|
|
|
Problem # 15 If a person pays Zakat to another to spend it on the poor, or his Khums to be spend on Sädãt, but does not specify any particular person, and the person to whom it has been delivered is himself entitled to receive it, while wordings do not indicate any intention otherwise, it would be permissible for him to have a share equal to one of those entitled to receive it, but not more. The same rule shall apply if the person to whom the Zakát has been delivered spends it on his family, particularly when the owner says “ This (Zakat) is for the poor and (this Khums) is for the Sadat or This {Zakãt) is to be spent on the poor and (this Khums) on the Sãdãt, though it would be more cautious not to receive it, except with the clear permission of its owner. The same rule shall apply if a person gives another a property belonging to a third person to spend it on a (particular) group of persons and the person to whom the property has been delivered happens to possess the qualifications of the said group.
Zakãt al-Abdan (or Zakãt of Bodies) is also called Fitrah . There are several traditions that have come down on this subject. Here are a few of them.
1. ‘Who so ever fails to pay Zakãt-i Fitrah runs the risk of meeting (an early) death.”
2. Verily, Zakãt-i Fitrah complements Fasting in the same way as the Salavat on the Prophet (May Allah send Blessings on him and his Progeny) complements Prayers.
Now, we shall discuss about those on whom its payment is obligatory, its commodity, its quantity, its time and its uses.
Problem # 1The payment of Zakãt-i Fitrah is obligatory on a person who is Mukallaf, free and rich, in deed or virtually. So it is obligatory neither on a minor, nor on a lunatic, even if he has fits of lunacy periodically, in case he has had a fit of lunacy on the beginning of the night of Eid (al-Fitr). It is also not obligatory on their guardian (or Wali) to pay the Fitrah on their behalf out of their property. Rather, according to the stronger opinion, there is exemption from its payment as regards its payment for a minor or a lunatic even by the person who maintains a minor or a lunatic. Nor is its payment obligatory on one who has been unconscious on the beginning of the night of Eid (al-Fitr). Nor is it obligatory on a slave. Nor is it obligatory on a poor person who has no expenses for himself and his family sufficient for the whole year, indeed and virtually, as a surplus after deducting the debts and other exemptions. It is more cautious to take into consideration the debts the person has to pay during the current year and others. Of course, according to the more cautious opinion, if a person has something surplus from the expenses of a day and night even to the extent of a Sã (a cubic measure of varying magnitude = about 3 kilos), it would be better for him to pay the Fitrah. Rather it is approved even for a poor person to pay the Fitrah in all circumstances even if he revolves a single Sa’ throughout the members of his family until it comes back to himself, and then he should pay it to a stranger (poor person). This is the rule when there is no non-Mukallaf person among the members of his family, otherwise, he should confine the revolving process of the Sä among the Mukallaf members of his family only. If a Wali (or guardian) receives Fitrah from a non-Mukallaf, he should spend it on him alone and none else, and it is not to be paid to any one else.
Problem # 2 It is a condition that the above conditions should be there at the beginning of the night of Eid (al-Fitr) i.e., before the beginning of the night even if for a moment, in a way that the person should fulfill all the conditions when the night falls, so that it is not sufficient to possess these qualifications earlier but losing it as the night falls. Likewise, it is not sufficient if a person did not fulfill these conditions earlier, but happens to fulfill them afterwards. So the payment of Fitrah shall be obligatory on a person, for example, who attains the legal maturity (or Bulugh) at the time of the nightfall or he recovers of his lunacy. But it would not be obligatory on a person who attains legal maturity after the fall of night, or one who recovers of his lunacy. Of course, it would be approved to pay the Fit rah if a person attains legal maturity or recovers of his lunacy before noon on the day of (Eid al-Fitr).
