unlefs that
perfon be the
flave or Mo-
katib of the
donor.
Other perfons
upon whom
Xakat may
be lawfully
bellowed.
after deliberation, a doubt Bill remain, the Zakdt is not difeharged,
unlefs it afterwards appear that the receiver was a proper objedt of its
application.
, If a perfon beftow Zakdt upon another, and afterwards difcover
that this other is his own Have or Mokdtib, this is not held to be a
difcharge of his Zakdt, becaufe, in this cafe, there is no transfer o f
property, (according to what has been already remarked,) and the difcharge
of Zakdt refts upon, a complete transfer of it, as was formerly
explained.
I t is not thought proper to beftow Zakdt. upon a perfon poflefled
o f a complete Nifdb in any property whatever, fuch an one being con-
fidered as coming under the defcription of Ghannee [rich,] becaufe this
is the law term for any one poflefled of a Nifdb ; but the condition on
which any perfon is accounted a Ghannee is, that the Nifdb which
conftitutes his property be exclufive of all demands or incumbrances,
(fuch as debts, and fo forth;) and on this precife quantity of abfolute
property no Zakdt is legally due from the proprietor, the increafe
thereof (underftood in the lapfe of Hawldn-Hdwl) being a condition of
the obligation to Zakdt.
I t is lawful to beftow Zakat upon a perfon poflefled of lefs than a
Nifdb, although be be found in body and Capable of labour, becaufe
fuch an one comes under the defcription of a Fakeer, who is one of the
fpecified objects of its application, and alfo, becaufe adlual necejfty in
the fituation or circumftances of the objedt is difficult to be afcertained,
and therefore the rule is reftrifted to that defcription which affords
argument of fuch neceflity; and a deficiency in Worldly property, to
the amount of a Nifdb, affords fuch argument of neceflity with refpedt
to the proprietor.
If a perfon were to beftoW to the amount of two hundred Dirms, or
upwards,
upwards, of the Zakdt of his property, upon one individual, fuch a procedure
is abominable, but yet is legal.— Ziffer has faid that this is illegal;
becaufe in the adt of beftowing that quantity of Zakdt, the perfon who
receives it becomes-a Ghannee *, which would induce the idea o f Zakdt
bein°- beftowed upon a Ghannee; but to this our doctors reply, that
the opulence of the perfon in queftion is an effedt of the gift of Zakdt
to him, and therefore he does not come within the defcription o f1 a
Ghannee until after it has been beftowed;— yet, where difcharge of
Zakdt tends to bring any one within the defcription of Ghannee,
it is abominable, the fame as prayer when performed near any
filth.
A boo H a n e ë f a has faid, “ I regard it as rnoft laudable to beftow,
“ upon a F ak e er , Z a k a t to fuch an amount as may preclude him
“ from the necèftity o f begging fo r that day.”
T he transfer of Zakdt from one City to another is abominable, it Zakat ot one
J . city not tranl*
being rather indifpenfable that the Zakdt of every city be beftowed ferabie to
upon the claimants of that c ity ; and alto, becaufe in this a regard is (ept jnrcee*.
had to the rights of Jowdr [neighbourhood:]— and hence it is abo- tiUn cafes-
minable in men to transfer the Zakdt upon their property from their
own city to another, except either for the ufe of their relations, or
for the purpofe o f affifting thole who may be in greater neceflity than
the inhabitants of their Own c ity ; becaufe in the one Cafe exifts the
peculiar duty o f confanguinity, and in the other thé application of
relief where it is moft required.— But although the transfer of Zakdt
from one city to another, excepting for the purpofes here mentioned,
be accounted abominable, yet it amounts to a valid difcharge of Zakdt,
becaufe the term Fakeer, mentioned in the facred writings as one of
the proper objedts of the application of Zakdt, is not' local, but
general.
* Literally, a rich perfon, in oppofition to Fakeer, a poor perfon.
CHAP ,