The Islamic government, if it exists, collects it, i.e., zakat al-fitr, just as it collects types of zakah?

The questioner :
Has it been the case that the Islamic government, if it exists, collects it, i.e., zakat al-fitr, just as it collects types of zakah?

The Shaykh:
No, zakat al-fitr is personal, whereas zakah is governmental. It is not all of zakah, but only some of its types. So, zakah
on money is not collected from individuals. Rather, it is zakah on land and zakah on livestock. These are handled by the state.
It collects them from them and distributes them where it sees fit. As for zakah on money, it is not permissible to collect it, contrary to what
is the prevailing view of some writers of the current era who go on about organizing Islamic law
and clarifying it for some people. Because of this, since they have not understood Islam deeply, especially in the way that is called
for by the Book and the Sunnah, they include zakah on money with zakah on livestock and zakah on land. This is a confusion. Indeed, the best
guidance is the guidance of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). And the guidance of Muhammad regarding this issue of zakah was according to this
division: zakah on money... A clear example of this is the zakah. No one asked, "Did you pay the zakah on your wealth?" or "No."
As for the other types we mentioned earlier, there is... called the sae' (collector). He goes around among the people, on
their lands and their livestock, and collects the charity from them. The Messenger (peace be upon him) established a system for them such that
they do not harm the one paying zakah on one hand, nor do they harm the wealth of the Muslims on the other hand. Now, we have some
issues. Although time has passed, these matters do not accept delay. In the first issue,
briefly, I say: What is the ruling on the prayer? The ruling on the 'Id prayer is an obligatory duty (fard) among the obligatory duties, like the five prayers. And the second
issue: this ruling includes women. And the third issue, which is what we want to pause on for a moment, is that we see
and this is from the favor of Allah upon us and upon the people, but most people do not know. We see that the types of Islam are
in a state of awakening and spreading to a considerable extent. Among this is that they give the 'Id prayer its due. And among this
is participating in its establishment: women in the prayer area with the men. But it appears that the awareness regarding
women in the prayer area has not reached its perfection as we hope and as we desire. This is because many women attend
the 'Id prayer while wearing clothing other than the 'Id clothing. And I mean, what I am saying is not that the 'Id clothing is beautiful clothing. I
mean that the woman's clothing for the 'Id is what the Messenger (peace be upon him) indicated in the authentic hadith when he ordered
the women to be brought out for the 'Id prayer, even the young unmarried girls. They attend the 'Id prayer and witness the good with the congregation
of the Muslims. A woman said, "O Messenger of Allah, one of us does not have a jilbab (outer garment)." He said (peace be upon him), "Let her sister give her from her jilbab."
This is the 'Id clothing. It is the opposite of what is understood by people. That is, a woman who does not have a jilbab and it is obligatory upon her
to pray the 'Id prayer. Does she miss this prayer because she does not have a jilbab? She borrows from her sister's jilbab. If
these women I am referring to attend the 'Id prayer without the 'Id clothing, but with the clothing
they are accustomed to going out in, and this is, of course, contrary to the Shari'ah, whether that is on the day of the 'Id or on a day other than
the 'Id. But the day of the 'Id is more deserving of caring about the obedience of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), as is our case and the case of all of us in this, as is our case in
Ramadan, for example. In Ramadan, the Messenger (peace be upon him) said, and as we mentioned at the beginning of the lesson, in Ramadan he said
(peace be upon him), "Whoever does not give up false speech and acting upon it, Allah has no need of his giving up his food and drink." This is a ruling
specific to Ramadan. But is false speech and testifying to it forbidden only in Ramadan? It is forbidden on all
days. But the meaning of this hadith is that if false speech and false testimony are forbidden on all days, and this
prohibition necessitates the Muslim's distance from that, then it is more fitting for him, and more fitting, to distance himself from false speech and false testimony
in Ramadan. Therefore, I say it is obligatory for the Muslim woman to wear the prescribed covering clothing on
all her days. If her faith and religion are not yet complete, and therefore she is still lax in wearing clothing
that does not cover her entire body, at least let her borrow from her sister's jilbab to attend the 'Id prayer to witness the congregation
there, and not to tempt people with her clothing, the least of which can be said is that it is contrary to the Shari'ah. As for the ruling on the 'Id prayer, I do
not want to lengthen it. It is sufficient for you to know that it is an obligatory duty (fard) among the obligatory duties, and not just a recommended practice (sunnah). A person is given a choice in it: if
he prays, he has the reward, may Allah will it, and if he does not pray, he has no sin upon him. It is not so.