Problem # 3 Payment of Fitrah for himself and for those who are maintained by him is obligatory on person who fulfils all the conditions mentioned above, regardless whether the person maintained is a Muslim or an infidel, free or slave, minor or adult, including even a child born before the sight of the moon for the month of Shawwâl even for a moment. Similarly, everyone who enters the list of persons maintained by him before the sight of the moon for the month of Shawwŕl including even a guest, although he may have not eaten anything (in his house), provided he falls under the persons maintained by him, although he may not be treated as a member of his family, contrary to a child born after the sunset. The same rule shall apply to a person who is included among the persons maintained by him after the sunset, so that he shall not be bound to pay their Fitrah. Of course, payment of Fitrah by him for them shall be approved if what is mentioned above takes place before noon on the day of Eid (al-Fitr)
Problem # 4 A person the payment of whose Fitrah has become obligatory on another person due to his becoming the latter’s guest or being included among those maintained by him shall himself be exempted from its payment, even if he happens to be a rich person and would have fulfilled all the conditions required for the payment of Fitrah had he not been included among those maintained by the other person. Rather, according to the stronger opinion, payment of Fitrah shall be exempted if the host or one having the liability of maintenance happens to be poor while the guests were rich. According to the stronger opinion, the guest should himself pay the Fitrah if he comes to know that the host has not paid it due to forgetfulness or deliberate violation (of the relevant rule), though, according to the stronger opinion, it shall not be obligatory on him to pay his own Fitrah. According to the stronger opinion, payment of Fitrah is obligatory on the guest if he does not fall under the category of those maintained by the host, but the host should not give up caution by also paying the Fitrah for such guest in addition to the one paid by the guest.
Problem # 5 If a person is away from his family, it shall be obligatory on him to make the payment of the Fitrah for the members of his family, except when he has authorized them to pay it from his own property and they can be relied upon in the matter of payment (of the Fitrah).
Problem # 6 Apparently the criterion for being a member of one’s family is being included among those maintained by that person and not among those whom he is liable to maintain, though it is to be more cautious to take into consideration either of the two aspects. If the permanent wife of a person is included among those maintained by another, payment of the Fitrah shall be obligatory on that person, and not on her. If the wife does not fall under those who are to be maintained by any one else, payment shall be obligatory on herself provided that she fulfills all the relevant conditions. In case she does not fulfill the relevant conditions, payment of her Fitrah shall not be obligatory on any person. The same rule shall apply to the case of a slave.
Problem # 7 If a person is to be maintained by two persons, payment of his Fitrah shall be the liability of both, provided that they are capable to do so. In case only one of them is able to maintain the person, it shall be obligatory to pay the Fitrah of his share to the exclusion of that of the other. Caution must not be given up in both the cases.
Problem # 8The receipt of Fitrah of a non-Hãshemite by a Hŕshemite is forbidden, the criterion in this case being the maintainer and not the person maintained. It is more cautious to observe caution in both the cases.
Problem # 9 Like all the other cases of Ibädät, in Fitrah too, Niyyat is essential. It is permissible for a person on whom payment of Fitrah is obligatory to pay the Fitrah personally or authorize another to make its payment on his behalf. In such case, it is indispensable for the agent to make the Niyyat of closeness (to Allah). If the principal authorizes another merely to take the Fitrah to the poor, the former shall be bound to have the Niyyat that what his agent is taking to the poor is the Zakãt (of Fitrah). It is sufficient to have such Niyyat in his heart, and it is not obligatory to bring it to his memory in detail. It is also permissible for a person to authorize another to make the payment of the Fitrah from his own property, and get its payment from him, so that the latter becomes an agent in payment of something from the property of his client. It is also permissible to authorize another to make payment of his Fitrah from his own property voluntarily without demanding its payment from him. Of course, there is difficulty in the permissibility of payment of Fitrah for another voluntarily without being authorized by that person to do so as his agent.
