第一节:被剥削所得资产的应纳天课性

Section 1: Zakatability of exploited assets.

第二节:天课的计算方法

Section 2: Computation of this zakah.

第3节:尼萨卜的考量。

Section 3: The consideration of nisab.

被剥削的资产是指用于生产可交换的服务或商品、并且在出售获利时不会耗尽这些被剥削资产本身的财富形式。它们包括出租获利的资产，如住宅建筑、交通工具、珠宝以及其他用于出租的物品。此类别中还包括为获取牛奶、羊毛或肉类而饲养的牲畜，以及用于生产商品的工厂、车间或设备。在第六章中，我讨论了牲畜产品，并得出结论：它们应当与蜂蜜同样对待，即对净产出征收十分之一，而产仔的牲畜则免征。因此，本章不再讨论牲畜。

Exploited assets are defined as forms of wealth used to produce exchangeable services or goods that are sold for profit without exhausting the exploited assets themselves. They include assets rented for profit, such as residential buildings, means of transportation, jewelry, and other material used for rental purposes. Also in this category are livestock raised for milk, wool, or meat, and factories, plants, or equipment used for producing goods. In chapter six, I discussed livestock products and concluded that they must be treated like honey, whereby one-tenth is charged on the net output, but the producing animals are exempted. Therefore, I will not include a discussion of livestock in this chapter.

用于剥削的资产与用于贸易的资产之间的区别在于：前者作为永久资本保留下来，而后者则会不断易手。在工业、运输和服务业中用于剥削的资产，占据了当代经济的很大一部分。

The difference between assets used for exploitation and those used for trading is that the former remain as permanent capital, while the latter change hands. Exploited assets used in the industrial, transportation, and service sectors represent a large portion of the contemporary economy.

学者中存在两种极端的观点。一种是扩大天课（Zakah）的概念，将所有或大部分财产都纳入其中；另一种则是将天课限定于少数几类财富。倾向于限制天课征收范围的一方认为：

Two extreme opinions exist among jurists. There are those who expand the concept of zakah to include all or most assets, and those who limit zakah to only a few kinds of wealth. Those who tend to limit the zakatability argue that:

1. 真主的使者（愿主福安之）规定了应纳天课的财产，其中并未提及这些被用于获利的财产，例如建筑物、出租的牲畜和生产性机器。原则是，没有明确的经文依据，人们不应被责令缴纳任何费用。而这样的经文并不存在。

1. The Messenger of God (p) defined the zakatable assets, and did not mention among them these exploited ones such as buildings, rented animals, and productive machinery. The principle is that people must not be obligated to pay any charge without a clear text. There is no such text.

2. 伊斯兰历史上各个时期和各个国家的法学家，都没有对这些资产课以天课。

2. Jurists throughout the history of Islam and in all its various countries did not obligate zakah on those assets.

3. 我们手头有学者的意见，否定被使用性资产的应纳天课性。法学家们指出，住宅、工匠的工具、运输用的牲畜、家具等均免纳天课。这意味着工厂、建筑、汽车、飞机和船只都不应纳天课，无论其规模、价值或收入如何。

3. We have on hand scholarly opinions that negate the zakatability of exploited assets. Jurists have stated that residential homes, craftsman's tools, transportation animals, home furnishings, etc., are all exempt from zakah. This means factories, buildings, cars, planes, and ships are not zakatable, regardless of their size, value, or income.

当这些资产的收益被收取、保留满一年，且达到尼萨布时，它们便如同现金一样需要缴纳天课。

When the earnings of these assets are received, retained for one year, and exceed nisab, they are then zakatable, like money.

限定可缴纳天课的财产种类，是教法学中一个由来已久的主张。伊本·哈兹姆之后，沙乌卡尼和西迪克·哈桑·汗也持此见解，以至于有些教法学家将贸易用的资产以及果蔬排除在天课之外。《Al Rawdah al Nadiyah》的作者支持这一观点，他写道：“对那些被一致认为不应缴纳天课的财产，例如住宅、不动产和牲畜，仅仅因为它们为了获利而出租、并未用于贸易交换，便向其征收天课，这在伊斯兰的early世代是闻所未闻的，更遑论它们在《古兰经》和圣训中没有任何依据。”1

Restricting the kinds of assets that are zakatable is a well-established stance in jurisprudence. It is defended by Ibn Hazm and later by al Shawkani and Siddiq Hasan Khan, to the extent that some jurists exclude trading assets and fruits and vegetable from zakat. The author of al Rawdah al Nadiyah argues for this opinion, ''Imposing zakah on assets that are agreed on as non-zakatable, such as residential buildings, real estate, and animals, simply because they are rented for profit without being exchanged in trade, was unheard of in the first generations of Islam, not to mention their lack of support from Qur'an or Sunnah."1

另一方面，也有一些法学家扩大了应纳天课财产的范围，主张工厂和建筑物等用于经营的资产也应当缴纳天课。这是部分马利基学派、罕百利学派的观点，也是宰丁派中追随哈迪的学者的观点。当代学者中，包括阿布·扎赫拉、阿卜杜勒·瓦哈卜·赫拉夫和阿卜杜勒·拉赫曼·哈桑等人也持此见解，我们将在本节中加以探讨。在我看来，这一取向更为可取，理由如下：

