Heads for Zakah Spending

Economic Issues
Amin Ahsan Islahi
(Tr. by:Jhangeer Hanif)
The heads for zakah spending have been enlisted in Surah Tawbah as under:

: )
Sadaqat are only for the benefit of faqirs and miskins, those who work
for the collection thereof, those who must be appeased, for
emancipating slaves, for freeing debtors of their debt burden, for the
cause of Allah and for the wayfarers. It is a duty imposed by Allah.
Allah is knower and wise. (9:60)
Now, an explanation of this verse follows.
1. Faqirs and Miskins
The first head described for spending zakah is faqirs and miskins. Since they
have been mentioned first, they should have priority over all others as far as
spending of zakah is concerned. When these two words are used separately in two
different sentences, they convey a synonymous meaning. However, when they
come simultaneously in a single sentence, a subtle difference in their connotation
may be discerned. By faqir is meant a person who though is able to work and earn,
and has the positive intention to do so, yet he faces financial constraints to earn
livelihood. By miskin is meant a person who has been exhausted and worn out by a
ceaseless wave of adversities so much so that he loses hope and finds no strength
to overcome difficulties, and ultimately ends up becoming disillusioned with himself.
Zakah, first of all, should be spent to help them out so that they may be able to live
their life honourably.
For making their life honourable, just as it will be necessary to provide food,
shelter and clothes to them, a proper arrangement for their education and training
as well as for meeting their other psychological needs will also have to be made so
that they may feel equal to the people around them in both social and ethical
terms. Obviously, to begin with, their immediate needs should first be met on an
urgent basis. Then, a comprehensive plan should be devised to help them stand on
their feet so that they may not remain dependent upon others and get on with their
lives on their own. Rather, they should ultimately become capable of extending a
helping hand to others. To achieve this objective, in addition to spending zakah on
the arrangement of food, shelter and clothes for these people, indispensable is it to
set up educational and training institutes, libraries, publishing houses, and
vocational training institutes where they and their children may learn some skills in
order to earn livelihood for themselves and their families. A free medical dispensary
may be opened to provide free medicines to these poor people. Maternity hospitals
can also be constructed with the help of zakah where their women may get free
medical treatment. Similarly, zakah can also be used to free them of their debt
burden while alive or dead, and to perform the funeral rites of their dear departed.
There is no doubt that in some of these cases the condition of exclusive personal
possession will be fulfilled; but in others, it will not. However, poor people will
benefit in all cases without any exception. One may understand this phenomenon
as that instead of exclusive personal possession, there is collective possession of
the entire poor community as they all are getting benefit from this fund. And we
have already pointed out that the word has been used in the Holy Quran
in the sense of collective possession.
2. Amilin-i Zakah
The second head where zakah may be spent is Amilin-i zakah (government
officials). These people do not originally deserve zakah by virtue of their
circumstances as do faqirs and muhtajs. This is only because of the work they have
been entrusted with, that is, to help collect and spend zakah. Because of their work
being indispensable, they have been mentioned second to the faqirs and muhtajs.
These people include tahsil dar (collector), his registrar, and the troops that he has:
In the matter of zakah, the word Amilin includes people as tahsil dar
(collector), accountant, dispenser, labourer, treasurer, and manager.
1

