The first thing I had to do was to collect relevant material from its sources, that is, texts, injunctions, and opinions of scholars, new and ancient sources, religious texts and books. The Qur'an and Sunnah are the main sources that I relied on in understanding the reality of zakah, its injunctions, objectives, and position in Islam. I found plenty of material in books of commentary from all ages, commentary by narration or commentary by means of explanation, especially the explanation of verses on ahkam.

Books of hadith gave me the second major source. I benefitted from both texts and footnotes, especially from books dealing with hadith jurisprudence such as Muntaqa al Akhbar and Bulugh al Maram and their commentaries. I used books of jurisprudence representing schools of thought as well .as comparative studies, especially those that provide the evidence from Shari'ah and debate the objections raised by others, as well as books of jurisprudence methodology and rules (usul) and books of financial and administrative jurisprudence such as al Amwal by the great jurist Abu 'Ubaid al Qasim bin Sallam. Some material came from modern books and papers that deal with one or more aspect of the social, political, and economic systems of Islam. I also used secondary sources such as books on language, history, bibliographies, encyclopedias, indexes, etc. Quotes from any of those books, ancient or contemporary, are marked to their authors in the text or in a footnote unless the reference is well-known or was mentioned earlier, where I only mention the name of the book. On rare occasions I quote certain statements that are very familiar to scholars without mentioning a specific source for them. In all this I follow our predecessors who said, "It is a blessing for any quote to be attributed to its author". I would like to mention here, that one of the blessings of the present study is that it paved the way for me to get involve in financial and economic readings from which I used to be isolated as a result of my own specialty in Shari'ah.

Through this new window I came to understand many aspects of the financial and economic system in Islam, its principles and pillars and the kinds of transactions it deals with. This I hope to put in a forthcoming independent study. Furthermore, while working on the present research I was able to put out my study entitled "The Problem of Poverty and its Islamic Solution".

The nature of the subject, interrelation of its parts, and integration of its material determine its structure as well as its organization in such a way that every ingredient requires the other I tried to make it a comprehensive scientific book of reference on zakah, which made it rather long. This study is divided into nine parts and a conclusion.

The sequence of those parts follows the logical rationale, starting with the obligation of zakah, the assets it is required on, its ratios, to whom it should distributed, where it must not be used, means of collection and distribution, objectives and effects of zakah, followed by the fast breaking zakah and a discussion of whether there are other financial duties beyond zakah and the similarities and differences between zakah and contemporary taxes.

Part One deals with the obligation of zakah, in which I showed that all religions share in the care for poor and weak members of the society. Islam expressed such concern as early as the Makkan period. This was climaxed by the imposition of zakah at the early Madinan period. The system of zakah proceeded all similar legislation in the world. Part Two deals with zakatable persons. In this part I have detailed the injunctions concerning zakah on children and insane persons, and the issue of zakatablitity of non-Muslims. Part Three deals with zakatable funds and assets and with the ratios of zakah - what kinds of wealth are zakatable in livestock, in money and currency, in business assets, in agricultural, in minerals, in maritime, ships, vessls, assets, in animal products, etc. In this part I explained zakah on buildings for rent, on plants and factories, on income of non-business capital, on salaries and wages, and on the income of professionals. In Part Four I discuss the eight areas of dispersement of zakah mentioned in the Qur'an, how much should be appropriated to each category, whether or not all categories should be covered in each distribution of zakah, and disqualifications for receipt of zakah. Part Five examines with the means of zakah payment and collection, its relation to the state, and the prepayment or late payment of zakah. It deals also with the issues of transporting proceeds of zakah from one country to another and payment in value or in kind. In Part Six I delineates the objectives and the effects of zakah. In this part I explain the objectives of zakah with reference to the zakah prayer, the zakah recipient and the whole society. Additionally, this part deals with the role of zakah in solving certain socio-economic problems such as unemployment, destitution and begging, natural catastrophe, community disputes and differences, in addition to the major problem of poverty. Part Seven describes fast-breaking zakah and its injunctions. Part Eight studies the issue of other duties on wealth besides zakah. In this part I discussed the two opposing opinions on the matter, the arguments of each side, and which one is sounder. In Part Nine I compared zakah and taxes, and depicted the characteristics of zakah as a tax. The principles, objectives and guarantees of zakah are discussed in this part, as well as the fact that zakah supersedes the contemporary thought on taxation with respect to its principles and regulations. This part also deals with the issue of whether other taxes are allowed in addition to zakah or whether zakah can be substituted by other taxes. In the conclusion I summarized the institution of zakah and gave statements by non Muslims’ scholars by writers, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, about zakah and its effects in fulfilling justice, equality, and solidarity among the members of a society.