On the other side there are jurists who expend the category of zakatable assets and establish the zakatability of exploited assets like factories and buildings. This is the position of some Malikites, Hanbalites, and the followers or al Hadi among Zaidis. It is also the view of some contemporary scholars, including Abu Zahra, 'Abd al Wahhab Khallaf, and 'Abd al Rahman Hasan, as we shall see in this section. In my opinion, this approach is more valid, for the following reasons:

1. 真主规定了每一类财产都有一份确定的义务：“在他们的财产中，有一份确定的权利。”“你从他们的财产中取出施舍。”先知（愿主福安之）也劝勉我们：“你们要为自己的财产缴纳天课。”这些经文并没有区分不同种类的财产。

1. God obligates a defined due on each asset: "and in their wealth there is a defined due," "Out of their assets take a sadaqah." The Prophet (p) also exhorts us to "Pay the zakah on your assets." These texts do not distinguish between the different kinds of assets.

伊本·阿拉比驳斥了札希里派的观点，后者因缺乏明确的文本依据而否定贸易资产需要缴纳天课。他说："经文'从他们的财产中取出一份施舍'是普遍性的，它包括各种财产，不论其类别、名称和用途。谁想对这一普遍性加以任何限制，就要求他提出证据。"2

Ibn al 'Arabi disproves the opinion of the Zahiris, who negate the zakatability of trade assets for lack of a correct text. "The verse 'Out of their wealth take a sadaqah' is general," he says. "It includes all kinds of wealth, regardless of classification, name, and purpose. Whoever wishes to impose any restriction on this generality is asked to bring proof."2

2. 课征天课（Zakah）于财产的理由是增长。这是那些探究教法裁决背后的理由、以便用于类比推理的法学家所指出的。（他们包括伊斯兰民族几乎所有的法学家，但少数佐希里派（Zahiris）、穆尔太齐赖派（Mu'tazilites）和什叶派除外。）因此，依一致的意见，天课不课征于自住的房屋、衣物、首饰、工匠的工具，或用于战斗的马匹。这也是为什么代步用的骆驼和牛被免除天课，以及凡是不能自行增长或不借人力增长的财产都被免除天课的原因。

2. The reason for which zakah is imposed with respect to assets is growth, as noted by jurists who look for the reasons behind Shari'ah rulings in order to use them in analogy. (They include practically all jurists of the Islamic nation except a few Zahiris, Mu'tazilities and Shi'ites.) Consequently, zakah is not obligated on houses inhabited by owners, clothes, jewelry, craftsmen's tools, or horses used for fighting, by unanimous agreement. This is also why zakah is waived from camels and cows used as personal transportation, and from every asset that does not grow on its own or by human action.

既然资产可以征收天课的理由在于其增长，那么只要存在增长，该项财产就必须征收天课。

Since the reason for the zakatability of an asset is its growth, then if growth exists, an item must be zakatable.

1. 先知（愿主福安之）未提及某项财产需要缴纳天课，并不表示该财产不需缴纳天课。因为先知ﷺ只提到了当时阿拉伯社会中常见的增值性财产，如骆驼、牛、羊、小麦、大麦、椰枣、葡萄干和银币。穆斯林历代学者依据经文的普遍用语，并结合天课的目的，通过类比先知ﷺ所提及的财产，对许多其他财产征收天课。以下是一些例子：

1. The fact that the Prophet (p) does not mention a certain asset as zakatable is not in indication of non-zakatability, because the Prophets only mentions growing assets common in Arab society at his time, such as camels, cows, lambs, wheat, barley, dates, raisin, and silver money. Muslims throughout generations obligated zakah on many assets by analogy to these mentioned by the Prophet, because of the general terms used in the texts, and in consideration of the objectives of zakah. Some examples are:

A. 沙斐仪在《立法根源》中谈到金子的天课时说："先知（ﷺ）对银子征收天课。之后，穆斯林对金子征收天课，或是依据一段未传到我们这里的先知圣训，或是类比推理，因为金子在伊斯兰之前和之后都被人们用作交易中衡量价值的标准。"[3] 沙斐仪没有听闻相关圣训的可能性极其微小。因此，唯一的理由便是类比，正如伊本·阿拉比在《提尔米齐圣训注释》中所说："先知时代阿拉伯人的贸易使用银币，所以先知提到了银子，用以指代所有使用的货币。他提到银子，被理解为包括各种货币。但当后世之人开始要求对每一事项都有具体经文时，真主关闭了他们面前的正道之门，他们便偏离了前人的道路。"4

A. Al Shafi'i says in al Risalah about the zakatability of gold, "The Messenger of God (p) imposed zakah on silver. Afterward, Muslims collected zakah on gold, either by virtue of a text from the Prophet that did not reach us, or by analogy, since gold is used by people as a determinant of value for their exchange, before and after Islam."3 The possibility that there is a saying that did not reach al Shafi'i is very remote. The only reason, then, is analogy, as stated by Abu Bakr bin al 'Arabi in Sharh al Tirmidhi: "The Arabs' trade at the time of the Prophet used silver currency, so the Prophet mentions it to mean all money used. His mentioning of silver was understood as inclusive of all kinds of money, but when people in later generations started asking for a specific text on everything, God shut in their faces the door of guidance and they deviated from the track of their predecessors."4

B. 关于贸易资产是否应缴天课，没有明确的经文依据。尽管如此，伊本·蒙迪尔（Ibn al-Mundhir）记载，依据公议（ijma'），贸易资产应缴天课。只有达希里派（Zahiris）持不同意见。

B. There is no clear text about the zakatability of trade assets. In spite of that, Ibn al Mundhir reports that they are zakatable by ijma'. Only the Zahiris disagree.

