of caution regarding the disagreement over its prohibition (Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat 1/442). Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if he delays it after the day of Eid, he sins and making it up is required of him (al-Mughni 4/46). Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the texts of al-Shafi'i and his companions agree that it is preferable to pay it on the day of Eid before going out for the Eid prayer, that it is permitted to pay it throughout the day of Eid, that it is not permitted to delay it after that day, and that if he delays it, he disobeys and making it up is required of him; they named "making up" the payment after the day of Eid (al-Majmu 6/105-106).
Its proponents, who constitute the majority, grounded their doctrine, the permissibility of delay after the Eid prayer and during the day of Eid and the prohibition of delay beyond, on the Sunna: the hadith of Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both): "the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered that zakat al-fitr be paid before the people go out for the prayer" (al-Bukhari 1438, Muslim 986), the hadith of Abdallah ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both): "The Messenger of Allah (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) made zakat al-fitr obligatory as a purification for the faster from vain talk and indecency, and as food for the poor. Whoever pays it before the prayer, it is an accepted zakat; whoever pays it after the prayer, it is a charity among the charities" (authentic hadith, cited earlier), and the Prophet's statement (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Enrich them from begging on this day" (weak hadith). These hadiths indicate the permissibility of paying zakat al-fitr on the day of Eid after the prayer, with dislike, and the prohibition of delaying its payment after the day of Eid. The permissibility rests on the Prophet's statement (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Enrich them from begging on this day", general for the whole day, so that it is permitted after the prayer as before it, the enrichment taking place on that very day, though he left aside what is preferable. The dislike of payment after the prayer rests on contravening the command to pay before the prayer, that command being carried on recommendation; delay after the prayer is nonetheless disliked out of caution regarding the disagreement over its prohibition. As for the prohibition of delaying payment after the day of breaking the fast, it rests on the fact that the hadiths contain the command to pay before the prayer and the command to enrich the poor on the day of Eid, and that delay after that day constitutes contravention of the command of payment and misses the commanded enrichment on the day of Eid: it is therefore proven that delay after the day of Eid is forbidden.
The third opinion: the delay of zakat al-fitr is permitted without limit; such is the doctrine of the Hanafis (Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/74, Hashiyat Ibn Abidin with al-Dar al-Mukhtar 2/359, Umdat al-Qari 9/108, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/271). Imam al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: as for the time of its payment, it extends over the whole life according to most of our companions, and it does not lapse through delay after the day of breaking the fast (Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/74).
The majority of the Hanafis grounded this doctrine on rational argument, in 2 ways. The first is that the command to pay it is unrestricted as to time, so that it becomes obligatory at any unspecified time; it is specified only by an actual specification or by the end of one's life, like the command of the zakat: at whatever time one pays it, one is in a state of payment and not of making up, as with the other obligations of extended time (Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/74).
Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: as for zakat al-fitr, it is distributed in the town where it became obligatory, whether his wealth is there or not; for the person is the cause of the obligation of the zakat, so it is distributed in the town where the cause is (al-Mughni 3/448). The jurists grounded payment at the place of the payer on what Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) reported: the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sent Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him) to Yemen and said to him:
"Call them to testify 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 5 prayers obligatory upon them every day and night. If they obey you in that, inform them that Allah has made a charity obligatory upon them from their wealth, taken from their rich and rendered to their poor."reported by al-Bukhari 1331 and Muslim 19
The point of the reasoning is his statement: "taken from their rich and rendered to their poor": the pronoun in his statement "their poor" refers to the poor of the people of the land, and this is the most apparent view, for Mu'adh was sent to the people of Yemen; and the pronoun in his statement "their rich" also refers to the people of Yemen: the same applies to "their poor", so that the wording and the meaning remain coherent.