Two kinds of comparisons are made in this study: comparison among schools of thought in order to select the opinion that is most supported by evidence in Shari'ah, and comparison between Shari'ah and other legal systems, divine or not, ancient or new, in order to show the characteristics of this divine Shari'ah that came final and perpetual as compared to prior divine laws that Shari'ah superseded or man-made systems that are inadequate. While comparing the different views of the Islamic schools I did not limit myself to the four famous schools for this may be unjust to other schools and opinions in Islamic jurisprudence. Since there are views expressed by scholars from among the Companions, the Followers, and the later generations, these views ought not be neglected or disregarded. As for the Companions, there is no dispute about their precedents and their knowledge. Beyond them there are views expressed by great followers such as Ibn al Musayyib, 'Umar bin Abd al 'Aziz, al Zuhri, al Nakha'i, al Hasan, 'Ata', al Sha'bi, Maymun bin Mahran, and many others. Even in the generations after the followers there are great names such as al Thawri, al Awza'i, Abu 'Ubaid, al Tabari, Dawud al Zahiri, and many others. All these views represent in fact a very precious and valuable scientific heritage, the neglect of which would be a great mistake both from the scientific and the religious points of view. Furthermore, I did not limit my study to the Sunnite schools, but expanded it to include schools of Zaidi and Imami.

Differences between them and Sunnite schools in the matters of detailed injunctions are trivial and we have seen great scholars such as al San'ani, in his book Subul al Salam and al Shawkani in his Nail al Awtar mention the views of Zaidis and Imamis, including al Hadi, a1 Qasim, al Baqir, al Naser, and others. These works circulate among Sunnite scholars without any sort of uneasiness.

As for the comparison between Islamic thinking on zakah and systems, it was necessary to compare Islam on zakah with previous religions on charities. It was also necessary to compare zakah with contemporary thoughts on taxation and social insurance.

Throughout the course of this research, I felt it is not sufficient to give the bare Shari'ah injunction in each matter. Rather, it is necessary to explain the rationale and the virtues of the rulings and the detriment of what is prohibited. This is in spirit of the approach of the Qur'an itself in providing not just rulings but their rationale, their objectives, and their benefits to mankind, individually and collectively. Qur'an does not merely demand that believers submit to all rulings without knowing the reasoning behind them. If providing the reasoning for Shari'ah's rulings is advisable in general, it is indispensable at this time because there are malicious ideas spread around and misleading pressures from the East and the West. It is no longer sufficient to merely spell Shari'ah injunctions and expect believers to cry, "We comply with what we hear!".

Any research that hopes to dissect and scrutinise all views and opinions from the different sources must also compare them with each other. But if the author himself is subject to one view or biased to certain school of thought, he would do his best to support the view he subscribes to. Therefore, I have freed myself from any such preconceptions or alliance to any specific school of thought. This non-partisan commitment is well appreciated in the tradition of this Muslim ummah. Following one jurist in all his opinions, even those that are weakly supported by Shari'ah texts amounts to taking that jurist as a legislator or a maker of Shari'ah since imitation itself is a form of annulment of mind and its virtue. "The mind is created to think and adore", said Ibn al Jawzi. How could a person who has a candle to shed light put it out and walk in the darkness? Others have said "those who imitate are either insecure or stupid".

I read texts and views as an investigator, an examiner, a researcher who seeks the truth regardless of where or whom it comes from. It may be found with predecessors jurists or with later generations. It may be found in opinionated schools of jurists or in schools of hadith, or in the school of Zahiriyah. It could be found among the four reputed schools or outside them. I do not subscribe to fanaticism that puts a taboo on all new opinions found after the early four imams believing that none are accepted after them, that ijtihad came to an end after the first three centuries of Islam and that truth lies only in the writings of those schools and those generations. On the other hand, I would not blindly follow those who claim to be making ijtihad without fulfilling all its requirements, those who call frr top to bottom renovation, about whom the late al Rafi'i said in mockery "They wanted to renovate religion, language, even the sun and the moon." I am committed throughout my research to the principles of no bias, non-partisanship, righteousness, openmindedness to every and all useful renovation and keenness to retain every correct ancient view or opinion. Yellowed and wrinkled pages, bad printing and small script of the old texts did not prevent me from perusing them and extracting their treasures, whether in the original texts, commentaries, or footnotes.

