Confusion Regarding Zakat

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Bismillah,

 

Salam aleikum.

 

I've got some confusion regarding zakat and how its supposed to be dealt.

 

Basically from my understanding, you are supposed to pay 2,5% of your free capital i.e. savings each year as zakat al-mal and then a certain amount as zakat al-fitr which is around 9-10 euro per person this year if i am not mistaken.

 

However it seems that you in shia islam specifically pay 20% of your income each year as zakat or khoms, whats the difference by the way?

 

And if i understood this correctly you are supposed to pay it to your marja, what if you have not decided on a marja yet? Can you give the zakat to people in need or organizations that give it to people in need?

 

In some islamic countries the state takes the zakat as part of the tax and then distribute it for that purpose.

 

How is it when you live in a non islamic country and from the amount of tax you pay there is already a big part going to charity and social support? Is that counted as zakat then or are you supposed to pay zakat on taxed income were the taxed money has already had some amount gone to charity?

 

Hmm, this is very confusing to be honest but I want to do right.

 

InshaAllah there is someone who can spread some light on this?

 

[mostafaa]

Salam Alaykum

It is obligatory to pay Zakat if a person possess one of the following items (and other conditions are available): 1.Wheat, 2.Barley, 3.Dates, 4.Raisins, 5.Gold, 6.Silver, 7. Camel, 8.Cow, 9.Sheep (including goat), 

These things are accepted and approved by all scholars.

Just to give a little explanation about Gold and Silver; only if they are in coin and are in currency for transaction (That is to say if those coined gold and silver are used in daily business) and reach the taxable, prescribed in Islamic law, the owner must pay 1/40th of it to and must be spend in prescribed disposals(no need to give it to a marja') 

[Shabbar-E-Shabbir]

A humble question, those commodities would have been common amongst the people of their time. Nowadays, not many people own these things other than farmers perhaps. Is there almost a 'translation' of those items to today's items?

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Hmm, I do not have any gold or silver coin that I do transactions with or otherwise.

 

I think I am more confused now, I had not heard about this before.

[mostafaa]

I think I am more confused now, I had not heard about this before.

 

That is what is known as Zakaat in law books, 

Share what you have heard so it can be verified.

 

 

A humble question, those commodities would have been common amongst the people of their time. Nowadays, not many people own these things other than farmers perhaps. Is there almost a 'translation' of those items to today's items?

 

Salam Alaykum

some scholars like Ayatollah Zanjani has gone beyond that and imposed Zakaat on today's usual currency (His view is to expand the number of things known as Gold or Silver and not other commodities.) ( for your info: as an obligatory precaution he imposed Zakaat on today's usual currency) 

[Soldiers and Saffron]

What I have heard is that you pay 2.5% of your unbound capital as zakat each year and by unbound capital i mean the money you have in your bank.

 

But If it is like you say, then I do not need to pay zakat since i do not possess any of those items?

 

Do you know the difference between khoms and zakat by the way?

[mostafaa]

I just mentioned verdicts of well-known scholars (only Ayatollah Zanjani issued a fatwa to impose Zakaat on ,as you said, unbound capital); so first you have to specify who (what marja') you are following and then ask about his fatwa.

 

The difference between these two is that in Zakaat, having gained the prescribed amount a person has to pay Zakaat. it can be spent for the following eight ways: 

1. poor people (there is a definition for poverty in Islamic law books which has to be followed.)

2. To destitute people who are poorer than the first group (there is also a given definition for this group)

3. To vakil of Imam or his representative (and the present time to a Mujtahid) who is in charge of collecting Zakaat.

4. To non Muslims whom you hope , as a result, to be inclined in Islam or assist Muslims in a fighting or other justified purposes.

5. To buy slaves and set them free.

6. To an indebted person who will not be able to repay the money he owes.

7. it can by spent in the way of Allah which has common benefit for Muslims for example to built a mosque.

8. To a stranded traveler. for example; the one who is on the journey and whose money is lost or stolen or even finished.

 

These are eight purposes to which Zakaat can be spent. Therefore it is not necessary to pay Zakaat to Mujtahids.

There are some other conditions for Zakaat's disposal.

 

But Khums is to be divided into two parts. (Each portion has a different way through which the money should be spent.) one of which is the portion dedicated to Sadaat (descendants of the prophet.) which means it is to be paid to the orphans or the poor or the stranded Sadaat and the second one is to be given to the Imam (and ,at the present time in which Imam is in occultation, to a Mujtahid).

 

These are the ruling concerning Zakaat and Khums, and the reasons and principles behind them are mentioned in Quran and Ahadith.

Edited July 6, 2015 by mostafaa

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Thank you brother mostafaa for your answers and time.