Problem # 1 The general rule for the commodity of the Zakãt of Fitrah is what is usually used for food in each community or area, though they may not suffice with it, as wheat, barley and rice used in most of the parts of Iran and Iraq, rice most of the areas of Gilan and its suburbs, dates, cheese and yoghurt are used in Nejd and the plains of Hijãz, though, according to the stronger opinion, it is permissible to pay the Fitrah in the form of (any of) the four grains in all circumstances. If in an area the staple food is maize or the like, it is permissible to pay the Fitrah in the form of maize, as also it is permissible to pay it in the form of (any of) the four grains. In case a particular grain is not the staple food of an area, it is more cautious to pay Fitrah in the form of the four grains. It is also permissible to pay Fitrah in value of the commodity. There is, however, difficulty in the permissibility of the payment of Fitrah in the form of anything else that is not of the same commodity in value; rather, it is not far from being insufficient. It is also a condition to take into consideration the time of payment and the place at the time of paying the value of the commodity of Fitrah
Problem # 2 It is also a condition in whatever is paid as Fitrah that it must be sound and without any defect, so that it is not permissible to pay it in the form of anything defective, as also it is not permissible to pay it in the form of a commodity mixed with something pardonable. Rather there is difficulty in the permissibility of paying something defective and mixed in value for something sound without defect and unmixed.
Problem # 3 It is preferable to pay the Fitrah in the form of dates and then in the form of raisins (or currants). Preference is given to the more useful in consideration of the external preferences, as, in case the staple food of a person is wheat of superior quality, it is preferable for him to pay Fitrah also in the form of wheat of a superior quality and not of a lower quality, or in the form of barley.
Chapter Three — The Quantity of Zakât of Fitrah
The quantity of Zakŕt of Fitrah is a Sã in case of each foodstuff, including even yoghurt. A Sa = 4 Mudds, which are equal to 9 Iraqi Ratls and 6 Medenese Ratis These 4 Mudds are equal to 614 1/4 Sayrafi Mithqäls. According to the Hiqqah of Najaf, which is equal to 933 1/3 Mithqals, it amounts to 1/2 Hiqqah, 1/2 Waqiyyah (a Waqiyyah being equal to 1/2 Ratl) and 31 Mithqäls minus two grams; while according to the Hiqqah of Istanbul, which is equal to 280 Mithqŕls, it amounts to 2 Hiqqahs, 3/4 Waqiyyah and I 3/4 Mithqŕls. According to the Shŕhi Maund, which is equal to 1280 Mithqals, it amounts to 1/2 Maund minus 25 3/4 Mithqãls. According to the current measure in Kilograms, a Sa = about 3 Kilograms.
Chapter Four - The Time When Zakãt of Fitrah Becomes Obligatory
The time when payment of Fitrah becomes obligatory is the beginning of the night of Eid (al-Fitr) and continues till the noon (of Eid al-Fitr). It is preferable, rather more cautious, to delay the payment of Fitrah upto the day of Eid (al-Fitr). If a person offers the prayers of Eid (al-Fitr) he must not give up the caution by taking out the Zakãt of Fitrah before (offering) his prayers. If the time of payment of the Fitrah has already and he has set aside Fitrah, he must pay it to the person entitled to receive it. In case a person has not already set aside the Fitrah, then, according to the more cautious opinion, its payment shall not drop, and he should make its payment with the intention of seeking closeness (to Allah) without intending the payment being made on its due time or compensatory after the lapse of the due time.
Problem # 1 It is not permissible to tender the Fitrah before the month of Ramadan, rather, according to the more cautious opinion, in all circumstances. Of course, there is no objection in its payment to a poor person and then accounting it for as Fitrah on the arrival of its time.
Problem # 2 It is permissible to set aside Fitrah and specify it in the property of special commodities or set aside its value in cash. It is more cautious, rather more according to the guiding principles to confine to cash while setting aside the value of the commodity. If a person sets aside less than what is required, the rule shall be exclusively meant for that part, and the rest, shall remain unseparated. If a person sets aside more than required, then in setting it aside until the separated part is mixed with that belonging to Zakãt of Fitrah, there is difficulty. If, however, a person specifies the Zakãt of Fitrah in a property that is jointly owned by the master and another person, and his portion in it is equal to or less than Zakat, then apparently Zakât may be set aside in this way. If the time for the payment of Zakät of Fitrah has lapsed, but the person has set aside the Zakãt on its due time, it would be permissible for him to delay its payment to the person entitled to receive it, particularly in consideration of some preferences, though he shall be liable in case it is destroyed despite his capacity to pay it and the availability of the person entitled to receive it. On the contrary, if he were not capable, he shall not be held liable except in case of transgression of the rules or omission in the safeguard of the commodity like all other things deposited in trust.
