Has the general Muslim populace been misled by the fatwa requiring Zakat al-Fitr to be given in staple foods?!

Has the general Muslim populace been misled by the fatwa requiring Zakat al-Fitr to be given in staple foods?!

A number of students of knowledge showed me articles, posts, and comments asserting that Zakat al-Fitr (alms given at the end of Ramadan) may be paid either in cash or in staple food, and that both forms are equally valid choices. They claim that anyone who denies the validity of paying it in cash is being overly strict, nitpicking, or ignorant of the objectives of Islamic law (Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah). They also stress that the opinion allowing the payment of cash is supported by many prominent scholars from the early and later generations, and that the matter is one of legitimate scholarly difference—thus a Muslim may follow either opinion without reproach.

I saw one of them express surprise that such an issue is even being explained to Muslims in Europe, saying: “Given the way of life there and the difficulty of obtaining cereals and delivering them to the needy without financial loss—not to mention the implications for a new European Muslim who literally adheres to textual evidence, or the broader European mindset about the idea of providing the poor with staple foods on Eid rather than money!” [from the article, “Paying Zakat al-Fitr in Cash… Fourfold Indications and Preference,” by Dr. Khalid Hanafi, Al Jazeera Blogs, 05/28/2019].

From my own experience over the course of twenty-five years dealing with new Muslims, I know that those among them who truly submit themselves to Allah see religion as “abiding by the apparent wording of the text,” and they observe Islamic rulings more consistently and precisely than most Muslims do. They regard these Islamic rites as purely acts of worship to Allah—rather than mere “ideas for enriching the poor”—except for those who have deviated in their belief and practice (after some time following their conversion), owing to the influence of certain deviant Islamic groups.

If we wanted to philosophise about religion in their way, we could argue that giving Zakat al-Fitr in staple form is actually more suitable for European Muslims in two respects:

If a European Muslim delegates a relief organization to distribute staple food to poor Muslims in Asia or Africa, sees the photos of it being given out, and sees how happy people are to receive it, his heart softens, his sense of humanity grows, and he becomes even keener to contribute to feeding the needy—especially given UN reports confirming that “over 820 million people suffer from hunger worldwide” (World Health Organization, 07/15/2019).

Paying it in the form of staple foods is cheaper for a European Muslim from a financial standpoint. Instead of donating five pounds to a relief organization—which often deducts up to a third of the amount for administrative expenses or channels it into other projects—he might feed a poor person in a needy country for only a pound or two!

Hence—using this line of “persuasive argument”—paying Zakat al-Fitr in staple foods may actually be more in tune with the European Muslim’s mindset and psychology, and gentler upon him!

I do not intend here to delve into the jurisprudential (fiqh) dimension of the issue; jurists—whether they say one must give staple food or may give its value—have already studied it thoroughly, and nothing new can be added. Rather, I wish to clarify how this issue stands from the perspective of fundamental principles, methodology, and the call to Islam. This is meant as sincere advice for Allah’s sake and for His religion, as a defense of the scholars of the Ummah, and as a response to those who use this and similar issues to spread doubt and confusion among ordinary Muslims. They say: “The well-known scholars of our time—like Ibn Baz, Ibn ʿUthaymīn, al-Albānī, and many others—have hidden from you the other opinion, weighed you down with burdens, and claimed that giving money is invalid. We reveal to you now that the other opinion is, in fact, that of numerous great imams; so cast aside everything you learned and all the fatwas of contemporary scholars. In fact, reconsider your entire religion!” A trustworthy brother informed me that he questioned one of the leaders of that deviant group—whose name he told me (and I could reveal it if I wished)—regarding Ḥasan al-Turābī’s view permitting a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man; this leader responded: “We should not hastily condemn his opinion. We must research the matter; perhaps he is correct.”

Indeed, the prevalence of the view that Zakat al-Fitr must be given in staple form and that paying it in cash does not fulfill the requirement—as well as the fact that this has been the settled fatwa for many decades throughout the Arab world—does have reasonable knowledge based justifications or, as is now said (under the influence of English usage), “objective reasons.” In other words, there are concrete, real-world causes for this. Below are a few of them:

First: The schools of law (madhhabs) widespread in the Arab world are the Mālikī, Shāfiʿī, and Ḥanbalī schools, whereas the Ḥanafī school is far less common—unlike in non-Arab regions such as India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey, etc. It is well known that universities, religious teaching institutions, and official fatwa councils typically adhere to the school prevalent in their region, and the same applies to scholars, students of knowledge, and preachers. Since it is the view of these three schools that Zakat al-Fitr is obligatory in staple food and that “paying its cash equivalent does not suffice” (as stated in Al-Fiqh ʿalā al-Madhāhib al-Arbaʿah by Al-Jazīrī 1/569 and Al-Fiqh al-Islāmī wa Adillatuh by Al-Zuḥaylī 3/2046), it is unsurprising that this has remained the dominant, official, and well-known view in the Arab world.

