Fiqh Al Zakah by Dr. Yusuf al Qardawi

The verse listing categories of zakah recipients [9:60] counts eight categories, but mentions four of them using the preposition "to"--to the poor, to the needy, to the workers, to those whose hearts are being reconciled--and uses the preposition "in" with the other four categories--in freeing slaves, in (aid of) those under debt, in the way of God, in (aid of) the wayfarer. The Qur'an is perfect; not even a change of preposition is done in vain, so why is "to" [the Arabic "li"] used first and "in" [the Arabic "fi"] used later?

Al Zamakhshari says the use of the preposition "in" for the last four categories indicates they are more deservant of zakah than the first four, since "in" indicates a place inside which things are put, meaning that these last four categories are containers in which sadaqat should be put.1 In al Intisar, Ibn al Munayyir comments on al Zamakhshari's note, "The other, more important, difference is that zakah is given to the first four categories in such a manner that they become its owners while zakah is not necessarily given to persons in the last four categories, but spent for their benefit. In other words, zakah is given to the master of the slave to gain the slave's freedom; it is also given for the sake of God, to the creditor of those under debt, or to help the wayfarer reach home."2 Al Razi notes, similarly to Ibn al Munayyir, that "to" indicates ownership, while "in" cannotes the purpose of the spending. In summary, zakah is given to the first four categories, while it is given for, and not necessarily to the last four categories.3 The same is stated in al Khazin's commentary.4

Rashid Rida,5 followed by the late Mahmud Shaltut,6 divides categories that deserve zakah into two kinds: individuals and interests. Individuals include the first four plus those under debt and the wayfarer, while interests include freeing, slaves and the sake of God. The author of al Manar uses the additive conjunction "and" before the word "those under debt" and "wayfarer," relating these two categories to the first four, since the preposition "in" is used immediately before "liberating slaves" and "sake of God." This non-sequential addition does not show proper respect for the eloquence of the Qur'an. It is better to take the additions in sequence, grouping the last four categories together, because they are preceded by the preposition "in" which is the choice of al Zamakhshari, Ibn al Munayyir, al Razi, and others. Ibn Qudamah supports the view of al Razi and his colleagues, saying Four categories receive zakah such that it becomes their property forever and they do not need to return it. The other four categories do not take zakah but to spend it for a pre-determined purpose, and if they do not spend it for that purpose, it can be taken back from them. The last four categories take zakah in order to use it toward fulfilling some objectives, while the first four categories are themselves objectives of zakah. For example, the purpose of zakah is fulfilled by giving the poor, thus making the poor rich. On the other hand, if a person in one of the last four categories ware given an amount of zakah for a purpose which can be achieved by spending a lesser amount, the reminder must be returned, except in the case of the fighter for the sake of God,"7 (This lost exception does not apply to military equipment such as weapons and horses, which must be returned to the zakah fund.) This distinction made by Ibn Qudamah is undoubtedly correct. He could have supported it by quoting the change of preposition used in the Qur'an with the listed categories, as noted by the commentator of Ghayat al Muntaha.8

Spending zakah in liberating slaves may take two forms:

1. This zakah can be used to help a contracted slave pay his master. A contracted slave (al 'abd al mukatab) is a slave who has an agreement with his master that upon paying the master an agreed upon amount, the slave gains freedom. God orders Muslims to contract slaves who desire liberating contracts. God also ordains Muslims to help slaves provide the contractual ransom to their masters. God says, "and if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing [to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum] give them such a deed if ye know any good in them; yea, give them something yourselves out of the wealth which God has given you."9 In other words, God also orders the masters to help slaves pay their contractual sum. In addition to this, God assigns a share of zakah for liberating slaves. Abu Hanifah, al Shafi'i, their disciples, and al Laith bin Sa'd, consider the verse of zakah a specific reference to contracted slaves. They present as evidence a report that Ibn 'Abbas interprets the verse " . . . and in liberating slaves," to mean contracted slaves. This is said to be supported by the last sentence of the above mentioned verse.10

2. The second way of liberating is to buy the slave with the proceeds of zakah and liberate him or her. This can be done by the state, a zakah payer, or a group of zakah payers together. This is the opinion of Malik, Ahmad, and Ibn Ishaq. Ibn al 'Arabi argues that this is apparent from the words of the Qur'an, because the word used translates as "necks" which, whenever used in reference to slaves in the Qur'an, means liberating them. If God meant the specific sub-category of contracted slaves, He would have mentioned it by its name. According to Ibn Al 'Arabi, the contracted slave may be given zakah as a person under debt and not under the title of liberating slaves, except by over-generalizing the term.11

Actually, the verse includes both meanings, However, it is said that Ibrahim al Nakha'i and Sa'id bin Jubair, both Followers, do not like purchasing slaves with zakah and then liberating them, since such an action benefits the liberator because of the concept known in Islamic jurisprudence as al wala' [mutual support] between the liberator and the liberated slave. Wala' between them means that if the liberated slave has no other heirs, his liberator may inherit his estate upon his death. Malik argues that since zakah is due for God's sake, the liberator must not gain any personal benefit. Thus, the person who liberates slaves from the proceeds of his own zakah should not be granted the wala' of the freed slave. This wala' belongs to all Muslims as represented by their state.12