A study of historical and Hadith narratives show that, many a time, this work
used to be outsourced on a commission basis. When the time to collect zakah would
come, further workforce would be hired to carry out this work. For the risk of
digression, I avoid delving deeper in this discussion. The only thing I wanted to
point out is that, in an Islamic government, all the government employees, of
whatever rank or cadre, involved in the business of zakah in one way or other will
be paid from the zakah fund. The accounts department, established to keep a
record of this fund, will also be financed by this fund. Consequently, if the officials
appointed to carry out these things can be paid from zakah, why cannot the
expenses incurred on transportation, disbursement, and security arrangement of
the zakah be met from this fund?
The answer to this question has to be in the affirmative. As an obvious corollary,
the non-governmental religious institutions will also be right in spending from zakah
on those whom they appoint for helping in the collection and the disbursement of
zakah provided these institutions undertake this work in the absence of a proper
Islamic government. Once they take up this task, they are legally authorized to
meet all the incidental expenditures like staff salaries, maintaining proper books of
accounts, travelling and conveyance, security, and other expenditures on any kind
of propagation needed for this task. Thus this matter rests entirely upon their
discretion.
3. Muallafah al-Qulub
The third head prescribed for spending zakah is muallafah al-qulub. Ibn Kathir
has enlisted the following categories of people that come within the definition of
muallafah al-qulub:
i. Non-Muslim leaders who are desired to convert to Islam.
ii. People who have just converted to Islam, about whom it is feared that they
will revert and thus be harmful for Islam.
iii. Influential people who wield a significant influence over their companions,
extending a hand of friendship towards those who can be helpful in winning their
companions hearts.
iv. Tribal chiefs that help the Islamic government in the collection of zakah from
their respective regions and that help secure the borders of the Islamic country
from the onslaught of the enemy troops.
According to Ibn Jawzi, the number of fresh converts to Islam and non-Muslims
who were paid heavy amounts from zakah fund are recorded to be almost fifty in
early Islamic history. The reason that they were awarded these grants was either to
win their hearts completely in favour of Islam or to make them at least have a
sympathetic attitude toward it. Some of these people have also been named by
Imam Shawkani in Nayl al-Awtar, who were given one hundred camels each. We
reproduce these names here so that it may be ascertained that what type of
influential people and tribal chiefs were considered as falling within the definition of
muallafah al-qulub worthy of being paid from the zakah fund.
The list goes:
i. Abu Sufyan Ibn Harab
ii. Safwan Ibn Umayyah
iii. Ayniyyah Ibn Hisan
iv. Iqra Ibn Habis
v. Abbas Ibn Mirdas
vi. Alqamah Ibn Ilathah
Ibn Kathir has also mentioned the name of Zayd al-Khayr as one possible
recipient of this favour from the Holy Prophet (sws). They who are well acquainted
with the early history of Islam know, for sure, that most of these people embraced
Islam after having seen the grandeur of Muslims. In other words, it was not the
true message of Islam that appealed to them; they surrendered and accepted faith
only because of the impregnable might of the Muslims. Safwan Ibn Umayyah
continued to receive immense favours for quite a long time from the Holy Prophet
(sws) in spite of his kufr. It is narrated about him that he said: the Holy Prophet
(sws) paid me after the battle of Hunayn when I could only find myself harbouring
seething hatred against the Prophet (sws); however, the favours never ceased until
the time came when I could only find myself feeling immense love for the Holy
Prophet (sws).
Having a cursory look at the names enlisted above and the objectives discussed,
every person could make a judgment as to the nature of these grants. Of course,
they were entirely of political nature. People who are politically important and wield
a significant amount of influence over their friends and fellows should be won over
in favour of the Islamic government. And even if they have entered the folds of
Islam only superficially, they should further be attracted to Islam so that they may
build up a strong faith.
According to the Hanafites, this head of account has been closed ever since the
supremacy and absolute authority of Islam got established. However, this viewpoint
is assailable for certain reasons, of which the explanation follows.
It is argued that Abu Bakr (rta) and Umar (rta) deprived certain tribal chiefs of
the favours that were being showered over them in order to please them. This
means that this head was only available as long as Islam was in the process of
gaining supremacy. Once Islam attained it, this head was closed for good. I do not
find myself in agreement with this conclusion although I concur with what Abu Bakr
(rta) and Umar (rta) did. To my mind, their decision simply implies that steps may
be taken to withhold certain benefits given to people of political importance once
the Islamic state has been established on impregnable foundations and is no more
in need of the crutches provided by these political figures. It is however wrong to
construe that this head is closed once and for all after the establishment of the first
Islamic government on strong footholds. Inasmuch as there was a need for the first
Islamic state to spend under this head, it would be for the states to establish in the
times to come.
If this head was closed at all after Islam acquired supremacy, it has got to be
available again in this time of crisis when Islam and its followers are living a life of
subjugation. Hardly can we find any Islamic state in the present age that needs not
to please people of political significance, whether already in harmony with the state
or at odds with it, to avert the possible opposition that can be harmful to the entire
nation.
The truth of the matter is that any state, no matter how strong it has become,
cannot be altogether independent of those political figures who wield enormous
amount of influence over different pockets of people for one reason or another. The
generous grants that flow from the USA and the USSR to other nations are not
altruistic veritably. They intend to secure certain benefits for these countries and
the ideology on which they are based. If the USA and the USSR could not help it,
how can a true Islamic state, supposing it gets established in this age, avoid
incurring some expenditure under this head? Yes, one point will definitely
distinguish an Islamic state from other states. It will incur all expenditures for
propagating the true religion and elevating the actual word of God as against these
states that spearhead the fallacious religions and erroneous ideologies sheer
disbelief, to be more precise.
This is the correct stance on the issue at hand. It is indeed of great comfort to
me that many scholars also concur in this stance. Abu Ubayd, while criticizing the
viewpoint of the Hanafites, has penned the following comments in Kitab al-Amwal:
What Hasan and Ibn Shihab has said basically pertains to the matter
at hand, that is to say, they opine that this head will remain available
in all times to come. This is exactly what our viewpoint is. The reason
is that this verse is a muhkam verse of the Holy Quran. As far as our
knowledge goes, there is nothing in the Quran and Sunnah that
abrogates this verse. An Islamic state that gives out grants to people,
who are either inclined towards Islam because of some material
benefits or who can be a potential threat to Islam because of their
power and might when they revert to disbelief or launch armed
offensives, actually meets a three pronged agenda. Firstly, it is the
directive of the Holy Quran to make such grants. Secondly, an
evident general benefit of the Muslim citizens is implied. Thirdly, there
is a chance that if these people continue to remain within the folds of
Islam, albeit ostensibly, they will someday understand its true
message and embrace it from the depth of their heart.
2