Regarding the place of payment of zakat al-fitr when the place of the payer differs from that of the one on whose behalf it is paid, the jurists differed in 2 opinions. The first opinion: zakat al-fitr is paid at the place of the one who pays it; this is the sound view among the Hanafis, the Malikis and the Hanbalis, and one view of the Shafi'is (al-Mabsut 3/106, Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/75, al-Kafi 1/113, Tabyin al-Haqa'iq 1/305, Mughni al-Muhtaj 1/704, Kashshaf al-Qina 2/252, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/269). Imam al-Zayla'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said: for the charity of breaking the fast, it is his place that counts, not that of his minor children nor of his slaves, according to the sound view (Tabyin al-Haqa'iq 1/305). Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: it is recommended for the traveler to pay it in the place where he is, for himself and for his dependents; if his dependents pay it on his behalf, it suffices him (al-Kafi fi fiqh ahl al-Madina 1/113). Imam al-Buhuti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: whoever owes the fitra of another, such as a wife, a slave or a relative, pays it in his own place (Kashshaf al-Qina 2/252, Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat 1/442). Al-Khatib al-Shirbini (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if his slave is in another town, the most correct view is that the town of the slave counts, since the charity initially falls upon the one who bears it; the second view, that the town of the master counts, is the weaker one (Mughni al-Muhtaj 1/407, Nihayat al-Muhtaj 3/133).
Its proponents grounded it on rational argument: the charity of breaking the fast attaches to the payer's legal liability, not to his wealth, to the point that if his wealth perishes, the charity does not lapse; the charity attaching to the payer's liability, it is the payer's place that counts, not that of the one on whose behalf it is paid (Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/75, Tabyin al-Haqa'iq 1/305).
The second opinion: the place of payment of zakat al-fitr, when the place of the payer differs from that of the one on whose behalf it is paid, is the place of the one on whose behalf it is paid; this is the sound view among the Shafi'is, and a view of the Hanafis and of the Hanbalis (Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/75, al-Mabsut 3/106, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/296, Mughni al-Muhtaj 1/407, Nihayat al-Muhtaj 3/123, al-Insaf 3/203). Ibn al-Humam (may Allah have mercy on him) said: for the zakat of wealth, the place of the wealth counts; for the charity of breaking the fast, the place of the person on whose behalf it is paid, according to the sound view, in observance of applying the ruling where its cause exists (Sharh Fath al-Qadir 2/280, al-Bahr al-Ra'iq 2/269). Al-Khatib al-Shirbini (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if his slave is in another town, the most correct view is that the town of the slave counts, since the charity initially falls upon the one who bears it (Mughni al-Muhtaj 1/407).
Al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: it has also been said: one pays in a town on behalf of those for whom one must pay (al-Insaf 3/203). The proponents of this view grounded it on rational argument: the analogy of zakat al-fitr to the zakat of wealth, for it is one of the 2 kinds of zakat; the zakat of wealth is paid where the wealth is, and so it is with zakat al-fitr (al-Mabsut 3/106, Bada'i al-Sana'i 2/75).
The jurists agree on the permissibility of transferring the zakat from one town to another when it overflows and its inhabitants are self-sufficient, on account of the abundance of the zakat, the absence of some categories or their small number; they even said that the transfer then becomes obligatory. They differed however, in 2 opinions, on the status of transferring zakat al-fitr from the country of obligation to another country while its entitled recipients exist in the country of obligation.
The first opinion, that of the Hanafis: the transfer of the zakat from one town to another is disliked in a mild way, unless it is transferred to needy relatives, on account of the tie of kinship; or to a person or group poorer than the inhabitants of one's town; or if its transfer is more beneficial to the Muslims; or from the territory of war to the territory of Islam, for the poor of the Muslims are better and more worthy of support than the poor of the territory of war; or to a scholar or a student of knowledge, to aid him in his mission; or to someone more pious, more upright or more beneficial to the Muslims: in all these cases the transfer is not disliked (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin on al-Dar al-Mukhtar 2/353, Sharh Fath al-Qadir 2/280, al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya 1/190, al-Mabsut 3/106, Tabyin al-Haqa'iq 1/305, al-Hidaya, commentary on al-Bidaya 1/115).
Allah the Exalted said:
"Charities are only for the poor and the destitute..."
Surah al-Tawba, 60
This verse enumerates the categories to which the zakat is assigned without distinction between the inhabitants of one town and those of another: it is therefore unrestricted, not limited to a particular place. Abu Bakr al-Jassas (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the apparent meaning of the verse implies the permissibility of giving it outside the town where the wealth is, in any place one wishes; that is why our companions said: in any place where one pays it, it suffices; proof of it is that we know of no charity in the legal foundations specified by a place to the point that paying it elsewhere would be forbidden. Do you not see that the expiations of oaths and vows and other charities do not have their permissibility tied to one place rather than another? (Ahkam al-Quran 4/341). As for the dislike, it rests on the Prophet's statement (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) when he sent Mu'adh to Yemen and said to him: "inform them that Allah has made a charity obligatory upon them from their wealth, taken from their rich and rendered to their poor" (authentic hadith, cited earlier); for that involves preserving the right of neighborliness, which is preferable.