C. 'Umar 下令对马匹征收天课，因为他认识到马匹已成为有价值的财富。只要马匹是为了繁殖而饲养并且是放牧的，阿布·哈尼法便同意 'Umar 在这一问题上的看法。

C. 'Umar ordered zakah on horses because he realized that they had become valuable wealth. Abu Hanifah agrees with 'Umar on this issue as long as the horses are retained for growth and pastured naturally.

D. 艾哈迈德（Ahmad）根据圣门弟子的传述，并类推谷物和果实，主张对货币征收天课。他还类推金银，主张对一切矿产征收天课，并引用普遍性经文："从大地中为你们生产的，你们应当施舍……"作为依据。 E. 祖赫里（Al Zuhri）、哈桑（al Hasan）和艾布·优素福（Abu Yusuf）类推埋藏物（rikaz）和矿产，主张对珍珠、琥珀及其他海中提取物征收五分之一的天课。

前面各章讨论过的应纳天课的生长性财产分为两类：

Zakatable growing assets discussed in previous chapters are of two kinds:

首先是那些天课按本金及其增值合并计算、每年一次的资产，例如牲畜天课和商业资产的天课。在这种情况下，资产与其增值紧密结合在一起，天课的税率为百分之二点五。

First are assets whose zakah is calculated on the principal and its increments together one every year, such as zakah on livestock and trade assets. In this case, the asset and its increment are integrated very closely, and the rate of zakah is two-and-a-half percent.

第二类是这样的资产:其天课只按收获后所得的增长或增益来计算。该资产可以是实物固定的,例如土地;也可以是非固定的,例如蜜蜂。此类资产的天课税率为百分之十或百分之五,正如我们在本书前面所见。

Second are assets whose zakah is calculated only on the growth or increase once the harvest is obtained. The asset may be materially fixed, such as land, or non-fixed, such as bees. The rate of zakah on this kind of asset is ten percent or five percent as we have seen earlier in this book.

如果建筑物和工厂需要缴纳天课，那么天课应当以什么为依据来计算，这些资产在天课方面又应如何对待？

If buildings and factories are zakatable, on what basis must zakah be calculated and how are these assets to be treated with regard to zakah?

许多人可能认为，前代的法学家之所以没有讨论出租房屋是否应缴天课，是因为这种做法在过去并不普遍。这一理由总体上是成立的，但仍能找到少数法学家主张此类房屋应缴天课，只是他们计算天课的方法各不相同。有人建议将出租房屋视同贸易存货，每年进行估价，并按估价金额以百分之二点五的税率缴纳天课；另一些人则根据这些资产所产生的收入来计算天课，看其是否达到尼萨卜，并是否满足其他应缴天课的条件。

Many people may think that preceding jurists did not discuss the zakatability of rented houses because the practice was not common in the past. This justification is generally valid, but one may find a few jurists who expressed the view that such houses are zakatable, although they have different ways of calculating zakah. Some suggest that rented houses be treated like trade inventory, appraised every year and zakated on the appraisal value at a rate of two-and-a-half percent, while others calculate zakah on the income these assets bring in, to see if it reaches nisab and fulfills other conditions for zakatability.

这种观点要求每年对用于获取收入的资产进行估价，例如出租的建筑物、飞机、船只等。然后，天课便按照这一估价，加上年末剩余的净收入，以百分之二点五的比率征收。逊尼派和什叶派的教法学家都持有这一观点。

This view requires an appraisal of the asset used for income such as rented buildings, airplanes, ships, etc., every year. Zakah is then charged on the basis of this appraisal plus whatever net earnings remain at the end of the year, at a rate of two-and-a-half percent. This view is shared by jurists from Sunni and Shi'i schools of thought.

伊本·阿基勒是一位伟大而思维敏锐的罕百里法学家,他提出了这一观点。伊本·盖伊601@ 在其所著《Bada'i al Fawa'id》中引用并认可了这一观点:"伊本·阿基勒依据艾哈迈德关于用于出租的首饰应当缴纳天课的信仰,认为用于出租的房屋以及任何用于出租目的的资产或商品也必须缴纳天课。" 伊本·盖伊姆继续写道:"伊本·阿基勒指出,这一观点是我们对首饰处理方式的逻辑延伸。依照我们的学派,首饰不需缴纳天课,但如果首饰被用作出租物品,则应缴纳天课。如果指定用于出租的状态使原本不需缴纳天课的物品变为需要缴纳,那么这一原则就必须适用于所有不需缴纳天课的物品,也就是说,一件物品是否需要缴纳天课取决于其所处的状态。金和银需要缴纳天课,但当它们被制成供女性个人使用的饰品时,其天课便被取消。若同一件首饰再次转变为出租物品,则重新需要缴纳天课。这必然表明,房屋、用于骑乘的牲畜、器皿和家具在出租时同样需要缴纳天课。"7