Problem # 3.lt is more cautious not to shift the commodity specified as Zakãt of Fitrah from one place to another when the person entitled to receive it is also there.
Chapter Five — The Uses of Zakãt of Fitrah
According to the stronger opinion, the uses of Zakãt of Fitrah are identical with those of the Zakat for property, though according to the more cautious opinion, it should be confined to payment to poor Mu’mins (i.e. Shi’ahs) and their children, rather the indigent among them, even if they are not morally sound. It is also permissible to pay the Fitrah to the Mustad’afs (i.e. those who have been rendered weak or poor) from among the opponents (i.e. the Sunnis) in case of unavailability of the Mu’mins (i.e. the Shi’ahs).
It is more cautious not pay to the poor less than a Sa (which is equal to about 3 Kilograms) or its value, even if the number of the poor is such that distributing the Fitrah to all of them in that way is not possible.
It is also permissible to pay several Sa’s (of Fitrah) to a single poor person, father even upto the extent of his yearly expenses.
According to the more cautious opinion Fitrah should not be paid or received more than required for the yearly expenses (of a poor person).
It is approved to pay Fitrah exclusively to the Dhawi al-Arham (relatives on the maternal side), neighbors, those who have migrated from their native places for the sake of (Islamic) faith, jurists, intellectuals, etc. who possess some preferences, and caution must not be given up by not paying Fitrah to one who drinks wine or commits such major sins in public.
It is not permissible to pay Fitrah to a person who spends it in the commission of a sin.
Khums (or one-fifth of one’s income) is what has been ordained by Allah, the Exalted for Prophet Muhammad, May Allah send Blessings on him and his Progeny, and Prophet’s Dhurriyyat (or Descendants), May Allah increase their blessed number, in place of Zakãt which is considered to be the filth of the people’s hands, (i.e. the dirt of a person’s earnings or belongings), in view of the veneration in which they are held. One who denies its payment, although a Dirham, shall be considered among the perpetrators of oppression on them and usurpers of their rights.
A Tradition has come down from Imam (Jafar) al-Sadiq, our Master, Peace be upon him, which says: “Verily Allah, (and) there is no god but He, when prohibited Sadaqah for us, sent down Khums for us. So Sadaqah is prohibited for us, and Khums which is obligatory and an honour for us is lawful for us.” Similarly, there is another tradition that has come down from the same Imam, Peace be upon, which says: “No human being (lit “slave’ of Allãh) who buys something with (the commodity of) Khums has the right to say ‘O Lord, I have bought it with my own property, unless he is permitted to do so by those entitled to receive Khums.” Likewise, there is a Tradition that has come from Imam Abu Ja’far (i.e. Imam Baqir), saying: “It is not lawful for anyone to buy anything with (the commodity of) Khums , unless our right has reached us”
Now here is a discussion about the things on which payment of Khums is obligatory, those who are entitled to receive it, and the procedure of its distribution among them, and Anfal (spoils of War).
Payment of Khums is obligatory on seven things:
First Whatever is taken by force, or even by way of stealing and deceit, when they have been during the war, and are included in the affairs of war, or from those who have waged war (against Muslims) and it is lawful to shed their blood or loot their property, make their women and children captives, when the war with them has been waged with the permission of the Imam, regardless of what has been gathered by the army or what has not been occupied by it as the land or the like, according to the more sound opinion. As regards the spoils of war which has been waged without the Imams permission, if it were done in the presence of the Imam and the possibility of obtaining the Imam’s permission, it shall be treated as part of Anfãl (spoils of war). As regards the spoils during the war during the (Twelfth) Imam’s Occultation and without the possibility of obtaining his permission, according to the stronger opinion, payment of Khums shall be obligatory on it, particularly when the war has been waged for invitation to Islam. The same rule shall apply in case of the booty that has been collected from the enemies during defence when they have invaded the areas inhabited by the Muslims, even during the Imãm’s Occultation. The same rule shall apply to what has been collected from the enemies by theft or deceit other than what has already been mentioned.