Tawus reported that Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him) said to the Yemenites: "Bring me as charities thick linen garments, or woolen cloth, in place of the barley and sorghum: lighter for you and better for the Companions of the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in Medina" (reported by al-Bukhari in suspended form, in the imperative form, no 32, in the chapter on presenting wealth as zakat; al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar said in Taghliq al-Ta'liq (3/12): the chain of transmission up to Tawus is sound, but he did not hear from Mu'adh, so the report is discontinuous). The point of the reasoning is that Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him) transferred the charity from Yemen to Medina; the word "charity" encompasses the zakat of wealth and the zakat of breaking the fast: the permissibility of transferring the zakat is thereby proven. Imam al-Haddad al-Zabidi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his statement: the transfer of the zakat from one town to another is disliked, and the charity of each people is assigned among them; that involves preserving the right of neighborliness: the closer the cohabitation, the more this preservation is required; if he transfers it to others, it suffices him, even though it be disliked, for the addressee of the text is unrestricted: the poor (al-Jawhara al-Nira 2/1).
The second opinion: it is not permitted to transfer the zakat from one place to another; this is the view of the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, with details among them. The Malikis said: the zakat must be distributed at the place of obligation or near it, that is, at a distance less than the qasr distance, which has the status of the place of obligation. If there is no entitled recipient at the place of obligation or near it, the whole is transferred as an obligation to a place that has one, even at the qasr distance; if there is one at the place of obligation or near it, distribution in that place or near it becomes necessary. Transfer at the qasr distance is not permitted, unless the one to whom it is transferred is poorer and more needy: it is then recommended to transfer the greater part of it to them; if he transfers all of it or distributes all of it at the place of obligation, it suffices. If he transfers it to someone other than the poorest and most needy, 2 cases arise. The first: transfer to someone of equal need with the people of the place of obligation is not permitted, but the zakat counts, that is, he is not required to give it again. The second: transfer to someone of lesser need is subject to 2 opinions: that of the Mukhtasar of Khalil, which states that the zakat does not count; and that reported by Ibn Rushd and in al-Kafi, which states that it counts, for it has not left its categories (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 1/500-502, al-Fawakih al-Dawani 1/346, Mawahib al-Jalil 2/359).
The Shafi'is said: it is not permitted to transfer the zakat from one town to another; the zakat should be distributed in the town of the wealth, and if he transfers it to another town while entitled recipients exist, it is forbidden to him. Does this transfer count? Two opinions are held. According to the first, it does not count, for it is an obligatory right of the categories of the town; if he diverts it from them to others, it does not count, like the bequest made to the categories of the town. According to the second, it counts, for the recipients are among the people of the charities and resemble the categories of the town where the zakat is. The sound view among them is that there is no difference between transfer at the qasr distance and at a lesser distance (al-Majmu 6/210-211, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/118, Nihayat al-Muhtaj 6/167).
The Hanbalis, in the doctrine, said: it is not permitted to transfer the zakat to a town at the qasr distance; it is even forbidden, whether to a relative or for a pressing need. In one narration from Ahmad, the transfer is disliked without being forbidden; and in another narration from Ahmad, it is permitted to transfer it to the frontier regions; the qadi explained it by the fact that the frontier fighter's post may be prolonged and he cannot part with it. Al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: according to Ahmad, transferring it to the frontier or elsewhere is permitted in case of preponderant need; in al-Faiq: it is transferred for a weighty interest, such as to a relative or a needy person, and this is the view chosen. Shaykh Taqi al-Din chose it while restricting it to 2 days' journey, and limiting the prohibition of transferring the zakat to the qasr distance has no legal evidence; al-Ajurri chose the permissibility of transferring it to relatives (al-Insaf 3/201). The sound view among them is that transfer to a distance less than the qasr distance is permitted, and such is the doctrine. According to the view that transfer is forbidden, does it count? Two narrations are held: according to the first, it counts, and such is the doctrine, the qadi saying that the apparent meaning of Ahmad's words implies it; according to the second, it does not count, the view chosen by al-Khiraqi, Ibn Hamid and the qadi (al-Insaf 3/200-202, al-Furu 2/425, Kashshaf al-Qina 2/264, al-Mughni al-Muhtaj 2/407, al-Mughni 3/446-448, al-Ifsah 1/370).