This is exactly what the viewpoint of the author of Nayl al-Awtar is on this
matter. He observes:
Apparently, the implication is that, if need be, a preacher can use
material benefits as a means to lubricate his delivery of message to
the audience. When an Islamic government finds itself in a situation
where it faces people who crave for material benefits to flow to them
from whoever they obey, and who are so powerful that the
government finds no way to subdue them by force, it should try to
win over their hearts using funds from this head. There can be no
effect of the initial supremacy of Islam on this matter since it is
evident in the above scenario, where an Islamic state [in the present
age] is still in need to make such a payment. This shows that the
initial supremacy had no consequent effect whatsoever.
3

Ibn Hazm also concurs in this viewpoint. He writes:
Some people proclaim that the expenditure under the head muallafah
al-qulub is suspended now. And I opine that this is needed more now
as ever before. Heads like muallafah al-qulub and amilin can only be
suspended when each and every person takes up the responsibility to
disburse zakah on his own. In this situation, the amilin would
obviously be missing, and the matter of muallafah al-qulub pertains
to an Islamic state, that has nothing to do with the individual.
4

These explanations of the great Muslim scholars reveal that expenditure under
the head of muallafah al-qulub is as imperative as it was ever before and can
legally be made with impunity.
One further question arises after agreement on this conclusion. It was
previously emphasized that in the absence of an Islamic state,
religious institutions should take up the task of zakah collection and
spending. Now the question arises whether these religious institutions
can legally be allowed to incur any expenditure under the head
muallafah al-qulub like an Islamic state does in order to achieve
some political objectives? In my humble opinion, the answer to this
question is in the negative. After all, it is a purely political
expenditure. An Islamic state can only be the institution that can
aptly decide the requirement of any expenditure to be incurred under
this head. Non-governmental organizations should confine their
operations to the heads that they have announced so far that they
will incur expenditures there under. For these heads alone, public has
shown confidence in these organizations that they can most
appropriately expend the zakah given to them. Only some very
obvious exceptions can be made to this policy matter for the non-
governmental organizations. For instance, if Muslims of a certain
region have come under the influence of disbelievers, and sheer
disbelief is now spreading like an epidemic there, and if these
organizations assess that by incurring some expenditure under the
head of muallafah al-qulub they can prevent some Muslims from
being used as vehicle for spreading disbelief or that this expenditure
can be helpful in putting a check to the invasion of the disbelievers,
they can proceed with this plan and use funds from zakah to spend
under the head of muallafah al-qulub.
4. Fi al-riqab
Fi al-riqab means that zakah may be used to emancipate slaves. The problem of
slavery is done away with now. However, it was prevalent at the time of the
revelation of the Holy Quran. This is why fi al-riqab was mentioned as one possible
head to help out the slaves so that they could live a free life. This was thus a
humanitarian step that Islam took.
There is a difference of opinion whether this head pertains to all slaves or those
slaves that are termed mukatib who enter into an agreement with their masters for
their freedom in exchange for a certain amount of payment. According to the
Hanafites and the Shafiites, this head relates only to the mukatib. Whereas Imam
Malik, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, Abu Thawr, Abu Ubayd and Imam Bukhari etc
opine that this head pertains to both types of slaves. According to them, to use
zakah in order to free a non-mukatib slave is not only permissible but also worthier
than using zakah to free mukatib slave. On the other hand, the Hanafites and the
Shafiites opine that some help may be extended to the slaves using zakah but they
cannot be freed completely with the help of this fund.
I have reasons to believe that the viewpoint of Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad Ibn
Hambal is more cogent and sound. Firstly, the viewpoint of the Hanafites and the
Shafiites is again based primarily on the discussion of lam
5
. But, granting this lam
to denote tamlik (exclusive personal possession) for a moment, I still see no reason
why this viewpoint has to be adopted. Because this lam is not interacting with fi al-
riqab as there is another preposition fi that interacts with this one, and all the other
heads that come after it. About this preposition, no one can ever claim that this
denotes the sense of tamlik in the subtlest way possible. As pointed out earlier, this
preposition conveys a sense of maslahat (benefit), mafad (interest) and bahbud
(welfare), of which the evident implication is that zakah can be spent for the
welfare of the slaves, and in order to free them regardless of whether tamlik is