Consequently I benefited from old and new without being either cautionary or permissive. I analyzed what I obtained and weighed the arguments of the different opinions and supported the strongest, that is, whose evidence is clearest, without bias to any school. I may take the view of Abu Hanifah sometimes, or Shafi'i, Ahmad, Sufyan, al Awza'i, Abu 'Ubaid, or any other thinker certain other times. I may even leave aside all of them and take instead what is correctly reported from a companion or follower.

This is not intermingling ideas together but rather, it is a search for truth and best argument. Only one thing limits all scholars. That is the unmistakable words of the Book of God or the tradition of His Messenger. Ibn 'Abbas, Malik and 'Ata', said, "One may take or leave any opinion from anyone except the Messenger of God (p)".

I relied on a set of rules that represent the Shari'ah basis in pointing out the opinion that overrules others and in deducting new opinions or quasi-new views. These rules can be summarized in the following:

1. Adopting general texts, unless there is an evidence that restricts them. Many texts in our religion are general in form so that they cover multiple cases as well as individual details and ingredients. This in itself is one of the miracles of this religion that equips it to be the final religion and makes it suit all times and places.

Consequently, Qur'anic verses and the Messenger's sayings should be received and taken as general, except when their scopes are narrowed by another text that is correct, authentic and clear in its meaning. In this case, the restriction comes first. I am not among those who reject clear-cut (muhkam) and authentic (sahih) sayings because they oppose general texts in the Qur'an. On the other hand, I do not share the position of those who quickly accept a restriction coming in the hadith even though the hadith may not be exactly authentic or may not have a clear-cut indication. I do not, for example, subscribe to the position of Imam Abu Hanifah in rejecting the saying that "There is no zakah in date that is below five wasq" in order to preserve the generality of the text "and of the fruits of the earth which we have produced for you"3 and the text "in what is watered by the sky there is one tenth", because the first saying is correct and agreed upon. The explanation given by Abu Hanifah that the saying deals with date that is kept for trading is a very weak and heavy-handed explanation. For that reason I go along with the opinion of the two disciples of Abu Hanifah and the majority of scholars that there is nisab in the produce of earth, the same as other sorts of wealth.

On the other hand, I fully agree with Abu Hanifah in holding to the generality of the text "and of the fruit of the earth which we have produced for you" and the hadith "in what is watered by the sky there is one tenth" and I do not consider this generality modified, by a saying like "There is no zakah on vegetables" because this is a weak hadith. Of course one can find, a reconciling explanation for this hadith, by interpreting it to mean that: Vegetables cannot be collected in payment of zakah because they are perishable and cannot be stored for for long. But, if zakah is not collected in the form of vegetables, it is still required of their producer on the basis of the generality of these texts.

The generality of the texts of Qur'an and Sunnah must be applied as is until they are modified by another correct and clear-cut text. Consequently, we must observe the general meaning of all verses and sayings that obligate zakah on all forms of wealth, such as the verses "Out of their wealth take zakah" and "on those in their wealth, there is a well defined right" and the saying of the prophet, (p) "Pay zakah of your wealth".

These texts do not differentiate between one kind of wealth and another, so we need not make exceptions unless when there are specific texts to support them.

The agreement of all scholars of this ummah, especially in the early generations, on certain issues is an obvious indication that they have based the agreement on strong Shari'ah evidence, be it a text, general benefit, or a material fact. Consequently, we should respect such an agreement so that we can preserve the value of ijma' in Shari'ah, that keeps balance in legislation and prevents chaos and legislative confusion.

Examples of this ijma' is the agreement of scholars that zakah is obligatory on golden assets at the same rate as it is on silver, i.e. one fourth of a tenth, and their agreement that a mithqal is one and three sevenths of a dirham.

I mentioned true ijma' because some jurists reported ijma' on issues that are still controversial. This is because in early generations there were many scholars most of whom were dispersed in several countries, so that it was very difficult to know their stand on certain issues. Imam Ahmad went so far as to state "Whoever claims that an ijma' on any matter did ever exist is a liar, for how could he know? People may have differed without him knowing. Instead, one may say "To my knowledge there are no disagreements on such an issue' or 'No different opinions have been reported to me'".