Its proponents, the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, grounded their doctrine, the prohibition of transferring the zakat from the country of obligation to another country while its entitled recipients exist in the country of obligation, on the Sunna, the early reports and rational argument. As for the Sunna, the first argument is the hadith of Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both): the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sent Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him) to Yemen and said to him: "Call them to testify 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 5 prayers obligatory upon them every day and night. If they obey you in that, inform them that Allah has made a charity obligatory upon them from their wealth, taken from their rich and rendered to their poor" (authentic hadith, cited earlier). The point of the reasoning is his statement: "taken from their rich and rendered to their poor", that is, the charity is taken from the rich of the people of Yemen and rendered to their poor; the charity of the people of every town is therefore most entitled to its inhabitants, and transferring the charity from one town to another is not permitted; the charity intended is the obligatory charity, which encompasses the zakat of breaking the fast. Imam al-Baghawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: this hadith contains the proof that transferring the charity away from the place of obligation is not permitted while entitled recipients exist there, and that the charity of every region belongs to its entitled recipients (Sharh al-Sunna 5/474). The second argument is the hadith of Awf ibn Abi Juhayfa from his father: "The collector of the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) came to us; he took the charity from our rich and placed it among our poor. I was an orphan boy, and he gave me from this zakat a young she-camel" (weak hadith: al-Tirmidhi 649, Ibn Abi Shayba in al-Musannaf 10644, al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan al-Kubra 12919; the qalusa is a she-camel come to maturity, see al-Nihaya of Ibn al-Athir 4/100). The point of the reasoning is that the charity of the people of every town is assigned to their poor and is not transferred to others, as his statement attests: "he took the charity from our rich and placed it among our poor".
As for the early reports, the first is what Abu Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam reported: Umar ibn al-Khattab criticized Mu'adh when the latter sent him a third of the people's charity from Yemen, and said to him: "I did not send you as a collector nor as a taker of tribute; I sent you so that you take from their rich and render it to their poor." Mu'adh replied: "I have sent you nothing while I find someone to take it from me" (reported by Abu Ubayd in Kitab al-Amwal, no 1912; al-Shaykh al-Albani said in al-Irwa al-Ghalil (3/346): this chain is weak). The second is what Abu Ubayd reported from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib: Umar sent Mu'adh as collector to Banu Kilab or Banu Sa'd ibn Dhubyan, and he distributed everything among them to the point of leaving nothing, down to the camel he had ridden out on; his wife asked: "Where is what you brought, as the collectors bring the gifts of their families?" He said: "A guardian was with me." She said: "You were entrusted by the Messenger of Allah (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and by Abu Bakr; would Umar have sent you a guardian?" She complained of it among the women and complained of Umar, who was informed of it, summoned Mu'adh and said: "Was it I who sent you a guardian?" He replied: "I found nothing else to excuse myself to her." Umar laughed, gave him something and said: "Conciliate her with it" (reported by Abu Ubayd in al-Amwal 1/710, no 1913; a weak chain by discontinuity). The third is what Abu Ubayd reported: Ali ibn Thabit informed us from Sufyan ibn Sa'id: "A zakat was carried from Rayy to Kufa, and Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz sent it back to Rayy" (reported by Abu Ubayd in Kitab al-Amwal 1/708, no 1606). These reports clearly indicate that the zakat of the people of every town is assigned to their poor and is not transferred to the inhabitants of another town. Abu Ubayd (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the scholars of today agree on all these reports: the inhabitants of every town or village have more right to their charity so long as the number of the needy among them is equal; beyond that, even if all their charity is taken, until the collector returns with nothing (al-Amwal 1/709-710).