 

I have not decided on a marja yet, that is the problem. But from my understanding it is Seyed Khomeini and Seyed Sistani that are biggest ones that most muslims follow, I would consider both of their fatwas and then chose the one which speak more to my logical sense.

 

You say that in the case of zakat, a person has to reach a prescribed amount before having to spend it, we are still talking about gold coins and animals, etc, i presume.

 

If I understood everything correctly then it is only khums that is applicable to me.

Is the khums amount 20% of all your saving or 20% of a years income, since it is paid every year?

What time of the year do you pay khums?

[mostafaa]

 

 

I have not decided on a marja yet, that is the problem. But from my understanding it is Seyed Khomeini and Seyed Sistani that are biggest ones that most muslims follow, I would consider both of their fatwas and then chose the one which speak more to my logical sense.

A marja' must be alive by the time you first follow his verdict based on both Imam Khomeini's and Ayt. Sistani's; or else he's not qualified to be followed.

 

You say that in the case of zakat, a person has to reach a prescribed amount before having to spend it, we are still talking about gold coins and animals, etc, i presume.

 

Yeah; sure. The commodities are to reach a prescribed amount; then a person has to pay Zakaat. 

 

Is the khums amount 20% of all your saving or 20% of a years income, since it is paid every year?

What time of the year do you pay khums?

 

The money remained from the current year's income is the subject for Khums. (There are detailed regulations concerning Khums and what I told you was the general ruling).

 

In fact it is to be counted from the first time you earned money; for example if the first time you earned money was 08 Jul, eighth July will be the date you have to pay Khums for following years.

Edited July 7, 2015 by mostafaa

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Thank you again brother mostafaa for the explanation.

 

I meant to say Sayyid Khamenei in my previous post, not Sayyid Khomeini.

 

In the case of khums, I must first pick a marja then, or ells there is no one to give the khoms to?

 

What is your opinion on the subject of living in a country that already takes a great deal of tax from which a great deal is spent on welfare and social security?

Is that not in some ways counted as khoms? Otherwise I will have to "pay tax" on taxed income. For example in Iran they already take khoms on your salary as a tax, which they use for welfare.

Khoms was initially applied to countries with zero tax, was it not? 

 

As to the case of picking a marja to send Khoms to, from the brother I have spoken to, they say Sayyid Sistani has more answers to more things and he is not politically active so he has more time for these issues.

 

However Sayyid Sistani lives in Iraq which is a country that you can barely call a sovereign country since it does not have full control of its own land and security.

Sayyid Khamenei lives in Iran and is the supreme leader of a country that is the stronghold of shia islam, the country does a great deal for shia islam every where in the world. Surely Khoms sent to Sayyid Khamenei would come to much greater use?

 

What if one would like to follow the fiqh of Sayyid Sistani but to sent his Khoms to another marja?

Speaking of Iran, there is corruption there sadly, is it then not better for me to give khoms straight to one of my relatives in Iran who in turn would give it directly to the needy without "paper turners" as a middle hand?

[mostafaa]

They are not of the same type in a way that we can make up for the other. 

Tax is the money taken by the government as to be spent for social services available there in your country (social services are not for free). You can live in a country where these services are not provided and therefore you don't pay tax but still you have to pay Khums because this is your duty as a Muslim. it has completely different disposal from that of the tax.

 

What you said about Iran is not true. The government there only deducts tax from one's income (Not Khums); and Iranians also have to pay Khums afterwards.

 

No matter to whom you're spending, Ayt. Sistani or Ayt. Khamenei. Don't be paranoid about the probable way a marja' might spend your money. Take it easy.

 

As I told you there are certain disposal for Khums so you're not allowed to give to your family members in Iran so they spend it in the way of Allah or whatever.

 

Ayt. Sistani's view on the issue of Khums disposal:     "Khums should be divided into two parts. One part is Sehme Sadaat, it should be given to a Sayyid who is poor, or orphan, or who has become stranded without money during his journey. The second part is Sehme Imam (A.S.), and during the present time it should be given to a Mujtahid, who fulfills all conditions, or be spent for such purposes as allowed by that Mujtahid. As an obligatory precaution, that Mujtahid must be A'alam, and well versed in public affairs." 

 

Ayt. Khmenei's view on the same issue: according to his fatwa you can give it to your marja or his representative. but you need to consider the following fatwa if you're going to follow Sayed Khamenei:

Both portions of khums come into the jurisdiction of the Leader of Muslims. Consequently, anybody who owes khums to the Imam (a.) or to the sayyids or his property is subject to any kind of khums must forward it to the authority in charge of khums or his authorized attorney. However, if one wants to spend any of these portions in their areas, they should acquire prior permission for that. At the same time, they should consider the ruling of their mujtahid. 