Similarly, in case of Riba’ and false claim or the like, the same rule shall apply. According to more cautious opinion, Khums shall be charged on them in view of their being booty and not profit. So there is no need of taking into consideration the yearly expenses in their case, though, the stronger opinion is in favour of the contrary. According to the more sound opinion, it is not a condition in case of Khums on booty that it should amount to twenty Dinars. Of course, it is a condition that it should not be usurped from a Muslim, Dhimmi (or a non-Muslim subject of a Muslim state) or one with whom the Muslims have a treaty, or the like, whose property has to be honoured, contrary to what they have got from the enemies at war, even if there has been no battle with them in that war. According to the stronger opinion, a Nasib is to be treated at part with the enemy at war in the lawfulness of whatever booty is seized from them and the application of Khums to that booty. Rather, apparently it is permissible to seize his property wherever and in whatever condition it is found and to charge Khums on it.
Second - the Minerals The criterion in their case is the prevalent custom. They include the gold, silver, lead, iron, copper, mercury, all kinds of precious stones, coaltar, petroleum, sulphur, brass, antimony, arsenic, salt, bituminous coal, rather, according to the more cautious opinion, including lime (-stone) red stone, clay for washing (head) and the Armenian clay. In case there is doubt as to its being a mineral, there shall be no Khums on it from this consideration. It is a condition in a mineral that, according to the more cautious opinion, after deducting all the relevant expenses on its mining and refining it should amount to twenty Dinars or two hundred Dirhams itself or in value. If there is difference in twenty Dinars and two hundred Dirhams in value, according to the more cautious opinion, the one having lesser value shall be taken into consideration. The value shall be taken into consideration at the time of taking it out. According to the more cautious opinion, it is better to charge the Khums on it when it amounts to one Dinar (in value), rather in all circumstances, and this caution is not to be given up. According to the stronger opinion, it is not a condition that the mining of the mineral should take place at a time. If a mineral is mined many times in parts and reaches the Nisäb, it shall be obligatory to pay Khums on the whole. In case it is mined in a lesser quantity (than the Nisab), and then it is left, and again it is mined and completes the Nisab even then, according to the more cautious, though not according to the stronger opinion, (Khums shall be charged on it). If a group of persons is engaged in mining, then, according to the stronger opinion, it is a condition that the share of each of them should reach the Nisab (of Khums), though it is more cautious to charge the Khums when the total amount has reached the Nisab. If a single mine consists of two or more varieties, according to the stronger opinion, it is sufficient for them to reach the Nisäb collectively. If there are several mines, according to the stronger opinion, they shall not be merged with one another, even if they belong to the same variety, Of course, if they are counted as a single mine, though they are separated by some pieces of land, they shall be merged with one another.
Problem # 1 There is no difference in the obligation of Khums on the mineral whether it lies in an ownerless land or in a land belonging to some one, though in case the mine lies in an ownerless land, its mineral shall belong to the one who has explored it, while in the latter case (when the mine lies in a land belonging to some one), the mineral contained in it shall belong to the owner of the land, even if the mineral has been mined by a person other than the owner of the land. In the above case, if the mineral has been mined by the order of the owner, the Khums shall be charged after deducting the expenses on it, which will include the wages of the miner if he has not done it voluntarily, If the mineral has not been mined by the order of the owner of the land, the mineral mined shall belong to the owner, and he shall pay the Khums without deducting the relevant expenses on mining, as he has not borne the expenses, and he shall not be bound to pay what the miner has spent on mining the mineral. If the mine lies in a land occupied by force (i.e. as a result of war), then if the land lies in an area which was developed at the time of its conquest and so belonging to the Muslims, and a person from among the Muslims happens to mine it, it shall belong to him, and he shall be bound to pay the Khums if it were mined with the permission of the ruler of the Muslims; otherwise, there shall be difficulty in declaring it as belonging to him, in the same way as when it is mined by a non-Muslim, and so there is difficulty in declaring as to whom it shall belong. If the mine lies in a land which was undeveloped at the time of its conquest by the Muslims, then it shall belong to its miner, and he shall be bound to pay Khums, even if he happens to be a non-Muslim, as is the case with all other ownerless lands. If a mineral is mined by a minor or a lunatic, according to the stronger opinion, he shall be bound to pay the Khums on it, and his guardian shall pay it.