fulfilled or not. Secondly, supposing that the sense of tamlik is somehow deducible
from the preposition fi, the serious question that arises is that why is tamlik
considered absent in a case where we free a slave by paying his master the agreed
price? Let me ask a question, in buying a miskin a loaf of bread with zakah money,
would tamlik be present or absent? If yes, then why, in Gods name, would tamlik
be absent if we buy a slave his freedom from his master? This is just an explanation
to show that our viewpoint is correct even if we take fi as conveying a sense of
tamlik. In our understanding, there is no room for this viewpoint in the first place
because fi never denotes the sense of tamlik as far as its usage goes. What it does
convey is the benefit, interest and welfare of the recipients as indicated before. This
implies that zakah can legally be spent on any arrangement that aims at the benefit
and welfare of the slaves. When a mukatib slave is in need of financial support to
pay the agreed amount, he can be helped from the zakah fund. Similarly, a
proactive initiative may be taken to buy freedom for the salves. I would even go to
this extent to clarify that if the curse of slavery again haunts mankind because of
some warfare, and some institutions are established to help free the slaves and
work for their welfare and that of their children on a mass level, no one should feel
loath to pay their zakah to them considering it an illegal expenditure.
Some people may find themselves a bit confused about the matter of proactively
freeing the slaves because it involves a sort of intifa (benefit) for the payer in that
he would be acting as a legal representative of the slave, which is actually taking a
benefit from the zakah of oneself. This is why proactive freeing of slaves should not
be allowed, they may perceive. The first point to note is that this confusion does
not arise when an Islamic state or a religious institution in the absence of an
Islamic state, spends zakah to free a slave because in that case, the legal
representation will be conferred upon the state or the institution, which is obviously
not the original zakah payer. The second point is that intifa of any kind from zakah
is prohibited inasmuch as it is for self interest, if it is aimed at while paying zakah
or charity. Where there is no such intention as to extract personal gains, and zakah
is paid entirely for the purpose of discharging the duty, any benefit that incidentally
accrue to the payer will not call into question the legitimacy of the act because he
has not targeted this benefit and it has only accrued to him incidentally. For
instance, the hajj of that pilgrim is definitely spoiled who sets off to Makkah
primarily for sight seeing and not to perform the hajj but what about the pilgrim
who leaves his homeland and goes to Makkah for the purpose of hajj originally but
also visits places of historical importance? I see no reason why the hajj of the latter
should be spoiled in spite of the other benefits that he has drawn from his visit to
Makkah.
5. Gharimin
Zakah can also be spent in helping out the people who fall within the definition of
gharimin. This word encompasses all people who have come under the burden of
debt because of the critical setback in their business or any other unfavourable
circumstances that have caused unbearable loss to them or because he pledged
some financial obligation to settle a dispute among Muslims which thereafter
became impossible for him to discharge. Mankind has to face many adversities both
caused by God and themselves. In all circumstances, when a community suffers a
loss of major proportions in the form of loss of lives, cultivations, gardens,
livestock, houses, or other assets, they should be helped with the funds of zakah
under the head of gharimin.
The help extended toward these people is based on the presumption that they
are actually the pillars of economy. Although they are presently in the whirlpool of
crisis, once rescued, they will again contribute towards the improvement of the
economy. For a flourishing economy, they are thus indispensable and should be
given a helping hand in times of crisis. This means that their help is not based on
the depression they are currently undergoing through. Their help is based on
forward looking. Because if they were to be helped for being poverty stricken, they
would not have been mentioned as a separate head for zakah as two heads were
already covering them. This is why the assessment of their needs shall be based on
a different parameter than that of the faqirs and miskins. To adduce this view of
mine, I quote:
Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to his governors that the debts of the
gharimin should be repaid. He was informed by them thus: The
people you asked us to help include such people who own a house,
and have servants, horses, good furniture and other assets in their
houses. What should we do about them? Need we repay their debts
as well? Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote them back: A Muslim needs a
house for his residence, and a servant for help in his work, and a
horse for fighting the enemy, and furniture and other things are
indispensable for household. This is why I call upon you to repay their
debts.
6

