AFTER the recent zakaat fiasco in Trinidad, I decided to constrain my “wildness” and to give the issue a “rest” because it was too close to my skin.

As a Mawlana, I had to be very, very careful, because when I speak, I do so on behalf of a lofty religion; Islam is not some narrow, gutter cult. So, this week, we will take flight and discuss ZAKAAT 101.

I am sure that some people were totally bewildered how this bacchanal seemed to have suddenly appeared from nowhere.

Therefore, I think that I owe our community and the public a duty to explain why this issue of Zakaat is so important, so that you may appreciate and gain an understanding of what exactly is Islam’s position on this matter.

The TnT Mirror newspaper is not a Madrassah (religious school), therefore, I seek the Editor’s permission and indulgence to explain and reason with the newspaper’s readership on this issue of zakaat. It is not my intention to make the pages of the Mirror a prayer carpet of a Mosque, so this is by way of general interest to those who want to know.

Zakaat or wealth-tax is the third of five pillars of Islam, which Prophet Muhammad (S) said that Islam is built on.

It is similar in religious scope to tithes, charity, and almsgiving, or offerings mentioned in Malachi: Chapter 3:7-12; Exodus: Chapter 30:11-16; Matthew: Chapter 6:1-4 and Proverbs: Chapter 3:27-28 of the Holy Bible.

In the Qu’ran, it is coupled with Salaah (Five daily prayers behind an imam), indicating that the two acts are interdependent.

Zakaat is an obligation (Fard) on those who possess the minimum amount (Nisaab) of property liable to payment and it is mentioned many times in the Qu’ran.

In the first 10 years of the Prophetic message in Mecca, its payment was encouraged as an element of faith.

When the Prophet (S) and his companions made the historical migration (Hijrah) from Mecca to Madinah, the nature of zakaat changed, as Islam devoloped into a polity, and zakaat from a religious obligation to also an economical and political duty, which is why in the ninth Chapter of the Qu’ran, Tawbah (Repentance) verse 103, the Prophet was commanded to “khud-take” the Zakaat and this was how it has been till 1924, when the Ottoman Khalifate fell.

Today, zakaat, despite its pivotal nature, is given nominal affirmation by the people and not the prime importance which is its due.

Most Muslims know that they have to pay something, but they consider it as an obligatory act of private charity.

There are many reasons for this attitude in the community, foremost among them is the political position which the Muslims find themselves today because the Shariah lost its central position in the society, which in turn affected the institution of zakaat.

Also, with the rise of secularisation, Islam was relegated to the private sphere, which redefined zakaat as a matter of private personal piety, although its very nature is a matter of Muslim governance. Failure to understand this has contributed to the current political and economical weakness of the Muslim community, which has no unity nor central leadership.

Lack of such an authority continues to re-enforce the notion of zakaat being something of an individual financial religious stipulation.

In all the historical books of Jurisprudence (Fiqh) of all the Schools of Law (Mazhhab), they assume and confirm this link of zakaat to authority.
The majority of Muslims in this country are followers of the School of that great Imam, Abu Hanifah.

In this school, if you pay your Zakaat to an illegitimate person or authority, it is still owed to the correct person or authority. According to Imam al Sarakhsi al Hanafi: “Zakaat is a right of Allah and is to be collected and distributed by the leader of the Muslims or his appointees.

“If anyone pays his zakaat to anyone else, it does not remove from him the obligation” (al Mabsut).

All the other schools have a similar position concerning leadership and its right to collect and distribute the zakaat.

All this makes it abundantly clear that zakaat in historical Islam was always in every instance connected to governance and any denial of that connection is an alteration of its original nature.

This lack of a recognised Muslim authority is specifically acutely felt in Trinidad and Tobago at the beginning and end of every Ramadhan for the pass 40 years.

Another major factor in the subversion of zakaat in the last two centuries is the strange and unparallel change in the nature of wealth and the definition of money.

Zakaat was originally prescribed for a natural consideration of wealth which humanity still measures as Chapter three, The Family of Imraan (Aal Imraan) verse 14 of the Qu’ran states: “Beautified for men is the things they covet; ... gold and silver, branded beautiful horses, cattle and well tilled land. This is the pleasure of the present world’s life...”

In all traditional society, wealth is still measured in land, livestock, gold and silver, and it is on these things zakaat is levied.

The laws of zakaat, therefore, stipulates concerning the different kinds of agricultural produce, type of produce, quantity, type of lands irrigated or not etc.

They go into extraordinary detail about livestock, what animal should be taken, their numbers and ages in each herd or flock.

As for gold and silver, the precise weight of each on which zakaat is due because it is the metal itself which is being taxed and it does not matter whether it is in the form of jewellery, coins, bullion, nuggets, or dust.

Trade goods under certain circumstances are also subjected to zakaat.

The reality of this in the 21st Century is that modern life today for the majority of people on this planet is that they do not own gold, silver, agricultural produce or livestock.

With the legal removal of the ban on usury in Europe in the 16th Century, the subsequent growth of banking and the use of usurious financial instruments and techniques ever since, have impacted on zakaat.

Natural wealth is now in the hands of a few -- the banking elite -- and the people are left with paper tokens whose value and integrity are totally dependent on the fleeting whims of international speculators and events.

In response to this, there is a growing backlash by Muslim scholars, intellects, thinkers and also by some Christians who share a similar view, which calls for the re-emergence of a bi-metal currency or for a silver currency which backs paper money which we shall discuss at length, God willing.

End of part one, peace out!

(In my last article I made an error regarding the name of the Imam of the Jamaat al Murabiteen in San Fernando who is, Imam Ibraheem Ayatullah ‘Abdul-Ghani, not Ibraheem Muhammad. Sorry)