Chapter on ṣadaqat al-fiṭr — Tuḥfat al-Mulūk

Ruling434

1 note

It is obligatory on every free Muslim who owns a niṣāb surplus to basic need, even if non-appreciating.

From the editors

Footnotes

It is obligatory but not farḍ in the strict sense, because farḍ refers to commands established by definitive (qatʿī) evidence. In contrast, the obligation of this type of Zakāh (Zakāh al-Fiṭr) rests on non-definitive (ẓannī) evidence, namely the solitary report (khabar al-wāḥid). Ibn ʿUmar narrated, “The Messenger of Allah enjoined (farḍa) Zakāh al-Fiṭr from Ramaḍān on the people: one sāʿ of dates or one sāʿ of barley, upon every free or enslaved, male or female Muslim.” Recorded in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2:677. Here, the word “enjoined” (farḍa) indicates the measure of Zakāh al-Fiṭr, because farḍa in language can mean “to measure.” Allah, the Exalted, says: “Then pay half of what you specified.” 2:237, meaning half of the dowry agreed. Ibn ʿAbbās said, “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) enjoined the charity of Ramaḍān: half a sāʿ of wheat or one sāʿ of barley or one sāʿ of dates upon the enslaved and the free, the male and the female,” as recorded in Musnad Aḥmad 1:351 and Sunan al-Dāraquṭnī 2:152.

It is not obligatory for a kāfir due to their disbelief. As it has the essence of worship, it cannot be fulfilled without intention. The intention of a kāfir is invalid as they lack capacity (ahliyyah) for worship. See: al-Jāmiʿ p. 101.

The niṣāb al-ḥirmān (threshold disqualifying one from receiving Zakāh) is any amount of wealth—whether in currencies, gold/silver, livestock, or trade goods—that meets the niṣāb of Zakāh. It is this niṣāb that obligates the ṣadaqah al-fiṭr, even if a full year has not passed. Similarly, if someone owns other types of property (such as a house not used for residence or trade) and its value reaches the minimum threshold (niṣāb), then Zakāt al-Fiṭr becomes obligatory, even though no Zakāh is due on it. This threshold prevents someone from receiving (ḥirmān) Zakāh, as opposed to the niṣāb that obligates Zakāh, which must have the potential for growth. See: al-Wiqāyah, p. 229, and ʿUmdat al-Riʿāyah 1:302.

Ruling435

1 note

He pays for himself, his small child who owns nothing, and his household slave even if a disbeliever—unlike his adult child and his wife; if he pays on their behalf voluntarily without their knowing, it avails them.

Ruling436

1 note

It is not obligatory for his mukātab—unlike his mudabbar and his child’s mother—nor for a slave or two co-owned slaves.

Ruling437

1 note

It is half a ṣāʿ of wheat by weight, or its flour or its sūq; or a ṣāʿ of dates or barley or their flour or sūq.

Ruling438

1 note

On raisins there are two narrations.

Ruling439

Flour is more virtuous than wheat; dirhams are more virtuous than both; and it is said: wheat is more virtuous than both.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling440

1 note

The ṣāʿ: eight Iraqi pounds (ratl).

Ruling441

1 note

Its time: the dawn of the day of Fiṭr; it is recommended to pay it before leaving for the Eid prayer.

Ruling442

1 note

Advancing it is valid unconditionally, and it does not lapse by delay—unlike the sacrificial animal.

From the editors

Footnotes

A faqīr is someone who possesses only a small amount of wealth. This amount is either below the niṣāb (minimum threshold) or they own the niṣāb but it is used up by their essential needs, such as a home for living, clothing for wear, tools for work, and necessary books for those who require them. See: Radd al-Muḥtār 2:59.

A miskīn is a person who has to ask others for their base sustenance and even for basic covering of their body, making begging permissible for them—unlike the faqīr. See: Fatḥ al-Qadīr 2:202.

Some hold that a person with a minimal amount of wealth is the miskīn, while one who has nothing is the faqīr. Both opinions are attributed to Abū Ḥanīfah. The first view is reported from him by Abū Yūsuf, and the second is narrated by al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād, and it is also the opinion of al-Shāfiʿī. See: al-Minḥah, p. 146.

This refers to someone so indebted that they do not own a niṣāb above what they owe. In other words, their debt outweighs or cancels out any wealth they have, rendering them eligible to receive Zakāh. Even if they possess some money, it does not surpass their debt by more than two hundred dirhams or so, because that amount is earmarked for essential needs, making it effectively non-existent. See: al-Muḥīṭ al-Burhānī, p. 129.

Someone unable to join the Muslim army because they lack provisions, a mount, or similar resources, even if they own wealth at home. This ruling was authenticated (taṣḥīḥ) by al-Isbījābī, the author of Majmaʿ al-Anhur 1:221.