Ibn 'Aqil, a great, sharp-minded Hanbali jurist, exposses this view, as quoted approvingly by Ibn al Qayim in his book Bada'i al Fawa'id: "Ibn 'Aqil, in application of Ahmad's belief in the zakatability of jewelry used for rent, says that zakah must also be applied to buildings designated fro rent and every assets or commodity that is used for rental purposes." Ibn al Qayim continues, "Ibn 'Aqil points out that this view is the logical extension of our treatment of jewelry. Jewelry, according to our school, is not subject to zakah, but if jewelry is used as a rental item, zakah becomes obligated. If the designation for rent obligates zakah on an item that was originally not zakatable, this must apply to all non-zakatable items, i.e., the zakatability of an item depends on its state. Gold and silver are zakatable, but when they are made into women's ornaments designated for personal use, zakah is abolished on them. If again that same piece of jewelry changes its state into a rental item, zakah is imposed on it again. This necessarily indicates that buildings, animals used for riding, utensils, and furniture become zakatable when they are rented out."7

在我看来，伊玛目艾哈迈德的这一观点非常有力。它基于一个重要原则：零星资产、用于满足基本需要的资产不需缴纳天课，而增值性资产则需缴纳天课。出租所得的资产无疑是增值性的。合法的装饰性首饰既不增值，又满足佩戴者的需要；但如果将其用于出租，它就成为需缴纳天课的增值性资产。据伊本·鲁世德所述，马立克也持相同观点。8

In my opinion, this view of Imam Ahmad is very strong. It is based on the important principle that zakah is not obligated on non-growing assets or on assets used to fulfill essential needs, and is obligated on growing assets, An asset that generates rental income is undoubtedly a growing one. Lawful jewelry used as ornamentation does not grow, and also fulfills a need for the woman who wears it, but if it is used for rental purposes it becomes a growing asset subject to zakah. This opinion is also shared by Malik, according to Ibn Rushd.8

作者在《al Bahr al Zakhkhar》中写道，属于宰德派什叶派的哈达维派认为，凡是用于获利的一切财产都应缴纳天课，其依据是经文“从他们的财产中取出施舍”是普遍性的，适用于这些财产。这些财产是为了产生收入而设的，应当与商业资产一样对待，若达到尼萨布则应缴纳天课。《Matn al Azhar》的作者及其注释者同样属于宰德派，他们对所有收益可以持续更新而本身不会耗尽的财产持相同看法。因此，按照他们的观点，马、骡、驴、房屋等财产不需缴纳天课，除非它们被用于商业或生产性经营。

The author of al Bahr al Zakhkhar writes that the Hadawis, who are Zaidi Shi'ites, obligate zakah on all items used for making profit, on the basis that the verse "Out of their wealth take sadaqah" is general and applies to these assets. These assets are intended for income generation, and must be treated similarly to trade assets and zakated if they reach nisab.9 The author of Matn al Azhar and its commentators, also Zaidi, adopt the same opinion regarding all assets whose benefits renew without exhausting the asset itself. Thus zakah, according to them is not obligated on horses, mules, donkeys, houses, etc., except when they are used for trade or productive exploitation.

据传，阿尔-哈迪曾说，如果有人购买一匹马是为了出售其繁殖后代，那么这匹马及其后代都应当缴纳天课。阿尔-穆艾亚德·阿布·阿尔-阿巴斯和阿布·塔利卜都这样说，理由是“因为它们都变成了商品资产”。阿尔-穆艾亚德接着说：“同样的规定也适用于蚕。”阿尔-胡盖尼也说，同样的规定也适用于购买树木以出售其果实的人。也有人说，这一规定同样适用于为繁殖、产奶、制作乳制品和羊毛而饲养的牛和羊。10

Al Hadi is reported to have said that if a person purchases a horse for the purpose of selling its reproduction, the horse and its offspring are all zakatable. Al Mu'ayyad Abu al 'Abbas and Abu Talib say this is "because all become like trade assets." Al Mu'ayyad continues, "The same applies to the silkworm." Al Huqaini says the same also applies to the person who has purchased a tree in order to sell its fruits. It is also said to be applied to cows and sheep bred for their reproduction, milk, and dairy products and wool.10

作者在《Al Bahr al Zakhkhar》中引用以下证据来支持这一观点：

The author of al Bahr al Zakhkhar states as evidence supporting this view:

1. 关于天课义务的经文具有普遍性。

1. The generality or the texts regarding the obligation of zakah.

2. 用于生产和经营的资产与贸易资产之间的相似之处在于：两者都是旨在获取盈利增长的财富形式。10

2. The similarity between assets used for production and exploitation and trade assets; both are forms of wealth intended for profitable growth.10

有些倾向于限缩天课义务的学者，例如沙意卡尼（al Shawkani）和西迪克·哈桑·汗（Siddiq Hasan Khan），反对这一观点。这并不令人意外，因为他们同样反对商品资产和蔬菜需要缴纳天课。他们的论证主要集中在两点上：

Scholars who tend to restrict the obligation of zakah, such as al Shawkani and Siddiq Hasan Khan, object to this opinion. This is no surprise, because they also object to the zakatability of trade assets and vegetables. Their argument concentrates on two points:

A. 「穆斯林的奴隶和母马不需缴纳天课」这一圣训的文本，在免除马匹天课方面是普遍性的。这一免除包括马匹被用于出租或用于贸易的情况。

A. The text of the saying "No zakah is obligated on a Muslim's slaves and mares" is general in its exemption of horses from zakah. This exemption includes cases in which horses are used for renting or for trade.