Second: Since the time of the Companions (Ṣaḥābah) and their Followers (Tābiʿīn) right up until our time, pious scholars and jurists have always firmly upheld the religious rulings they found to be correct based on textual evidence, doing so as an act of devotion to Allah and to clear their conscience. This has been the practice of leading, righteous scholars—recognized for their jurisprudential expertise and fairness—specifically on this issue:

Imam Mālik ibn Anas (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “It does not suffice for someone to give an item of merchandise in place of Zakat al-Fitr, because that is not what the Prophet ﷺ commanded” (al-Mudawwanah: 1/392; al-Tahdhīb fī Ikhtiṣār al-Mudawwanah: 1/489). Scholars of the Mālikī school were unanimous with their Imam on this, including Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463 AH), who remarked: “It does not suffice—in Zakat al-Fiṭr or any other type of zakat—to give the monetary value, according to the people of Madinah. This is the sound position from Mālik and most of his students” (al-Kāfī fī Fiqh Ahl al-Madīnah: 1/323).

Imam al-Shāfiʿī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “A man pays from whatever staple he mostly consumes, whether it be wheat, corn, ʿalas (a type of wheat), barley, dates, or raisins. Whatever he pays among these, he must give a full saʿ (by the Prophet’s measure). He must not pay it as flour or sūwīq (ground wheat) or its value” (al-Umm: 2/73).

Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 319 AH) stated in al-Ishrāf ʿalā Madhāhib al-ʿUlamāʾ (3/80): “Mālik and al-Shāfiʿī say no substitution is permitted. Isḥāq and Abū Thawr say it is only permissible in a state of necessity.” Then Ibn al-Mundhir added: “It is not permissible in any circumstance.”

Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (may Allah have mercy on him) likewise has many statements disallowing the payment of money in place of staple foods:

In Masāʾil Ṣāliḥ (978), he reports: “I said to him: ‘Some people say food is better for the needy; others say bread is better.’ My father disliked that and said: ‘We have to adhere to the Sunnah. Allah says, {…and feed sixty needy people}, and He did not command us to give its value or anything else. We give what Allah commanded. The ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar says the Prophet ﷺ made Zakat al-Fitr mandatory as one saʿ of dates or one saʿ of barley, so you must give what the Prophet ﷺ obligated. Neither Abū Saʿīd nor Ibn ʿUmar ever considered the monetary value.’”

Abū Dāwūd in his Masāʾil (596) says: “I heard Aḥmad being asked about giving bread as Zakat al-Fitr. He replied: ‘No.’ Someone said in my presence: ‘What about giving money?’ He answered: ‘I fear it may not be valid, as it differs from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.’”

His son ʿAbdullāh in his Masāʾil (647) mentions: “I heard my father disliked paying it in cash, saying: ‘I fear that if one gives its value in money, it will not suffice.’”

Al-Athram said: “I asked him, ‘Do I give to each poor person?’ He replied, ‘We do not accept the monetary value.’ I asked, ‘What do you advise?’ He answered, ‘I do not recommend it. We fear that giving its monetary value is invalid.’” (Tahdhīb al-Ajwibah: 2/596)

Abū Ṭālib said: “Aḥmad told me: ‘One must not give its monetary value.’ He was told, ‘But some people say ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz used to take the monetary value.’ He responded: ‘They leave the words of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and go by what someone else said? Ibn ʿUmar said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ made it obligatory.” And Allah says, {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger}. But some people reject the Sunnah and say, “So-and-so said this, so-and-so said that!”’” (al-Mughnī by Ibn Qudāmah, 4/295)

Therefore, it is not fair to blame contemporary scholars for adhering strongly to the opinion that they found best supported by the evidence, or for rejecting the other opinion, or not mentioning it.

Third: Given that these three schools agree on the invalidity of paying its monetary value, and their scholars, both past and present, have consistently issued fatwas to this effect, it follows that those who are affiliated with these schools—be they muftis or students of knowledge—yet nevertheless follow the Ḥanafī opinion in this matter, should at least clarify why they are departing from their own schools and the reasoning behind that. They should not attack people who follow the dominant view of most jurists (both early and later) by accusing them of rigidity or fanaticism, or of neglecting the higher objectives of the Sharīʿah, or of lacking the proper etiquette in areas of scholarly disagreement!

In this regard, the Supreme Scientific Council in Morocco did well in its statement published on 22 Ramaḍān 1442 AH, titled “Regarding Zakat al-Fitr and Its Measure in Volume and Cash,” wherein it stated:

“It is known that Zakat al-Fitr is a religious obligation through which Muslims draw closer to Allah Almighty at the end of Ramadan each year. The basic principle is to pay it in the staple food of one’s country, with a measure of one prophetic ṣāʿ on behalf of each person, which is four mudd measured by the mudd of the Prophet ﷺ. Today, this is equivalent to two and a half kilograms (2.5 kg) of grains or flour. It may be paid up to three days before the Eid. This year, its monetary equivalent has been set at fifteen dirhams (15 MAD).”

They clarified that giving staple food is the fundamental principle in the view of that Council. Hence, we understand from their statement that “setting a cash amount” is an independent ijtihād on their part—one that goes against their official school—yet they did not disparage that established principle in their school and in the other schools. This is the proper approach for those who hold that paying in cash is permissible: to adopt it humbly, to show goodwill, and not to lash out against those who follow what they consider the original, correct, and authentic opinion based on sound textual evidence and firmly established consensus. Meanwhile, the opinion of giving its monetary value remains an area of dispute, so one cannot blame anyone who declines to follow it or rejects it outright.

And success is from Allah Almighty.

Written by:

ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Turkmānī

Leicester: Sunday, 27 Ramaḍān 1442 AH | May 9, 2021 CE

 

https://turkmani.com/articles/226