Apparently, it seems that the governors of Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz thought that
the gharimin can only be helped when they have disposed of all their assets and
have reached the status of a faqir. As long as they possess some assets, it was
illegitimate to provide any help from the funds of zakah in order to relieve them of
their debt burden. The response of Umar Ibn Abd al-Aziz made clear that the aim
of this help is not only to redress the crisis they are facing but to support them to
resume their function so that they could again become a healthy organ of the
economy as they previously were. To assess their needs on the parameter of faqirs
is therefore not appropriate. Their assessment is based on their prospective
contribution to the economy in particular and society in general.
Likewise, Umar (rta) commanded his governors during his golden reign of
justice:
With the funds of zakah, provide help to those people who have been
left with only one horde of goat after the drought. No need to provide
any support who have been left with two hordes.
7

In this narrative, the word ghanam has been used, which signifies a horde of
goats consisting of almost one hundred goats. Obviously, one hundred goats are
much above the poverty line whereby a person deserves help by virtue of his status
as a faqir. He who has this number of goats is, on the contrary, held liable to pay
zakah. But if famine or flood has struck his business and caused heavy losses to
him by destroying his sheep and cattle, and he is left with a horde of one hundred,
he should be given help from the funds of zakah under the head of gharimin so that
he could survive the losses and bring his business in a take off position again.
About the person who pledges some financial obligation to settle a dispute
among the Muslims and thereafter finds it difficult to discharge as he pledged, there
can be no question about providing help to him; we simply cannot wait that he
should first reach the status of faqir before he deserves any help from the zakah
fund. He is indeed one from among the gharmin in spite of his status as a well to do
man because he is not able to discharge an obligation he took over to settle a
dispute among the Muslims for which he needs some help to be provided from the
zakah fund. Imam Shawkani writes:
Many a time, a conflict would only end, among the Arabs, that was
primarily based on some financial dispute, like blood money etc, when
a person from among them would rise and pledge that he, only for
the sake of Allah, would pay off the requisite amount. This was one
good deed from among the acts that people of high ethical standing
were supposed to do. When people would come to know that
someone has taken on such a pledge, they would vie each other to
lend support to him in this noble cause. Such was the extent of this
help that he would soon be relieved of this obligation that he pledged.
He himself would not feel shy to ask people to provide help to him in
this matter. This was not considered an act of disgrace but honour
and pride, instead.
8

One thing that needs to be assessed carefully, however, is that only that person
will be considered a possible candidate for help under the head of gharimin who has
suffered a loss because of some external reasons having nothing to do with his
insatiable appetite for risk for excessive returns or his overspending upon luxurious
living. Otherwise, no help should be provided at least from the funds of zakah in
order to discourage such an attitude that leads to a wrong way of life.
6. Fi Sabilillah
This head has a very wide scope that includes all virtuous and good acts to which
Allah and the Holy Prophet (sws) has guided us. In contrast to the term of fi
sabilillah, fi sabil-i al-taghut is used, which has the contrary connotation, that is, all
the evil system, based on falsehood, laid mischievously by Satan. Thus, when fi
sabilillah is considered in contrast to the sabil of taghut, it becomes evident that
sabil of Allah is the entire arrangement of divine guidance revealed for mankind in
its collective capacity as well in its separate elements. Inasmuch as it is legitimate
to spend zakah in order to protect the collective arrangement of this divine
guidance, it is legally correct to spend zakah in order to safeguard a particular
element of this divine guidance. No objection can be raised to either of these as
both are fi sabilillah.
I present some examples from the Holy Quran regarding infaq (spending) and
jihad bi al-mal (struggle with the help of wealth), which the Holy Quran includes
within the definition of fi sabilillah, so that a firm understanding may be achieved as
to what is included in this term.