B. 对于那些众所周知免征天课的财产，如房屋、建筑物和乘骑牲畜，仅仅因为它们被出租而征收天课的做法，在圣门弟子及其后的世代中是闻所未闻的，更不用说《古兰经》和《逊奈》对此毫无依据。尽管他们会出租自己的房屋、果园和牲畜，但这些人从未想过要在年终时就其不动产或牲畜缴纳百分之二点五的税款。他们在没有受到这类苛刻义务困扰的情况下安然离世，直到伊历第三世纪末，这种天课形式才仅凭与商业资产的类比而被提出，而这种类比本身就值得怀疑。此外，这一类比本身也是不正确的，因为出租是交换资产的使用收益，而商业交易交换的则是资产本身。11

B. The obligation of zakah on assets known to be exempted such as houses, buildings, and riding animals, simply because they are being rented, was unheard of among the Companions and the generations that followed them, not to mention its lack of support from Qur'an and Sunnah. In spite of the fact that they used to hire and rent their houses, orchards and animals, it never occurred to any of these people to pay, at the end of the year, a 2,5% tax on their real estate or animals, They passed away with their peace of mind unbroken by such harsh obligations, until the end of the third century of Hijrah when this form of zakah was claimed on the basis of mere analogy to trade assets, which itself is dubious. Moreover, this analogy is itself incorrect because in renting one exchanges the benefit of the asset, while in trade one exchanges the asset itself.11

简而言之,这一观点认为:原则上,人们没有义务必须说什么,除非有明确的证据要求他们这样做。就本案而言,并不存在这样的证据。没有任何关于先贤学者的记载,也没有任何经文或圣训涉及此事。至于将其类比于商业资产的说法,由于二者之间存在差异,该类比是错误的。

In brief, this view says that people are not obligated to say anything in principle, except when there is clear evidence that requires then to do so. In the case on hand, such evidence does not exist. Nothing is reported from the precedent-setting scholars, no verse or saying talks about it. As for the analogy to trade assets, it is erroneous because of the difference between them.

可以认为，“穆斯林的奴隶和母马不必缴纳天课”这句话，其豁免的依据在于：这些财产是用于个人使用的，满足的是服务和出行等基本需要。自第三代起，绝大多数学者便主张：若这些财产是为贸易而备的，则需缴纳天课。

One can argue that the saying "No zakah is obligated on a Muslim's slaves and mares" founds the exemption on the basis that these items are for personal use that satisfies essential needs for services and transportation. The great majority of scholars, as early as the third generation, obligate zakah on them if they are designated for trade.

伊本·蒙迪尔甚至提到，在这一问题上存在伊જ马仪（共识）。这一经文的措辞从来没有妨碍这样的理解。关于租赁资产和生产性资产是否需要缴纳天课，圣门弟子没有相关的传述，这可能是因为在他们的时代此类情况很少出现。将固定资产用于生产或出租，在当时并不普遍，不足以让人们专门就此发表意见。《巴哈尔·扎赫哈尔》的作者指出，哈迪派与共识相悖的说法毫无根据，因为无论哪一方面，我们的前辈在这一问题上都没有任何传述。《艾兹哈尔注释》的作者评论说："我认为，哈迪的观点并不与共识相悖。因为圣门弟子和再传弟子要么讨论过这一问题并存在分歧，要么就某一观点达成了一致（但未有传述），要么根本没有讨论过这一问题。对一个新出现的问题进行讨论并就此发表意见，并无不妥。"13

Ibn al Mundhir even mentions that there is ijma' on this. The wording of the saying never prevented such understanding, The lack of reports from the Companions concerning the zakatability of rented and productive assets may be attributed to the rarity of such incidents at their time. The use of fixed assets for productive purposes or rent was not so common as to make it important enough for people to give their opinions about it. The author of al Bahr al Zakhkhar notes that the claim that Hadawis contradict ijma' on this issues is baseless, because there are no reports from our predecessces on this issues either way.12 The author of Sharh al Azhar comments, "I believe that the view of al Hadi does not contradict ijma', because the Companions and the Followers either discussed this issue and differed on it or agreed on an opinion [nothing is reported] or did not discuss this issue at all. No harm is done by discussing it a new and expressing opinions on it."13

这种将生息租赁资产与贸易资产进行类比的做法有一定道理，因为二者都是能够产生收益的增值资本，而且其所有者都是商人，意图将资本投入能够产生收益的活动以获取利润。交换物品的使用权与交换物品本身之间的差别，并不足以构成区别对待的理由。甚至可以说，只交换使用权而保全本金的人，比交换物品本身的人更有获利的保障。

The analogy between productive rented assets and trade assets makes some sense because each is a growing capital that produces income, and the owners of each are businessmen who intend to invest their capital in income generating activities for the purpose of profit. The difference between exchanging the utility of the item or exchanging the item itself is not substantial enough to warrant different treatment. One may even argue that a person who exchanges only the utility and preserves the principal has more guarantee of profitability than the person who exchanges the item itself.

然而,如果我们深入思考,会发现这两种资产形式之间存在一些差异。

However, if we think deeply we may find a few differences between these two forms of assets.