As for the rational argument, it is that the poor of the town know the wealth of the rich and attach hopes to it, and the transfer estranges them: distribution to them is therefore preferable (Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/118). Shaykh al-Islam for his part issued a fatwa on the permissibility of transferring the zakat and what ranks as such for a legal interest: asked (may Allah have mercy on him) about one who has a zakat to pay and whose relatives, in a town at the qasr distance, are entitled to the charity: may he give it to them or not, he answered: Praise be to Allah: if they are needy, entitled to the zakat, and no one else secures their sufficiency, he gives them from the zakat, even if they are in a distant town, and Allah knows best (Majmu al-Fatawa 25/85). Ibn Zanjawayh (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the Sunna among us is that the imam sends over the charities of every people one who takes from their rich and distributes among their poor; however, the imam has regard for Islam and its people, and the believers are brothers: if he sees fit to divert part of the charity of a people self-sufficient without it to the poor of a people in need of it, he does so with investigation and ijtihad (Kitab al-Amwal of Ibn Zanjawayh 4/493).
From this confrontation the sum of the evidence combines: the evidence of those who forbid bears on the absence of need and interest, and that of those who permit on the presence of need and interest. Among the cases of need for which the transfer of the zakat is permitted:
"The example of the believers in their mutual love, mercy and compassion is that of one body: when one limb complains of it, the whole body keeps vigil with it in sleeplessness and fever."reported by Muslim 2586
It follows from the foregoing that the distribution of the zakat in the land where it was collected remains preferable, and that its transfer to another land remains permitted according to rules:
The scholars differed over the status of transferring zakat al-fitr from the country of obligation to another country while entitled recipients exist in the country of obligation: does this transfer count as payment or not? Two opinions are held.
The first opinion: the transfer of zakat al-fitr from the country of obligation to another country while entitled recipients exist in the country of obligation counts as payment if it is given to those entitled to it; such is the doctrine of the Hanafis, that of the Malikis in the doctrine, one view of the Shafi'is and that of the Hanbalis in the doctrine (al-Mabsut 3/106, Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 2/353, Sharh Fath al-Qadir 2/280, al-Jawhara al-Nira 2/1, Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 1/501, Mawahib al-Jalil 2/359, al-Fawakih al-Dawani 1/346, al-Majmu 6/210, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/118, al-Insaf 3/201, al-Furu 2/425, Kashshaf al-Qina 2/214).
Al-Dasuqi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: his statement "or if it is transferred to someone of lesser need, it does not count" was objected to by al-Mawwaqi: the doctrine is that the zakat counts, as reported by Ibn Rushd and in al-Kafi, and it is the apparent meaning, for it has not left its categories (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 1/501). Ibn Qudama (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if the owner transfers it, 2 narrations are held. According to the first, it does not count, for it is an obligatory right of the categories of the town, and giving it to others than them does not count, like the bequest made to the categories of the town. According to the other, it counts, for the recipients are among the people of the charities (al-Kafi 1/330). Al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if he does so, does the transfer count? Two narrations reported by Abu al-Khattab and those after him, when one says that its transfer is forbidden: according to the first, it counts, and such is the doctrine; the qadi said that the apparent meaning of Ahmad's words implies it, and that he finds no explicit text on it. According to the second, it does not count, the view chosen by al-Khiraqi, Ibn Hamid and the qadi (al-Insaf 3/201-202, see al-Furu 2/425 and al-Kafi of Ibn Qudama 1/330).
The second opinion: the transfer of zakat al-fitr from the country of obligation to another country while entitled recipients exist in the country of obligation does not count as payment, even if it is given to those entitled to it; this is the sound view among the Shafi'is, and a view of the Malikis and of the Hanbalis (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 1/501-502, al-Majmu 6/210, al-Insaf 3/201-202, al-Furu 2/425, al-Kafi 1/330). Imam al-Shirazi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: if he transfers it to the categories of another town, 2 opinions are held. According to the first, the zakat counts, for the recipients are among the people of the charities and resemble the categories of the town where the wealth is. According to the second, it does not count, for it is an obligatory right of the categories of the town; if he diverts it from them to others, it does not count, like the bequest made to the categories of the town. Among our companions, some distinguish 2 views on the permissibility of the transfer, one holding that it is permitted and the other that it is not; but as for its validity when he transfers it, there is a single view: it counts, and the first is the more correct (al-Muhadhdhab 1/173). Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: the summary of the doctrine is that the zakat should be distributed in the town of the wealth; if he transfers it to another town while entitled recipients exist there, al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) has 2 opinions on the question; the companions have 3 paths on it, the most correct among them being that the 2 opinions on its counting reduce to 2: the more correct is that it does not count, and the second is that it counts. There is no disagreement that the transfer is forbidden (al-Majmu 6/210).