( : )
And spend in the way of Allah and do not expose yourself by your
own hand to destruction. (2:195)
Here, the term fi sabilillah indicates jihad bi al-sayf (armed offensive) launched
to protect and safeguard the Muslims and free the House of the Lord from the
clutches of disbelievers.

: )
The likeness of those who spend their wealth in Allahs way is as the
likeness of a grain which grows seven ears. (2:261)
Here the term fi sabilillah means good deeds in general that include all kinds of
virtuous and good acts.
(

: )
Those who spend their wealth in way of Allah and thereafter make not
reproach and injury to follow that which they have spent. (2:262)
In this verse, fi sabilillah means spending for the sake of faqirs, miskins and
other deserving people.
(

: )
[Zakah is] for the poor who are straitened for the cause of Allah, and
who cannot travel in the land for trade. (2:273)
The context of this verse reveals that fi sabilillah here means religion and the
religious sciences.

: )
Lo! those who disbelieve spend their wealth in order that they may
debar men from the way of Allah. (8:36)
Here it is evident that sabil implies the religion of Islam in its entirety.

: )
Lo! those who believed and left their homes and strove with their
wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah. (8:72)
Evident is the implication of fi sabilillah and jihad fi sabilillah in this verse as
being the struggle to provide strong footings to the religion of Islam. Similarly, a
tradition has been narrated by Abu Daud that tells us that hajj is also included in fi
sabilillah.
Consequently, it is clear now that fi sabilillah encompasses all virtuous acts and
good deeds. However, when this term is spoken alone, it may indicate a specific
deed provided the occasion of speech restricts the meaning to this deed only. No
doubt that this term may also mean the religion of Islam in its entirety for the wide
scope that it covers provided the occasion of speech gives an indication of such
meaning. Likewise, when this term is uttered after a mention of a good list of
certain obvious virtuous deeds, the implication is that this term indicates all the
remaining good deeds described by the religion which did not find mention in
words. In all the points that I have maintained, a good number of Muslim
academics concur as well.
The following note may be found in Tafsir Kabir:
The apparent meaning of fi sabilillah does not make it imperative to
confine it to the mujahidin alone. This is why Qaffal has narrated in
his exegesis about certain jurists that zakah can be spent on all good
deeds like funeral rites of the poor, construction of castles, and
construction of mosques etc for the scope of fi sabilillah includes all
these deeds and many others.
8

Ibn Hazm has explained the term fi sabilillah as follows:
We say yes whatever deed is good is included in the implication of fi
sabilillah.
9

The famous salafi scholar of the present age, Rashid Rada, explains fi sabilillah
in the following words:
Fi sabilillah comprises everything, religious in nature and/or beneficial
for people, on which the edifice of religion and the state is dependent.
However, the primary and foremost importance is that of the
expenditure incurred on the preparation for war by acquiring arsenal,
providing food for the troops, making arrangements for
transportation, and equipping them with requisite ammunition. A
similar viewpoint is also attributed to Muhammad Ibn Hakam.
10