艾哈迈德据传曾说，出租房屋的租金一经收到，即须缴纳天课。此说由伊本·古达玛引述。[14] 在马立克学派的著作中，祖尔鲁格在《<法律备忘录>注释》（Sharh al Risalah）中写道："对于用于获取收入的资产（如出租房屋），其是否应缴天课有两种观点：一种认为，应在出售时就其所得的价值缴纳天课；另一种认为，应在取得收入时就其收益缴纳天课。"15

Ahmad is reported to have said that zakah is obligated on the rent of rented houses whenever the rent is received. This is quoted by Ibn Qudamah.14 In the writings of the Malikites, Zarruq states in Sharh al Risalah that "There are two opinions on the zakatability of assets used for income, such as rental housing. One, zakah is due on their value received when sold, and two, zakah is due on their income when it is acquired."15

这种第二种看法很重要，它的根源可以追溯到一些圣门弟子和再传弟子的较早观点。

This second opinion is important and has its roots in older views from some Companions and Followers.

凡主张已得之财(未满一年)即应计算天课者,对工厂产出所得的收入、汽车、建筑、飞机、设备、家具等之租金收入,同样适用此规则。我们将在经文章节中看到,这是伊本·阿拔斯、伊本·迈斯欧德、穆阿维叶、纳昔尔、巴基尔和达乌德的观点。据称这也是欧麦尔·本·阿卜杜勒·阿齐兹、哈桑·巴士里、祖赫里、麦库尔和奥扎尔的观点。16

All those who say that earned funds are zakatable when acquired (without the passage of one year) apply the same rule with regard to zakah on income earned from the output of factories and rental income of cars, buildings, planes, equipment, furniture, and the like. We shall see in the text chapter that this is the opinion of Ibn 'Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Mu'awiyah, al Nasir, al Baqir, and Daud. It is also attributed to 'Umar bin.'Abd al 'Aziz, al Hasan al Basri, al Zuhri, Makhul, and al Awza'i.16

这一观点的证据是那段泛指的圣训："铸币银每四十分之一应缴纳天课。"有些教法学家还引用了阿里·哈迪（al Hadi）所提出的论证，即类比：用于出租或生产的财产与用于出售的财产同理，理由是出售某物的使用收益，就如同出售货物一样。

The evidence for this opinion is the generality of the saying ''One-quarter of onetenth is obligated on minted silver." Some jurists add the same argument given by al Hadi, the analogy of assets designated for renting or production and assets designated for sale, on the grounds that selling the benefit of the item is like selling a commodity.

但这一类比意味着，出租资产的尼萨布应与货币的尼萨布相同，即两百迪拉姆，费率应为2.5%，正如《纳西尔教法中的哈希尔》(al Hasir Fi Madhhab al Nasir)的作者所言。17 值得注意的是，按照这一观点，满一年的条件并不适用。

But this analogy implies that rented assets' nisab should be the same nisab of money, two hundred dirhams, and the rate should be 2.5%, as stated by the author of al Hasir Fi Madhhab al Nasir.17 Notably, according to this view, the condition of the passage of one year does not apply.

这一观点与先例确立的学者中的第二种主张相一致,即对于来自出租、受租以及生产性资产的收益,应当缴纳天课;但它认为适用的税率是农业的税率,即十分之一或二十分之一,这是类比耕地而得出的。拥有土地并收取其果实和产出的人,与拥有建筑物或工厂并收取其租金或产品的人之间,存在相似之处。

This opinion agrees with the second trend among the precedent-setting jurists in that zakah is due on earned income from exploited, rented, and productive assets, but it suggests that the applicable rate is that of agriculture, one-tenth or one-twentieths by analogy to agricultural land. There is similarity between owner of land who collects its fruits and produce, and the owner of a building or factory who collects its rent or output.

这是已故学者阿布·扎赫拉、阿卜杜勒·瓦哈卜·哈拉夫和阿卜杜勒·拉赫曼·哈桑的观点，他们在1952年于大马士革的一次关于天课的讲座中提出了这一看法。他们将财产分为三类。

This is the opinion of the late scholars Abu Zahrah, 'Abd al Wahhab Khallaf and 'Abd al Rahman Hasan, which they expressed in a lecture on zakah in Damascus, 1952.18 They classify assets into three categories:

1. 为满足个人和家庭需要而购置的资产，例如业主自住的房屋、家中为日常所需而储存的食品等。这些都不需要缴纳天课。

1. Assets acquired for the satisfaction of personal and family needs, such as houses inhabited by the owner, foodstuffs stored at home for daily use, etc. These ar not zakatable.

2. 为获利而购入的资产，或借助这些资产获利的资产。这类资产通常存放于仓库或储藏处。学者一致认为，这类资产须缴纳天课。

2. Assets acquired for the purpose of making profit with them or with their help. These assets are usually stored in vaults or storage places. They are unanimously zakatable.

它们包括先知（ﷺ）所提到的应当缴纳天课的财产种类。其他财产则依据与之相似的情况，被纳入这一类别。

They include the items mentioned by the Prophet (p) as zakatable. Other items are added to this category on the basis of similarity.

3. 有时用于增值或营利、有时用于个人需要的资产，例如首饰和家畜。法学家对这些物品是否应缴纳天课存在分歧。

3. Assets that are sometimes used for growth or profit and sometimes for personal needs, such as jewelry and domestic animals. Jurists differ on the zakatability of these items.