The 'Id prayer is an obligatory duty (fard) among the obligatory duties. It is sufficient for you to know this ruling, even briefly, by recalling
the previous hadith where the Messenger ordered the women to go out, and not just the old women, but even the young unmarried girls
and those who are secluded among them. The Messenger of Allah ordered them to go out. So what do we say about the men? And what do we say about
the youth? Therefore, he made the excuse obligatory for them, and that indicates to you this ruling. Know that it is established in the authentic Sunnah
that if they gather
on the day of the 'Id, the day of Friday. It is established in past years that Friday fell on the day of the 'Id. It is established in the Sunnah
that the gathering of these two 'Ids, Friday and the day of the 'Id, means that the 'Id prayer is dropped for the one who prayed the 'Id. So be careful
of what I say. So the 'Id prayer, on the occasion of the 'Id... May Allah will it, I saw that I should make today's lesson or the issues
related to zakat al-fitr on one hand, and other issues related to the 'Id prayer on the other hand. So from these
issues is the ruling on zakat al-fitr. The scholars differed in its ruling. The majority are of the opinion that it is obligatory (fard), and the Hanafis
departed from the majority and said it is obligatory (wajib) but not obligatory (fard). They followed this school of thought because they have a school that considers
it a principle, which is the distinction between fard and wajib. This is a difference unique to the Hanafis and not to others
among the Imams. It is not appropriate now for me to speak about this distinction from the Islamic perspective, because it will take
our time detailed in the issues. Rather, I want to mention that any principle that is established and its application leads to
contradicting what the righteous Salaf were upon, that is the greatest proof that the principle is not... If we search in the books of
the Sunnah and in the books of athar (reports) that are specifically concerned with the athar of the Companions, in which is their saying, "The Messenger of
Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made it obligatory (fard)." There are two authentic hadiths. The first is in Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim, in the hadith
of Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both). He said, "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made zakat al-fitr obligatory (fard), a sa' of
barley or a sa' of dates, etc... The point of the hadith is the saying of Ibn 'Umar: 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and
blessings be upon him) made zakat al-fitr obligatory (fard).' And the other hadith is the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), who also said
"The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made zakat al-fitr obligatory (fard) as a purification for the fasting person from idle talk and obscene speech, and as food
for the poor. And it is necessary here to complete the hadith because it has a connection to some of the following issues. And as food for the poor,
whoever pays it before the 'Id prayer, it is an accepted charity. And whoever pays it after the 'Id prayer, it is a charity among
the charities. In this hadith also, there is a distinction... 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas stated that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)
made zakat al-fitr obligatory (fard) after the coming of these two authentic reports, narrated from those noble Companions
from the famous 'Abdullahs, 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar and 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas. Each of them reported from the Prophet
(peace and blessings be upon him and his family) that he made zakat al-fitr obligatory (fard). So how is it permissible for this Muslim to say that zakat al-fitr
is not obligatory (fard), but only obligatory (wajib)? Therefore, it is necessary to rely on these two authentic hadiths to
understand the correct ruling of zakat al-fitr, that it is an obligatory duty (fard) made obligatory by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And with that,
it is an obligatory duty (fard) that he made obligatory in its aspects, not from himself, because the Shari'ah is... rather, it is from the revelation of speech.
But it differs between this revelation coming from the Noble Qur'an and this revelation coming from
The authentic Sunnah and the obligation of zakat al-fitr came from the authentic Sunnah, as you have heard and as we have mentioned repeatedly
and again, and we have pointed out that it is not permissible for a Muslim to separate between Allah and His Messenger, and between the Book of Allah and the hadith of His Prophet, for all of that
is equal in the Shari'ah, as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "I have left among you two things by which you will not go astray as long as you hold fast to them:
the Book of Allah and my Sunnah, and they will not separate until ... So zakat al-fitr is an obligation among the obligations, and it is incumbent upon
the Muslim to hasten to comply with it, and not to be lazy or neglect it, otherwise he would be sinful, because he would have neglected an obligation of
the obligations of Islam. The first hadith is the hadith of Ibn 'Umar that the charity which the Messenger of Allah
(peace and blessings be upon him) made obligatory is a sa' of barley, or a sa' of dates, or a sa' of raisins. And in this hadith, or
in another, a sa' of dried curds. And in another, wheat is definitely mentioned, but on the basis that the amount mentioned
for wheat is half a sa', not a full sa' as it is for the other types. And here comes a matter in which the scholars have
differed, which is: is it obligatory to give zakat from these specific items, from these types that
were named in the hadith or the authentic hadiths, and it is not permissible to give their value instead, or is it permissible to give the value
as a recommended practice? Al-Shafi'i and others are on the first view, i.e., it is obligatory to give zakat from these things which were mentioned in
the hadiths. As for Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), he sees the permissibility of giving the value of these things. And what I see, and what has become clear
to me for a long time, is that the cause of this disagreement among these scholars goes back to looking at this obligation,
the obligation of zakat al-fitr: is it a purely devotional act of worship whose purpose is not known to the reader,