Meaning someone who is disconnected from their wealth while traveling for Ḥajj, according to Muḥammad. This difference of opinion does not change the overall ruling, since all categories of recipients—except the collector (al-ʿāmil)—are eligible on the condition of poverty. Thus, someone cut off from the army also receives support by consensus. The difference primarily affects issues like wills (waṣiyyah) and endowments (waqf) when someone dedicates their wealth “fī sabīlillah” and whether or not it would include the estranged pilgrim. See: al-Durr al-Muntaqā 2:211 and Radd al-Muḥtār 2:61.

An affluent person (ghanī) is one who possesses the niṣāb (minimum threshold) of deprivation (niṣāb al-ḥirmān) from any type of wealth, whether it is currency (nuqūd), livestock (sawāʿim), or trade goods (ʿuruḍ). This means they have wealth exceeding their basic needs, as stated in Majmaʾ al-Anhur 1:223. The niṣāb of deprivation (niṣāb al-ḥirmān) does not require the passing of a full lunar year (ḥawl). Rather, merely owning this niṣāb, makes a person ineligible for zakāh. Abū Hurayrah narrated, “Verily, charity is not lawful for a wealthy person,” found in Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān 848, Musnad Aḥmad 2:377, Musnad Abī Yaʿlā 11:286, and others.

Ibn ʿAbbās narrated that the Messenger said to Muʿādh before sending him to Yemen, “Inform them that Allah has obligated upon them a ṣadaqah to be taken from their wealthy and given to their poor.” Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 4:1580.

Transfer of ownership (tamlīk) is a condition for Zakāh and is not met in these instances. Similarly, Zakāh may not be used for building bridges, aqueducts, road repairs, dredging rivers, funding Ḥajj or jihād, or anything else lacking a transfer of ownership, as noted in Manḥat al-Sulūk (p. 148). A permissible workaround (ḥīlah) is for the owner to give the charity to a poor caretaker, who then spends it on such causes. This arrangement allows numerous avenues of goodness. See: al-Hadiyyah (p. 133).

This refers to the debt of a deceased person, as well as paying off the debt of a living person without their consent. In both cases, there is no transfer of ownership (tamlīk), which is a pillar of Zakāh. Consequently, giving Zakāh to an insane person (majnūn) or a minor who cannot comprehend receiving it, or leaving Zakāh in a poor person’s shop for them to pick up later, does not constitute a valid transfer.However, if one pays off the debt of a living person with their permission, it is valid. In that scenario, the debtor is effectively an agent (wakīl) in receiving the funds. See: Hadiyat al-Ṣaʿalūk, p. 133.

Freeing a slave is the removal of ownership, not a transfer of ownership (tamlīk), so Zakāh is not performed through this. See: Sharḥ ibn Malak.

They are the family of ʿAlī, the family of al-ʿAbbās, Jaʿfar, ʿAqīl, al-Ḥārith ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, and their mawālī, meaning slaved they freed. The benefit of specifying these is that it is permissible to give to those other than them from Banī Hāshim, like the descendants of Abū Lahab, because they did not support the Prophet ﷺ.

This means that if someone pays Zakāh to a recipient without investigating (taḥarrī) whether the individual is truly eligible, the obligation is not considered fulfilled — unless it later becomes certain or highly likely that they indeed deserved it. Similarly, if, after conducting due diligence, it appears the recipient is ineligible, but the Zakāh is still given, it does not suffice unless it is definitively established or strongly indicated that the recipient was, in fact, entitled.

It is disliked (makrūh) to send Zakāh to a different country from where the wealth is located, because it deprives the local poor of their rights. This ruling applies if the distance is that of a legitimate journey (masāfat qaṣr al-ṣalāh). It was narrated from Muʿādh that the Prophet (ﷺ) said to him, “Inform them that Allah, the Exalted, has obligated charity (ṣadaqah) in their wealth, taken from their wealthy and given to their poor,” recorded in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (2:505) and other sources.

It is not disliked to send Zakāh to a relative, as this strengthens family ties, or to someone in greater need than those in one’s own country, because it more effective in relieving hardship. This is mentioned in al-Wiqāyah, p. 228 and Fatḥ Bāb al-Ināyah, p. 543. Tāwūs narrated that Muʿādh said in Yemen, “Bring me garments from you instead of corn or barley; it is easier for you and better for the migrants in Madinah.” This is recorded in Sunan al-Dāraquṭnī 2:100.

It is obligatory but not farḍ in the strict sense, because farḍ refers to commands established by definitive (qatʿī) evidence. In contrast, the obligation of this type of Zakāh (Zakāh al-Fiṭr) rests on non-definitive (ẓannī) evidence, namely the solitary report (khabar al-wāḥid).Ibn ʿUmar narrated, “The Messenger of Allah enjoined (farḍa) Zakāh al-Fiṭr from Ramaḍān on the people: one sāʿ of dates or one sāʿ of barley, upon every free or enslaved, male or female Muslim.” Recorded in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2:677. Here, the word “enjoined” (farḍa) indicates the measure of Zakāh al-Fiṭr, because farḍa in language can mean “to measure.” Allah, the Exalted, says: “Then pay half of what you specified.” 2:237, meaning half of the dowry agreed. Ibn ʿAbbās said, “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) enjoined the charity of Ramaḍān: half a sāʿ of wheat or one sāʿ of barley or one sāʿ of dates upon the enslaved and the free, the male and the female,” as recorded in Musnad Aḥmad 1:351 and Sunan al-Dāraquṭnī 2:152.