There are examples of cases in which ijma' was claimed or a state of no report of disagreement was mentioned whereas there is concrete evidence that such cases were not agreed upon. Al shafi'i, for example, said about zakah on cattle, "On each thirty there is a tabi and on each forty there is a musinnah, and I know of no difference among scholars on this". It is certain that a difference existed and was reported by Jabir bin Abdullah, Sa'id bin al Musayib, Qatadah, and the zakah collectors in Madinah of Ibn al Zubair4. Another example is that reported by Ibn al Mundhir, that there was ijma' that zakah may not be spent on non Muslims while other scholars reported from al Zuhri, Ibn Sirin, and 'Ikrimah, that this is permissible and it seems that this is the view of 'Umar, according to reports from him.5 Also, Ibn Qudamah in al Mughni said "we know of no disagreement on the view that the clan of Hashim are not allowed to receive zakah," This was commented on by al Hafiz Ibn Hajar, in al Fath, "But al Tabari reported that Abu Hanifah said that they may receive zakah if they were not given the allowance of dhavi al Qurba (the close relatives of the Prophet). This is also stated by al Tahawi.

Similar views are attributed by some Malikites to al Abhari, a Malikite, and it is an opinion expressed by some Shafi'ites. Abu Yusuf said, "Zakah of the clan of Hashim is lawful to members of the same clan." For this special case the Malikites have four different opinions."6

Such alleged ijma' is not binding because it is not in fact an ijma' and one may take a position that opposes it. As for true ijma' i.e. ijma' that truly has no known opposition, it is an acceptable ruling in Shari'ah and I bind myself to following it in spite of objections raised about its binding nature.

Some usul scholars say that if Muslims of a certain generation differ on an issue and are divided, for example, into two opinions a later generation may not formulate a third brand new opinion. The argument given is that if there are only two opinions, an implicit ijma' to reject a third one must exist. Al Amidi said, if a third opinion contradicts both of the original two then it is not acceptable, while if it coincides with one, or each, of them in certain aspects, then it can be accomodated. Let us take as an example what Abu Hanifah says, i.e. that the one tenth imposed as zakah on land is obligated on the landlord. The majority says it is on the tenant. Apparently all agree that the tenth is obligated, so one may say that this tenth is obligated on the tenant on his net agricultural products after deducting the rent which is paid to the owner, and that the landlord is required to pay zakah at the rate of 10% on the rent received. Obviously this does not violate the implicit ijma' according to Al Amidi. Others believe that the mere fact that scholars of a certain generation differ on an issue and express two opinions is in itself an indication that this issue is controversial in which all can exert effort and apply ijtihad. A third and later opinion is merely an outcome of such ijtihad and consequently should be accomodated. The followers, as an example, had several third views not known to the companions as it is reported from Ibn Sirin, Masruq, and others8." This is the way I see it as long as such ijtihad issues are susceptible to new research and efforts.

Analogy means applying to a case the same ruling given to a similar case because of common reason ('illah). It is a matter of natural rationale implanted by God in human minds and, according to Ibn al Qayim, an ingredient of al Mizan (right criteria) that descended from God with his Holy Book and made by God a support of the Book. God says: "It is God who has sent down the Book in truth, and the Balance9" and "We sent aforetime our apostles with clear signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance that men may stand forth in justice".10 The balance is meant here as justice and the criteria and means with which we know justice. Appropriate analogy is the Balance.

It is better to give it the noble name that is given to it by God and to recognize that there is an obligation on every Muslim to apply it as much as possible. It is not so with the name "analogy" because analogy may be right or wrong, praised or disclaimed, correct or incorrect. The right and correct analogy is the Balance that God sent along with his Book11.

Imam Ibn Taimiyah said, "Analogy is an inclusive word. It includes correct analogy and incorrect analogy, but only the correct analogy is accepted in Shari'ah. It implies treating similarly, cases that are similar and differentiating between cases that are distinct.. The first application is called qiyas al tard (positive analogy) and the second is called qiyas al 'aks (negative analogy). Analogy in this meaning is part of justice and balance sent by God with His messenger. Appropriate analogy is one in which the reason on which a Shari'ah injunction is based exists in the two cases without anything that opposes it or prevents the application of the same injunction. This kind of analogy is always consistent with Shari'ah. By the same token, analogy by disregarding irrelevant differences is also a correct analogy where an acclaimed difference between the two cases is shown as irrelevant. Again this kind of analogy is also consistent with Shari'ah."12

In brief, if the reason that is common between the two cases, in analogy, is obvious and clear and if there is no relevant difference, apparent or otherwise, nor any factor preventing similarity, analogy should be applied an considered a Shari'ah evidence which no one can disclaim. Some object to this on the basis that zakah is one of the worships and in worships there can be no analogy. It is agreed upon that matters of pure worship don't have analogy since the true reasons behind them may never be known by human beings and in worships obedience to God is the only rationale. Analogy is not applicable to pure worships such as prayers, fasting, and pilgrimage. This prevents human beings from inventing forms of worships out of their own imaginations, without a clear order from God.