Abu 'Ubaid reports that Ibn 'Abbas finds no error in a person liberating slaves with his own zakah and comments that Ibn Abbas is much more of an authority than al Nakha'i and Ibn Jubair, and his opinion is much preferred, especially since al Hasan, a Follower, and the majority of scholars agree with Ibn 'Abbas.13 Abu 'Ubaid adds that even if the liberator may inherit ex-slave's estate as a result of al wala between them, he may also have to pay, for example, the ransom for a killing the liberated slave may commit, in application of the same principle of al wala.14

It should be realized that the difference in opinion applies only to the case where the individual zakah payer liberates slaves out of his or her zakah, but if the Islamic state takes that action, Muslims agree that the state can use any combination of the two forms of slave liberation mentioned above. Some scholars even prefer that the state use the two forms together, as suggested by al Zuhri when he wrote to 'Umar bin 'Abd al Aziz that "the share of liberating slaves is divided into two parts, half for Muslim contracted slaves and the other half for buying Muslim slaves and liberating them."15 Of course, there is no reason for the restriction of dividing this share in half.

It should be noted that Islam was the first system to start a gradual mass elimination of slavery, by using several means together. Islam first dried up the sources of slavery by prohibiting the kidnapping and selling of free persons, legal slavery of debtors and criminals, or the enslaving of prisoners of wars waged for aggression or economic benefit. Only one source of slavery, morally-lawful war aimed at preventing aggression and oppression, was left intact.16 Even in such a war, the Islamic state need not enslave prisoners of war. This is only an option left open in order to provide for treatment comparable to that which Muslim prisoners receive from the unbelievers. Qur'anic texts regarding prisoners of lawful wars do not even mention slavery as an option. The Qur'an says, "When ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them; thereafter is the time for either generosity or ransom."17

At the same time, Islam prescribes continuous means for liberating slaves. Islam urges freeing slaves, and makes it one expression of submission to God, as well as a compensation performed by persons seeking forgiveness for sins or errors, such as breaking fast in Ramadan or breaking an oath. Islam requires freeing slaves as Fiqh al Zakah (Vol. II), Dr. Yusuf al Qardawi 46

compensation for beating him without right. Masters are ordered in the Qur'an to contract their slaves for freedom against an agreed upon sum, and the Muslim society is called upon to help contracted slaves financially and provide them with jobs so they earn the amount needed for their freedom. God says "And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing [to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum] give them such a deed if ye know any good in them; ye give them something yourselves out of the wealth which God has given you."18 In addition, God makes liberation of slaves one of the eight objectives of zakah. The amount of zakah assigned for freeing slaves may be on one-eighth, or more or less, of this huge, continuous source of funds in the Muslim society.19 This category may sometimes take most or all of the proceeds of zakah, if other groups of zakah recipients are satisfied, as happened in the time of 'Umar bin 'Abd al 'Aziz. Yahya bin Sa'id says, "'Umar bin 'Abd al Aziz sent me as an officer on the zakah of Africa. I collected it and searched for poor people to give it to, but found none.

We searched for deservants to give zakah to, but found that 'Umar bin 'Abd al 'Aziz had made all people satisfied. Then I bought slaves and freed them with zakah."20 If Muslims had the chance to fully implement their religion under a just and wise state for an extended period of time, slavery would have been wiped out from their lands long before it actually was.

The share of zakah proceeds used to gain the freedom of Muslim slaves can include Muslim prisoners of war who have fallen in the hands of enemies of the Islamic state, according to Ahmad, on the grounds that both cases gain the freedom of Muslims.21 Ibn al 'Arabi, a Malikite, says that scholars differ on whether this is permissible. Asbagh says it is not allowed, while Ibn Habib believes it is allowed. The latter argues that if zakah is otherwise going to be used to gains the freedom of a Muslim slave owned by another Muslim in a Muslim society, freeing Muslims from an oppressive unbelieving enemy, obviously takes priority.22 There are many ongoing wars in the world today in which Muslims fall prisoner in the hands of non-Muslims; gaining their freedom becomes one of the objectives of zakah.

In the commentary al Manar, the late Rashid Rida says "liberating has its modern equivalent in liberating people from the humiliation and oppression of colonial power, which is mass liberation as compared to freeing individual slaves."23 Shaikh Mahmud Shaltut emphasizes, ". . . I think we have today a form of slavery that is more dangerous to humanity. It is the enslavement of peoples ideas, wealth, and authority, depriving them of their freedom in their own land. The enslavement of an individual ends with the death of the person, but today entire nations and peoples are enslaved, generation after generation, in a continuous form of overwhelming oppression under ruthless power.

This form of enslavement deserves extermination and deserves more efforts to liberate people from it, not only by using the proceeds of zakah and charity, but also by sacrificing all our wealth and ourselves. This must open our eyes to the tremendous responsibility of rich Muslims to help peoples of the Muslim nation."23

Although Rida and Shaltut correctly describe the unbearable oppression inflicted on colonized nations by aggressive powers, I do not agree on expanding the meaning of freeing slaves to such and extent, because words should not be so loosely applied. As for helping the oppressed peoples, we have great opportunity under the title of zakah spent "for the sake of God," in addition to all the resources of Muslim states and people that must contribute toward the liberation of Muslims and Muslim lands.