将这一分类应用于我们这个时代的各类资产，必然使我们把一些在我们伟大的前辈那个时代并不存在、而今天用于增值与盈利的物品也纳入应缴天课的范围。三位学者提到了这类资产中的两种。

The application of this classification to the kinds of assets we have in our time must necessarily lead us to include in zakatability items that are used today for growth and profit but were not at the time of our great predecessors. The three scholars mention two kinds of these assets.

首先是工业设备、工厂和机械，它们代表生产性资本，因为它们是产生收入的资产。这些机械和工厂不同于那些用双手工作的铁匠或木匠的工具。这三位学者得出的结论是，厂房和设备属于应缴天课的财产，因为它们是应缴天课的被剥削资产。245

First, industrial equipment, plants, and machinery that represent productive capital, because they are the assets that produce income. These machinery and plants are not like tools of the blacksmith or carpenter who works with his hands. These three scholars reach the conclusion that plant and equipment are zakah table because they are Zakah on Exploited Assets 245

这三位受人尊敬的学者的观点，与我们前辈所确立的第二种趋势一致，即对房屋和工厂的收入征收天课。唯一的区别在于所适用的税率。此观点最具说服力，因为它基于固定资产收入与农田收入之间的合理类比。这是我选定的观点，并附有以下说明：

The view of these three respected scholars is consistent with the second trend established by our predecessors in charging zakah on the income of buildings and factories. The only difference is in the rate applied. This opinion is most persuasive, since it is based on the sound analogy between the income of fixed assets and that of agricultural land. This is my selected view with the following remarks:

这一观点将工厂和建筑物列为应纳天课的财产，却没有提供可普遍适用于所有类似生产性资本的一般标准。我们这个时代还出现了其他形式的盈利性投资，例如牧场、家禽养殖场以及运输租赁公司。所有这些形式的投资资本都与工厂和建筑物相似，应当同样对待，不应因投资资本的形式不同而区别对待。我们注意到，先知ﷺ曾从蜂蜜中征收天课，蜂蜜是蜜蜂的产出，是一种可移动的财产，与建筑物不同。

This opinion includes factories and buildings among zakatable assets, without providing general criteria that can be applied to all similar productive capital. This era of ours witnesses other forms of profitable investment, such as cattle and poultry farms and transportation rental firms. All these forms of invested capital are similar to factories and buildings and should be treated like them, without distinction between the different forms invested capital may take. we have noted that the Prophet (p) collected zakah from honey, which is the output of bees, a mobile asset, unlike buildings.

另外，将出租的房屋与农田相类比，也并非没有争议。有观点认为，获得农田收益的地主与获得建筑物收益的房主之间没有区别，但这一说法被驳斥，理由是：农业天课是基于对农作物本身的所有权，而不是基于对土地的所有权，而即使土地是出租的，作物的所有权仍可能存在。因此，正确的类比应当是：只获得土地租金的出租地主，与同样获得租金的出租房屋的房主之间的类比。这样的类比，必须先讨论农田租金是否应缴纳天课，这一点已在前面的章节中论述，并得出了应当缴纳天课的结论。

Also, the similarity between rented houses and agricultural land is not free of dispute. The claim that there is no difference between an owner who gets income from his agricultural land and an owner who collects income from buildings is rejected on the grounds that zakah on agriculture is not based on ownership of the land, but on ownership of the crops themselves, which can occur even though the land is rented. The sound analogy must be between the owner of rented land who gets only its rent, and the owner of a rented building who also obtains rent. Such an analogy must certainly be preceded by a discussion of the zakatability of rent on agricultural land, which was done in the preceding chapters, and the conclusion reached that is must be zakated.

最后，建筑物与农业用地之间的类比是不被接受的，因为农业用地是一种持续不断的收入来源，不会随着岁月的流逝而耗尽，而建筑物则有一定的使用年限，到期后将会废弃，甚至可能被拆除。这种类比上的困难可以通过接受当今税收制度中所采用的资本折旧豁免来克服：即每年从固定资产的收入中扣除一定金额，目的是积累足够的资金，以便在旧资产的生产寿命结束时购置新的资产。考虑到这种折旧或摊销之后，有着有限寿命的建筑物和机器就可以与农业用地相似起来，因为农业用地的寿命并不是有限的。

Lastly, the analogy between buildings and agricultural land is not accepted, because agricultural land is a perpetual source of income that is not exhausted as years go by, while buildings have a certain number of years at the end of which they will be dehabitated and possibly demolished. This difficulty in analogy can be overcome by accepting the exemption of capital depreciation used in today's taxation systems, whereby a certain amount is deducted every year from the income of fixed assets, with the purpose of accumulating sufficient amount to acquire a new asset at the end of the old one's productive lifespan.20 With this consideration of depreciation or amortization, the buildings and machinery that have a finite lifespan can become similar to agricultural land, whose lifespan is not finite.

这三位知名教授并未讨论建筑物和工厂收入的应纳天课基数（尼萨卜）问题。这一基数应当是多少？它是否与谷物和果实的基数相同，即五瓦斯格？还是应当与货币的基数相同？看来，只要建筑物和工厂的所有者以货币形式从租金中获得收入，其尼萨卜就应当与货币的尼萨卜相似。

The three renowned professors do not discuss the issue of nisab on the income of buildings and factories. How much should this nisab be? Is it like that of crop and fruits, i.e. five wasq, or is it like the nisab of money? It seems that nisab should be set as similar to that of money, as long as owners of buildings and factories receive their income from rent in monetary form.