 

But according to sayed Sistani you don't need to take permission for the portion dedicated to Sadaat; which means you yourself can pay the money to a poor Sayed. 

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Thank you once again br mostafaa, May Allah(SWT) bless you.

 

I had heard about how in Iran they took khoms as part of the tax on income, did not know it was not true.

 

Hmm, you tell me not to be worried, but I do not know these men, I don't know what kind of characters they have or what they think, like I would know a close friend. I simply have a hard time trusting them since they are strangers to me, and now I have to send them money annually, it feels very strange to me.

 

Why do you have to send khoms to poor sayeds in particular and not poor humans in general? What is it that a not poor sayed will do that a not poor human will not do?

 

Also given that I want to pay khoms, i know there are some different ways of calculating how much you have to pay, but I would like to ask you a hypothetical question:

 

What if you live in a country where apartments are very expensive and the only way people can afford them is by taking a loan from banks that applies riba to the loans given. If you cannot afford an apartment and all your savings are meant to buy a apartment in the future, then do you still pay khoms on that saving? Even though it is being saved to buy an apartment and try to avoid taking a riba loan?

[mostafaa]

Hmm, you tell me not to be worried, but I do not know these men, I don't know what kind of characters they have or what they think, like I would know a close friend. I simply have a hard time trusting them since they are strangers to me, and now I have to send them money annually, it feels very strange to me.

 

salam alaykum

That's why a marja' is to be Adeel (عادل) and pious -people are in need to trust him first, then they would follow him-. If people find him wicked or committing sin then they will not will lose their confidence in him.

As far as I have heard, read and watched about these two above mentioned Mujtahids I am positive that they are pious; they stick to Islam and follow its teaching. Especially observing the fact that majority of Shiite  in Iran, Iraq and other countries who are concerned about their Marja' and not ignorant have trusted them and chosen them to be followed a person will be more easily believe in them. (Other Mujtahids like Ayt.Makaarem Shirazi, Vahid Khorasani, Zanjani and some others are also pious as far as I have done research.)

 

The important person's behavior cannot be easily hidden because it is in the center of people's attention; if they act incorrectly it would spread everywhere and everyone would know about it. I think you can make sure through what you have heard, read or even seen on the media whether or not a Marja' (and in particular Ayt. Sistani and Khmenei) is Adeel and pious; and if their goal is to conduct Islamic teachings.

 

Why do you have to send khoms to poor sayeds in particular and not poor humans in general? What is it that a not poor sayed will do that a not poor human will not do?

 

"Zakaat could only be spent for poor people who are not Seyed. Seyed needy families are only allowed to receive Zakaat from Seyed payer.

But Khums is to be used for needy seyed whether the payer is seyed or non seyed.

There are some principles said in ahadith about the mentioned rulings; for example it is reported that the prophet (pbuh) said:

قال رسول اللّه (ص): إن الصدقة أوساخ أيدي الناس، و إن اللّه تعالى قد حرم علي منها و من غيرها ما قد حرمه، و إن الصدقة لا تحل لبني عبد المطلب

"Zakaat is the dirt and filth of people's hand (is the dirty money of people's income); this money and other filthy money is forbidden for me. Zakkat is prohibited for Abd ol-mottaleb's offspring."

But Khums is not likewise and it is to be spent for destitute seyed; this is how the prophet and Imams interpreted(و اعلموا انما غنمتم من شي فان لله خمسه و للرسول و لذی القربی و الیتامی و المساکین و ابن السبیل) it is reported in authentic ahadith that needy and destitute people meant and intended in this verse are to be seyed.

Edited July 13, 2015 by Haydar Husayn

[Guest silasun]

Br Ibn Sina: this article explains it excellently (it's by Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi):

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. Is allocation of one half of Khums for the Bani Hashim not favouritism?

 

Some people are of the impression that this Islamic tax, which covers twenty percent of most wealth and one half of which has been apportioned for the sadat,1 is a kind of familial distinction and smells of nepotism and favouritism - an aspect that is incongruous with the universal nature of Islam and it's spirit of social justice.

 

Those who harbour such views have not studied the conditions and specifics of this ruling completely, for the answer to this objection, in it's entirety, lies in them.

 

Firstly, one half of the khums associated with the descendants of the Noble Prophet (s.a.w) and the Bani Hashim must be given exclusively to the impoverished ones from amongst them and that too, only in the measure sufficient to fulfil their needs for one year (not more)!  Thus, the only ones who can utilize it are those, who are either sick and cannot work, or infant orphans and those who, due to certain reasons, cannot make both ends meet.