in which case one adheres to the text and does not transgress in examining this text, or is this charity one of the
treatments with a rational meaning? And I have touched upon this aspect more than once, and I do not want to repeat the speech on it, even
though I feel that some may not understand the intent of this detail: is the worship purely devotional
and not of rational meaning, or is it devotional with a rational meaning? But perhaps the research into what we are currently discussing
will indicate the intended meaning in those two expressions. Is zakat al-fitr of rational meaning, or is it purely
devotional? Those who hold that it is devotional are those who stopped at the text and adhered to it literally, and said it is obligatory
to give barley, dates, or the like. As for those who understood that the concept of this obligation is the concept of its purpose,
which is ... for the poor, these people say it is permissible for us to give the value, and that it may be more beneficial for the poor than
giving these specific items, especially in this time. And the result of applying thought to this matter has made it clear to me that
the stronger view is that zakat al-fitr is of rational meaning, and many acts of worship take their rational meaning from the indication
of the text itself, or from understanding the text, rather. But this specific obligation, we found that the hadith explicitly stated
the intended purpose of the legislation of this charity, and that is in the third hadith of Ibn 'Abbas, where he said
in it: "A food for the fasting person from idle talk and obscenity, and a food for the poor." So this hadith makes it clear to us that the purpose of
the legislation of zakat al-fitr is clear: something that relates to the one giving zakat, and something else that relates to the poor. As for what relates
to the one giving zakat, it is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): "A purification for the fasting person from idle talk and obscenity." As for what relates to the poor, it is
his saying: "A food for the poor." So if this is clear, as I hope, then we return to the specific items or things which were
mentioned in the authentic hadith. If we adhere to the literalness of the hadith, as opposed to looking at what we are
currently discussing, and we give, for example, barley, or even wheat, to one of the poor people of this town, the poor person
does not benefit from this charity. I do not say that he did not benefit at all, but I say that he definitely did not benefit from the benefit. But I say
that he definitely did not benefit from the benefit which the Lawgiver aimed at by making obligatory a sa' of barley and half a sa' of
wheat. Also, because our poor person here, if he receives these sa' of this or that, he returns it to the first seller, to
the grain merchant, and sells it to him for a price less than what the rich man bought it from him, by a little or a lot. And so the poor person returns with a charity less
than what Allah made obligatory for him. I mean, if the rich man wanted to give his charity from wheat, he would give him half a sa'. This
half sa' costs one Syrian pound ... he pays one Syrian pound to the grain merchant and brings the wheat to the poor person. Then
the poor person takes the wheat to the grain merchant and takes the price of eighty, seventy-five, less or more, Allah knows best. The important thing is that he does not
take his full right. Why? Because we did not care for and did not notice the purpose which the Lawgiver aimed at in
the obligation of this ruling for some of the poor. So he gives the barley food to the place from which the barley comes,
and they praise Allah greatly for this bread, and that these are many expensive things for them ... and that their conditions were
as we all know, conditions ... very. And if they were given wheat, that is ... but in those days, life
in most of the lands which were in it, or from which Islam originated, their life was on these types of grains
which were mentioned in the hadith. And consequently, most houses contained ovens in which they baked
bread from wheat, and every house had the small mill known as the jarusha. Today there are no such
means that make it easy for the poor person to eat bread from the barley which he carries in his hand and his wife bakes
with her hand. Today, bread is bought from the bakery. So in this case, we see that applying the meaning of the hadith
which the Shari'ah aimed at is by giving the value. And exactly the opposite in the villages which still live
in the manner of the previous life ... and many villages still store food from wheat and barley, and still
use the jarusha and the oven and the like. So the charity in such villages, estimating it by the specific items which the
mentioned in the hadith, is the obligatory thing at that time, because first, the text of the hadith, and second, it is what achieves
the benefit of the poor, unlike the poor person in the capitals. There, if you give the value, he will do the opposite of what the
poor person here does: he goes down to the market and buys wheat and barley and stores its price --- so if you come to him with this food,
usually from wheat or barley, first you have given him his right, and second, you have saved him from buying what you presented
to him. Then you presented to him the value of these things. So I understand from what ... (may Allah have mercy on him) went to, in his saying
about the permissibility of giving the value, that this should be noted when the value is more beneficial for the poor, and it should not be taken as a rule
in the value. The rule is what the hadith specified. But in some houses in some lands, if it is
understood, as we believe, that the value is more beneficial for the poor, as we mentioned before, then here it is permissible to give the value. As for in the villages,
one adheres to it, representing and applying the text of the hadith. This is in what came regarding the types from which it is permissible or obligatory
to give the charity, or to give its value when the value is more beneficial for the poor. Otherwise, the question will increase, and
especially the 'Id is one or two days between us and it. What is the value of this charity? That is, we ... go to the grain merchant
and say to him: please give us ten sa' of barley, because I have ten charities, me and my wife
and eight children, for example. But all he does is give the value. In this case, it is necessary that we know the value.
