Mijlcm.
Allowance to
tiie colle.lt :r.
Definition o f
other terms.
the whole of which, however, amounts to fomewhat lets than a
Flifab. B y _Mi/keens is underftood perfons who have no property
whatever. This comment upon the terms Fakeer and Mi/keen is recorded
from Aboo Haneefa. Some, however, hold the reverfe de-
fcription to be true.
T h e Imam is to allow the officer employed in the colledlion of
Zakdt as much out of it as is. in proportion to his labour: as much,
therefore, is to be allowed as may fufficefor himfelf and his affiftants;
and his allowance is not jixed to an eighth. Shafei argues that Zakdt,
being appropriated to eight different obje&s, becomes thus divided
into eight equal lots, of which one is the right of the collector, who
is confequently entitled to an eighth of the whole. Our doctors
argue that, as Zakdi is paid to the collector, not as alms, but in the
manner of a reward for fervice performed, it follows that the proportion
paid him mull: be whatever may fuffice for that purpofe; and
hence it is that the colleftor is entitled to pay himfelf out of the col-
ledtions of Zakdt, although he Ihould be rich * .
B y the phrafe Feear-Rikdb, mentioned in the K o r a n , (where it
treats o f the objedls of expenditure of Zakdt,) is to be underftood
Mokdtibs: this definition is taken from Seyid Ben Jeeroo. And by the
term Gharumeen, in the fame paffage, are meant debtors: Shafei fays
that it means perfons who have involved themfelves in compofing the
differences of others. By the phrafe Fee Sabeel Oola, in the fame
pafiage, is to be underftood (according to Aboo Toofaf) a perfon who,
by poverty of eftate, is incapacitated and cut off from takino- a part in
the wars of the faith; that is, in the JihadFar%. Mohammed, on
the contrary, argues that the phrafe here mentioned applies to a
perfon who, by poverty, is incapacitated from performing pilgrimage:
* An objection and reply are here omitted, as -they turn folely upon points of verbal
criticifm, and confequently do not admit of an intelligible tranhation.
the
the latter defcription, however, is neceffarily implied and underftood
in the former; whence the phrafe in queftion may be faid to apply
to both. It is to be obferved that (according to our doctors) no
portion of Zakdt is to- be paid to fuch warriors, as are in a ftate
of affluence, none being objedts of its application but thofe who are
poor. *
B y the term Ibmes Sabeel [travellers}is td be underftood perfons,
in a ftrange place, having left their property at home, and who are
confequently deftitute. of means o f fupport.
T he feven defcriptions of perfons here fpecified are the proper
objedts of the application of Z a kd t’, and a proprietor (who choofes to
dilburfe his Zakdt himfelf, and not to pay it to the colledor) is at
liberty either to.diftribute it, in equal lhares, among feven perfons of
thole different defcriptions, or to. pay the whole to one of them.—
This is the opinion of our dodlors.— Shafei has faid that a. proprietor
is. not at liberty himfelf to dilburfe the Zakdt upon, his own property
in any other way than bellowing a part upon three individuals of each
feveral defcription. The arguments, on both fides here turn on feme
peculiarities in the Arabic language. Ou-r doctors, take their opinion
from Amroo Bin Abbas.
I t is not lawful to beftow Zakat upon -a Zimmee, or infidel fubjedt,
becaufe the prophet diredted Mdaz, laying, “ fake: Z a k a t from the
“ rich Mujfulmans, and bejlow it upon the poor MuJJulmans."— But
although infidel fubjedls are not entitled to lhare in Zakdt, yet other
alms may be bellowed upon them in the manner of Sadka,. or alms-
gift.— Shafei fays that they are prohibited from partaking of thefe alio,
as well as of Zakdt: but our dodtors ground their opinion on this point
upon a precept of the prophet, who has ordained that alms Ihould be
bellowed upon perfons of every religion indifcriminately; and our
dodlors alfo alledge, that i f it were not on account of the diredtions to
Mdaz
Zakat not to-
be bellowed'
upon Zeim-e
meet*