由于收入的流动总是与时间相关，因此就产生了收入累积的时间问题：应当以月收入、周收入还是年收入来计算是否达到尼萨卜（Nisab）？看起来，年度是考虑尼萨卜最合适的时间段，尤其是因为个人和国家的收入，以及租金收入，通常都是以年为单位进行估算和考量的。据载，有些学者认为，所得收入在取得时即应缴纳天课，他们也认为，如果全年的租金达到尼萨卜，那么在收到租金时就必须缴纳天课。

Since the flow of income is always time related, the question of the time for the accumulation of income arises. Should we apply nisab on the monthly, weekly, or yearly income? It seems that the yearly interval is the most suitable period of time for the consideration of nisab, especially since incomes of individuals and states, as well as rental proceeds, are usually estimated and considered on a yearly basis. It is mentioned that some of the scholars who believe that earned income is zakatable when acquired believe also that if the yearly rent reaches nisab, it must be zakated when rent is obtained.

因此,按月收取的租金和收入,应视同分期采收的果实,然后将所有收入相加,这是罕百里学派的观点。《穆格尼》的作者说:"在数次采摘中收获的果实,只要属于同一年的收成,就应当相加,无论它们是否同时成熟。当第一次收获到来时,同一年内同一植株的第二次结果,应当与第一次相加,就像一年结两次果的棕榈树一样,两次收成都要相加。"21

Consequently, monthly earned rent and income will be treated like fruits that are collected periodically and then all the collections are added together, which is the opinion of the school of Ahmad. The author of al Mughni says, "Fruits collected on several pickings are added together as long as they are of the same year's harvest, whether they all ripen together or not, and when the first harvest comes, the second growing of the same plants during the year must be added to the first, like in the case of palm trees that carry fruit twice a year. Both harvests are added together."21

我的看法是,天课应当以净收入为基础计算,即在扣除工资、维持费用、税款等开支与成本之后计算。此外,根据阿塔及其他学者的观点,对他人的债务以及个人和家庭的开支也可以扣除。阿塔说:"扣除你的开支,然后就其余部分缴纳天课。"伊本·阿拉比在其《提尔米兹圣训注释》(Sharh al Tirmidhi)中也支持这一观点。

My opinion is that zakah must be calculated on the basis of net income, after deducting expenses and costs such as wages, maintenance, taxes, etc. Additionally, debts that are due to others and personal and family expenses are deductible, according to the opinion of 'Ata and others. 'Ata says to "Deduct your expenses and pay zakah on the rest." This is also supported by Ibn al 'Arabi in his Sharh al Tirmidhi.

毫无疑问，确实有一些人，他们唯一的收入来源是房屋的租金、小作坊的收益或类似的所得。这类收入可能属于年老退休的人、寡妇或孤儿。那么，这些以及类似情况的所有者，其唯一收入来源是固定资产所产生的租金或产出，是否允许从中扣除一定数额作为生活开支？还是必须以总收入计算天课（zakah）？

Undoubtedly, there exist people whose only source of income is the rent from a house, the earnings from a small craftshop, or something similar. Such incomes may belong to an old retired person, a widow, or orphaned children. Are these and similar owners whose only source of income is rent of output derived from fixed assets allowed a certain amount as a deduction for their cost of living. Or must zakah be calculated on the gross income?

显然，免除最低生活费用的规定与伊斯兰的公正相一致，只要这一最低标准是由虔诚正直的专家来确定的。

It is obvious that an exemption of a minimum cost of living is consistent with the justice of Islam, so long as such a minimum is determined by experts who are righteous.

天课只有在净余额达到尼萨布时才需计算。这一观点有两点依据：

Zakah must be calculated on the residual only if it equals nisab. This opinion is substantiated by two points:

1. 法学家认为，所有者为满足基本需要所必需的财产，被视为已被耗尽，就天课而言，等同于不存在。他们以口渴之人的水为例：口渴之人即使身边有水，也可以用土代替水来行净法（tayammum），因为只要这水被此人的口渴所耗尽，它就不能被计算在内。

1. Jurists consider assets which are needed by owners to satisfy basic needs as exhausted and, with respect to zakah, non-existing. They give the example of water for thirsty person. A thirsty person can make ablution with soil [tayammum] in spite of the presence of water, because as long as the water is exhausted by the thirst of the person, it cannot be counted.

2. 前面提到的圣训规定，要为椰枣和葡萄的估产者设定估算，以减轻业主的负担。先知ﷺ吩咐他们"扣除三分之一；如果不扣除三分之一，那就扣除四分之一"。从应纳天课的总量中扣除这部分，是考虑到业主自己食用，以满足其所需。按照这些圣训的精神，扣除三分之一或四分之一，在计算上甚至可能更加容易、简便。

2. Sayings mentioned earlier ordain estimators of dates and grapes to make it easy on the owners. The Prophet told them to "discount one-third, and if you do not discount one-third, then discount one-fourth," This discount from the total zakatable quantity is a consideration for what they eat to fulfill their needs. It might even be easier and simpler in calculation to discount one-third or one-fourth, in compliance with the spirit of these saying.