After having a look on all these statements, one should have a clear view that
the head of fi sabilillah is very wide in its scope. It encompasses all good deeds and
virtuous acts. Nothing good in nature prescribed by Islam eludes this term! It is an
unfathomable ocean that contains all types of goodness and righteousness. No
question of tamlik arises from any angle whatsoever insofar as this head is under
discussion. Firstly, there is nothing here that may be adduced to support the so-
called tamlik viewpoint. When all is said and done, there is only lam that one may
resort to. What we find here is that instead of lam, fi precedes fi sabilillah, a
preposition entirely devoid of the sense of tamlik in the slightest manner possible.
Secondly, after accepting that all good deeds are contained in fi sabilillah, as
pointed out by great Muslim scholars, it is simply not possible to fulfil the
requirement of tamlik in all these forms in which a good deed is done. However, if
the condition of tamlik were to be fulfilled in a collective form, this could have been
done in all these cases. To this, neither would we have disagreed. Rather, I would
say to the dissidents who still do not agree with our viewpoint that any good deed
that they think should be done but they leave it only because tamlik cannot be
fulfilled, they should bring it under the head of fi sabilillah since there is no
objection as to the propriety of any deed of general goodness coming under this
head.
7. Ibn al-Sabil
By ibn al-sabil is meant a traveller. Travelling and need for help go hand in hand.
As long as a traveller treks his path, he is always in need of help. This is true for
people of all classes. Even a man who is considered affluent in his own community
as sets off on a journey may not be in a position to fulfil all his needs by his own.
Only a select few members of the elite class can afford to have all their needs met
without any trouble no matter where they go; they stay in five star hotels, travel in
state-of-the-art vehicles, and call upon doctors to come to their place to check
them whenever they fall ill no matter where in the world they are. A common man
when leaves his home for a far away destination, albeit not a poor person by
definition, cannot dare to have his needs met from his own pocket despite his
wishes. Of necessity, he would look for some place to spend his night over there,
and he would need to go to a free medical dispensary to get medical treatment if he
falls ill, and he would try to travel on a subsidized transportation if he finds one
because if he does not proceed with his travelling as described, he cannot reach his
destination because of his constrained means. This is why the shariah has directed
us to spend zakah for his sake in order to make his travelling as much comfortable
as possible in spite of the fact that he is not poor by definition. Ibn Kathir has
quoted a tradition from Abu Daud:
The Holy Prophet (sws) said that no rich man is permitted to receive
help from zakah except in three situations. The first is when they are
in the way of Allah, or travelling, or they are given a gift or invited to
a meal by a poor neighbour who arranges both things from the zakah
received by him.
11

This is why it does not seem appropriate that only the travellers that are short
of ticket money or whose conveyance has broken down should be considered
deserving of help from zakah funds. Quite conversely, the correct view is that all
Muslims deserve help during travelling. Rather, since exclusive personal possession
is not a mandatory requirement to fulfil, the befitting way to provide help to the
travellers is to construct inns, resting places and other facilities at such points in
cities and towns where people have to stay for a while during their journey for one
reason or another in addition to setting up an information desk where the queries of
the travellers may be addressed appropriately; a system for postal service,
telegraph and medical treatment may also be set up. I also find it imperative to
emphasize that inasmuch as there is a need to provide for such facilities in Makkah,
Madinah, Mina and Jaddah, there is need to configure an arrangement for the same
in places like Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and other cities. Is it not a harsh reality
that whenever we travel we have to go through unbearable troubles to find
anything, no matter how petty, that we are in need of and sometimes our efforts go
entirely in vain? Quite sadly, there is no institution in our cities that could attend to
the needs of the travellers responsibly.
Abu Ubayd has attributed a saying to Anas Ibn Malik and Hasan Basri which
explains that amount spent on the construction of facilities for the travellers is a
valid payment of zakah. It is possible that these two great scholars included this
payment under the head of fi sabilillah. But it is equally possible that they might
have considered it as coming under the head of ibn al-sabil.
(Translated from Islahis Tawdihat by Jhangeer Hanif)







1. Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar, vol. 4 (Saudi Arabia: Idarah al-Bahuth al-Ilmiyyah), 237.
2. Abu Ubayd, Kitab al-Amwal, vol. 2 (Islamabad: Idarah Tahqiqat-i Islami, n.d.), 394.
3. Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar, vol. 4 (Saudi Arabia: Idarah al-Bahuth al-Ilmiyyah), 167.
4. Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalla, vol. 6 (Beirut: Dar al-Jayl, n.d.), 145.
5. This pertains to the proposition lam in 9:60, about which both of these juristic schools
hold that it denotes exclusive personal possession.
6. Abu Ubayd, Kitab al-Amwal, vol. 2 (Islamabad: Idarah Tahqiqat-i Islami, n.d.), 327.
7. Ibid., 333.
8. Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar, vol. 4 (Saudi Arabia: Idarah al-Bahuth al-Ilmiyyah, n.d.), 236.
9. Imam al-Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir, vol. 16 (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, n.d.), 90.
10. Ibn Hazm, al-Muhalla, vol. 6 (Beirut: Dar al-Jayl, n.d.), 145.
11. Rashid Rada, Tafsir al-Manar, vol. 10 (Beirut: Dar al-Marifah, n.d.), 505.
12. Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Ibn Kathir, vol. 2 (Lahore: Amjad Academy, n.d.), 266.