Problem # 2 It has already been mentioned that there is no difference in the application of Khums on what is taken out of a mine, whether the miner is a Muslim or an infidel, according to the details already given above. So the mineral mined by infidels including those of gold, silver, iron, petroleum, bituminous coal, etc. shall be charged Khums, and it shall be collected by the ruler of the Muslims if it happens to be under his control. If the mine is transferred to the rightful group (i.e. the Shiahs), they shall not be bound to pay its Khums, even if they know that Khums has not been paid on it. It is because the Imams, Peace be upon them, have legalized for their followers (i.e. the Shiahs) the Khums of the property on which Khums has not been paid, when it is transferred to them from who does not believe in the payment of Khums, whether he is an infidel or an opponent (i.e. a Sunni), whether the object on which payment of Khums is obligatory is a mineral or something other than it as the profit on trade, or the like.
Of course, if something on which payment of Khums is obligatory has been delivered to the groups of Shiahs from a person who does not believe by way of Ijtihäd or Taqlid that payment of Khums is obligatory on some of the commodities which are believed by the Imämiyyah Shiahs to be liable to Khums, or he believes that Khums is not obligatory in all circumstances under the impression that the Imams, Peace be upon them, have exempted their followers from its payment, payment of Khums shall be obligatory on them in case it has not already been paid.
Of course, in case of doubt about his belief, it is not obligatory on the person receiving something from him to make an inquiry about it, nor is he bound to pay Khums where it is likely to have already been paid. In case, however, there is knowledge about their holding an opposite belief, it is more cautious, rather according to the stronger opinion; he should abstain from making an inquiry, and should even pay Khums.
Third - A Hidden Treasure The criterion for deciding about it is the prevalent custom. When its owner is not known, regardless whether it lies in an area of the infidels, or in an undeveloped land or a wasteland in a Muslim territory, and irrespective of the fact whether it has some vestiges of Islam or not, in all these cases it shall belong to the person who explores it, and he shall be bound to pay Khums on it. Of course, if a person finds a hidden treasure in land belonging to himself after it has been purchased by him or any other way, he should inform about it to the previous owner in case it is likely to belong to him. In case the previous owner has also no knowledge about it, he should inform the owner to whom the land belonged before the previous owner till it reaches a person who is also ignorant of it or who is not likely to own it, then the treasure shall belong to the person who has explored it, and he shall be bound to pay Khums on it, if its value has reached twenty Dinars when it contains gold or two hundred Dirhams when it contains silver, or either of them when it contains something else. If a person buys, for example, a cattle and it has something in its stomach, according to the more cautious opinion, it shall also be treated at par with a hidden treasure, and payment of Khums shall be obligatory on it in case its seller is ignorant of it, and in its case it is not a condition of reaching the limit of Nisab. In case something is found in the stomach of a fish, then according to the more cautious opinion, it shall also be treated at par with a hidden treasure. Rather, except in rare cases, there shall be no need to inform the seller about it. Rather, besides a fish or cattle, even if something is found in the stomach of any other animal, it shall also be treated at par with a hidden treasure.
Fourth - Anything found by diving. Everything which is taken by diving like pearls, corals etc which is known to be obtained by diving shall be liable to payment of Khums when its value reaches a Dinar or above, regardless of whether they belong to the same category or not and whether they have been taken out in one attempt or many attempts, so that they shall be merged with one another, and once their total value amounts to one Dinar, payment of Khums shall be obligatory on them.
In case the things are found by a collective effort of several persons, it shall be treated at par with the identical case of minerals.
Problem # 3 If the jewels are taken out of the sea with the help of some tools or machinery and not by diving, according to the more cautious opinion, they shall be treated at par with those taken out by diving. Of course, if they have come out themselves on the sea-coast or on the surface of the water, and a person obtains them without diving, they shall be treated like profits on trades and not the jewels taken out by diving, provided that it is his profession.. In such case, it is a condition to deduct his yearly expenses from its value. There is no condition of its value reaching the limit of Nisab. In case a person finds them by chance, they shall be treated generally as profits, and shall be governed by their relevant rules.
|
|
|