As for zakah, it is not purely a worship, for in addition to being a worship it is a defined right of the poor, an established tax, and an ingredient of the social, and economic system of the society. The reasons for enacting zakah are, in general, known and clear. Why can we not then use analogy in zakah?

It is established among Muslim scholars that the injunctions of Shari'ah are ordained for the benefit of mankind in their earthly living and upon their resurrection after death, whether these benefits are necessities, needed or improvements. Imam al Shatibi argued that this can be verified by surveying the injunctions of Shari'ah and looking into their supportive evidence, universal or specific. This does not apply only to one case or one text - since all Shari'ah is established after this underlying fact.15 Al Shatibi made the important point that with regard to worship the principle is that people accept and obey without seeking explanation or reasons. As for transactions and interrelations, the principle is to look for meanings, and rationale"16. Al Shatibi provides very strong arguments to support this view, but unfortunately they fall beyond the limit of the present work. What should be emphasized here however, is that zakah, despite the facts that it is associated with prayers under the label of worships, is in reality not purely a worship. It is closer to being a transaction because it is the major financial institution for Muslims. Zakah is a relationship between the state, the wealthy, and the poor. This is perhaps why all works on financial and administrative issues in Islam include a chapter on zakah the same way they include chapters on kharaj, state revenues, etc. Zakah is, as such, a part of the social system in Islam. If we were to re-sort issues of fiqh according to contemporary standards, we would classify zakah as part of the socio-financial system and not with the pure worships. Similarly, when we talk about law, we talk about zakah as part of the financial law of the state.

This does not mean that all the rules of zakah are outside the boundaries of worships, Al Shatibi resolves that in transactions that have some characteristics of worship, we should limit ourselves to the texts. This applies not only to zakah but also to the requirement of sadaq (dowry) in marriage, the distribution shares in inheritance and the number of months in 'iddah, etc. I add to these the percentages of zakah and its minimum exempt (nisab) because these are issues defined clearly by texts and Muslims have no disagreement on them through history. So, it is essential to abide by these texts and this ijma'. For that reason I disagree with those who claim that the minimum exempt and rates of zakah are subject to change with changing time and places on the ground that such changes are in observance to the objectives and common benefits. I believe such changes alter the features of zakah and make it a mere civil tax, like other taxes imposed by governments.The sum up, the objectives of Shari'ah are to achieve the common benefit of people and to avoid what harms that benefit. Accordingly, Malik and his disciples went to the extent of considering the achievement of common benefit a Shari'ah criterion that should be applied like any other criteria in Shari'ah.l7 Ironically, many Hanbalites follow this trend, which is strongly supported by Imam Ibn Taymiyah and his disciple Ibn al Qayim. In their writings, they show abundent evidence in the support of this view.

Our aim in this whole book is to combine easiness for the reader with accuracy of details and to avoid difficult wording and statements. Even when I quote, I try to select the clearest quotations with the simplest words, and at times I try to clarify words in the quotation without affecting its meaning. In my opinion the most successful style is that which puts side by side the accuracy of a scholar and the clarity of a preacher, and I hope I am successful in that.

I should mention that this study was prepared more than six years ago as my PhD.

dissertation but I could not then present it because of unavoidable circumstances. The papers remained in my hands and I began reviewing, correcting and editing them until God permitted this work to come out in this form. I hope it will be accepted among non-partisan researchers and that I will benefit from sincere critiques.

I hope Muslims will review the current practices of their religion and will come back to it after long abandonment and make this obligation of zakah an important part of their socio-financial institutions. This way they would earn the pleasure of God, solving many social problems and protecting their youth from misleading and deviant ideas.

If I fulfill in this study those objectives, thanks and praise should be to God alone. I intended this effort for Him and He alone is asked to make it benefit people. If it did not reach that goal, it suffices that I exercised my best abilities and I hope God will give me the reward for the effort and good intention, since the reward of every person is in accordance with his intention.

Success can only come from God on whom I depend and to whom I return.

Jumada al Ula, 1389 H., July 1969, A.D.

Yusuf al Qardawi.

Doha, Qatar.