It is not obligatory for a kāfir due to their disbelief. As it has the essence of worship, it cannot be fulfilled without intention. The intention of a kāfir is invalid as they lack capacity (ahliyyah) for worship. See: al-Jāmiʿ p. 101.

The niṣāb al-ḥirmān (threshold disqualifying one from receiving Zakāh) is any amount of wealth—whether in currencies, gold/silver, livestock, or trade goods—that meets the niṣāb of Zakāh. It is this nisāb that obligates the ṣadaqah al-fiṭr, even if a full year has not passed. Similarly, if someone owns other types of property (such as a house not used for residence or trade) and its value reaches the minimum threshold (niṣāb), then Zakāt al-Fiṭr becomes obligatory, even though no Zakāh is due on it. This threshold prevents someone from receiving (ḥirmān) Zakāh, as opposed to the niṣāb that obligates Zakāh, which must have the potential for growth. See: al-Wiqāyah, p. 229, and ʿUmdat al-Riʿāyah 1:302.

The obligation arises from having a dependent under one’s complete responsibility and legal authority (wilāyah). These dependents are considered an extension of oneself in terms of support and care. Just as one must pay on their own behalf, they must also pay on behalf of their dependents.

This means that if a father pays on behalf of his adult child, or a husband pays on behalf of his wife voluntarily and without their knowledge, it is considered valid as an exception (istiḥsān), because it is customarily permitted. See: Minḥat al-Sulūk 2:153 and Sharḥ ibn Malak.

This is because he is not obligated to provide for them as his authority over them is limited. See: al-Jāmiʿ p. 103.

The well-known narration (riwāyah mashhūrah) from the Imām is that half a ṣāʿ is obligatory. This is because raisins typically hold a higher market value than wheat, and if half a ṣāʿ of wheat suffices, it is even more suitable for raisins. See: al-Jāmiʿ, p. 104, and al-Minhāj 2:155.A second narration states that a full ṣāʿ is obligatory, aligning with the view of the Ṣāḥibayn. This opinion is attributed to Ḥasan’s narration from Abū Ḥanīfah, and it was authenticated by al-Bahnasāwī and others.

This is the choice of the jurist Abu Jaʿfar. See: al-Minḥah 2:155.

It is half a ṣāʿ of flour or wheat, which is a narration from Abū Yūsuf as noted in al-Minḥah 2:155. The difference in preference arose when bartering was common. There is agreement that all are valid. Today, with the widespread use of currency and trade dependent on it, giving money is undoubtedly preferable, since the core obligation is to enrich the poor.

The ṣāʾ is equal to 3.64 kilograms, as established by Sheikh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ʿUyun As-Ṣūd, as in the margin of al-Lubāb 2: 369.

The Iraqi pound equals 406.25 grams. See: Muqaddimah al-Majmaʿ p. 46.

This means that the time Ṣadaqah al-Fiṭr becomes obligatory (wājib) is the onset of the true Fajr (dawn) on the day of Eid al-Fiṭr. Therefore, if someone’s child is born, or a disbeliever (kāfir) accepts Islam, or a poor person becomes wealthy before dawn, Ṣadaqah al-Fiṭr becomes obligatory upon them. However, if these events occur after dawn, the obligation does not apply. Similarly, if someone dies before dawn, Ṣadaqah al-Fiṭr is not due for them; but if they die after dawn, it is considered obligatory.

It can be paid in advance because the obligation is established by its legal cause (sabab): dependents under his care, over whom he has full authority (wilāyah). Once the cause of obligation is in effect, fulfilling the duty early is valid.

It is valid to give it after Eid al-Fiṭr because its obligation is not tied to a fixed deadline. Therefore, it is due at any point without a set end time. Consequently, its timing only becomes determined upon actual payment or at the end of one’s life, similar to how Zakāh is treated. Whether paid early or later, it is counted as a valid performance (adāʾ), not a makeup (qaḍāʾ).

If uḍḥiyyah is missed beyond its allotted time, it cannot be made up because no alternative act has been legislated on other days. It cannot be made up by sacrificing another animal (irāqat al-dam), as such an action is not considered an act of worship outside of ʿEid al-Aḍḥā. The Sharīʿah has designated sacrificing animals as an act of worship confined to a specific time period, so its status as worship is limited to that timeframe. Consequently, it is not subject to reparation after the period has passed. The only available remedy is providing a live sheep or its equivalent in charity. For the detailed discussion, see al-Jāmiʿ, p. 281.

فصل في صدقة الفطر