The custom is that the Ministry of Awqaf publishes a notice. This notice takes into account the right of the poor more than what Allah made obligatory. And I
say there is no harm in that, but on the condition that the one who is obligated knows it first. Then, if he wishes, after that, if he wants to
volunteer, there is no harm in that. Either it is said this is what is obligatory on him, and the obligatory is less than that by a little or a lot. This is not
what I see as correct. So I say, as is the custom ... and considering the high prices of wheat and barley these days, the value
of the sa' of barley is one hundred and thirty, one hundred and thirty-five qirsh. So if you give from it one hundred and fifty, it will be
He gave the obligatory alms and the voluntary alms, and the wheat was valued at half a sa' (a dry measure of about 3 kg), which is the equivalent of one Syrian pound. Some scholars hold
that there is no distinction between barley and wheat, so one must give a sa' of wheat, and it is not obligatory to give the same amount of
barley. However, we have seen some authentic hadiths indicating that the obligatory amount of wheat is half a sa', unlike
the other types, for which a sa' is actually required. So, the zakat al-fitr (the alms given at the end of Ramadan) is one pound or more. I am concerned with this
detail. I mentioned the ratio... and that is that the capacity of those who give or pay the zakat al-fitr varies from person
to person. Some person does not care whether it is one pound, five, or ten. And another person thinks about
his pocket... one pound or two pounds. Therefore, it is upon us to clarify what is obligatory of this charity, and then each person is responsible
for himself above all else. Is there a poor person who cannot afford to give the value of a sa' for himself, his wife, and his children?
There may be, and there may be someone slightly richer than him, but he still cannot afford the value of a sa', which is one pound. So if
he gives one pound, then the rich person can give a sa' of raisins, which might be worth ten pounds. Therefore, when
we give the value, we give the minimum value so that the poor person can also take advantage of the dispensation (rukhsah) to purify his fasting. So if we present
this conclusion, which is the minimum value of one and a half pounds or more, we open the door for more of the fasting people to
give their zakat al-fitr, unlike if we exaggerated the price and raised the price... the poor. In that case, there would be
poor people who would benefit... from the zakat al-fitr. But when we exaggerated the price and raised it, we deprived them of this
charity. And therefore, the emphasis, which is the obligation in all Islamic legal rulings,
is the standard for the sa'. This is required of every one of you, whether you need it or not... every one of you
has free time, has the time to go to the feed store... half a sa' is four, and a sa'... whatever he puts in
as a precaution... what does he do with them? The sa'... this is in terms of types or the value of types, such as
the time of giving the zakat al-fitr. The hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari is explicit in the hadith of Ibn 'Umar, who said: "The Messenger of Allah
(peace and blessings be upon him) ordered the giving of the zakat al-fitr before the prayer of the festival." The text is like this, and it is always better
to convey this text as it is. The detail we took previously, whether it is rational in meaning or devotional, not every person
can do it. Even the scholars themselves differ on it. So the obligation is to apply it literally, except for one who thinks that...
the literalness of the text sometimes leads its holder, in some cases, to come up with something reprehensible and laughable.
For example, one might say, and there is no harm in reminding you, that what is understood from the saying of the hadith of the Messenger, (peace be upon him), from Abu
Hurayrah, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade urinating in stagnant water." The forbidden thing is
what the text of the hadith indicates, which is urinating in stagnant water. But if one urinates in an empty vessel and then pours this urine
into stagnant water, this is permissible. This is a clear absurdity, because the result is the same. But his adherence to the literalness of the text without
looking at what the text aimed at, which is preserving the purity of the water, or at least its cleanliness, without
looking at this, led to this strange and odd ruling. And similarly, for example, when the Messenger, (peace be upon him), said in
the hadith... about women, and he said during the hadith about the virgin and that she... so he said, that one who adheres to the literalness of the text
without looking at what the text aims at, said: "If the virgin said, 'I am satisfied,' it is not valid. She must
remain silent." The hadith carries a ruling that is correct; it carries a ruling. But did this ruling intend to facilitate corruption?
On... it does not apply in faith, and in the heart of every jurist, the soul knows that he intended to facilitate and intended the remembrance.