 

Therefore, those who are capable of working (in actuality or in potential) and are able to procure an earning, sufficient for leading their lives, do not have the right to make use of this portion of the khums. It follows that the commonly held view among the general masses that the descendants of the Noble Prophet (s.a.w) can utilize khums, however well off they might be, is improper and totally baseless and unfounded.

 

Secondly, the impoverished and the underprivileged ones from amongst the sadat and the Bani Hashim do not have the right to use zakat; instead they can only utilize this portion of khums.2

 

Thirdly, if the share of the sadat, which is one half of the khums, happens to exceed the needs of the sadat actually present, this surplus should be put into the public treasury to be put to other uses. On the contrary, if that portion is insufficient to fulfil their requirements then they must be provided for, either from the public treasury or from the zakat.

 

In view of the above three points it is quite clear that no differentiation has been exhibited between the sadat and the non-sadat, materially.

 

The needy non-sadat can procure their yearly expenses from zakat but are deprived of khums, whereas the indigent sadat can procure theirs from khums but, in turn, remain deprived from zakat.

 

In fact, there exist two coffers; the 'coffer of khums' and the 'coffer of zakat'. Each of these two groups has the right to utilize the contents of only one of these two coffers, and that too, equally - that is, one year's requirements only.

 

But those people who have not reflected over these conditions and details, are given to imagine that the sadat have been allotted a greater share from the public treasury or that they enjoy a special distinction.

 

The only question that looms up here is that if there is no difference between the two, as far as the outcome is concerned, what is the benefit of such a classification?

 

The answer to this can be comprehended by taking one important point into consideration and that is, there exists an important fundamental difference between khums and zakat; zakat is considered to be of the taxes that are regarded as part of the general funds of the Islamic society and hence it is essentially utilized in this sector, whereas khums is of the taxes appertaining to the Islamic Government - that is, the expenses of the Islamic Government and its functionaries are paid from it.

 

Thus, keeping the sadat deprived of the general funds (zakat) is in fact with the objective of keeping the relatives of the Noble Prophet (s.a.w) away from these funds. Otherwise, the Noble Prophet (s.a.w)3 would be accused of placing his relatives in control of the general funds.

 

But on the other hand, as the needy and the impoverished sadat do need to be looked after too, it has been stipulated in the Islamic Laws that they would be supported from the funds of the Islamic Government and not from the general funds.

 

Thus, in reality, not only is khums not a distinction for the sadat, but on the contrary, it is a means to sideline them in view of the general interest and to prevent the arousal of any kind of suspicion and mistrust.4

 

1. Descendants of the noble Prophet 7 (Tr.)

2. The fact that the Bani Hashim have been forbidden from taking the Zakat is incontrovertible and this is an issue, which has been mentioned in numerous books of tradition and jurisprudence. Is it possible for us to believe that while Islam has made arrangements for the orphans and the incapable and impoverished ones of the non-Bani Hashim, it has left the Bani Hashim without any security - unattended and unlooked after?

3. And if we notice that some of the traditions state:

كَراَمَةً لَهُم عَنْ أَوساَخِ النَّاسِ.

 

The objective is to keep the sadat away from Zakat, since it is reckoned to be a kind of filth of the people's wealth) it is for the purpose of appeasing and placating the Bani Hashim over this prohibition (of utilizing the Zakat) and also for explaining to the people that they should desist from being a burden upon the public treasury, unless absolutely necessary, and leave the Zakat for those, who are seriously in need of it.

 

4. Tafsir-e-Namunah, vol. 7, pg. 181

 

 

 

 

Also brother: with regard to your question about saving for an apartment I think the best thing is to forward the question to your marja because it may be a more complex situation which needs explaining.

[Soldiers and Saffron]

Hmm I have had some time to think about this and also now I have decided upon a marja so there is only few question marks left for me before I can pay khums.

 

First question mark:

If I have understood this correctly then the reason to why sayyeds get khums is because they cannot get anything from zakat funds, that is a weak argument in my opinion because in modern times almost no one pays zakat and the khoms that everyone pays is a hundred fold worth the zakat that people pay nowadays.

 

Also, it is said sayyed gets the money from Islamic government funds (khums), would that not mean that they have to actively work with governing of Islam to be able to get the money or is it enough that they are poor and sayyed to get money just because of their ancestry but does absolutely nothing for Islam? How is that fair?

 

Second question mark:

 

I wish to do hajj with my future wife when I get married inshaAllah, can I tag the money needed for this purpose and put it aside and not pay khums on all the money I have in total?

 

Thank you once again for answering all my questions brothers and sisters :)