If someone gives his house to a zakat deserving person to live without any rent and the owner of house adjusts his rent in zakat fund. Is it right or not? Will zakat be assumed paid or not?
I think not at all. It would not be considered as paid. Because you have to make the deserving person the owner of the zakat and that you can only do is by giving them something in hand. Thats why zakat is not even considered paid if you put your money in a mosque fund collecting box.
First the rent should be agreed between the landlord and tenant or both should be aware of it.
Some scholars believe that the land-lord should take rent from the tenant and then give it back to the tenant as zakat.
But a more sensible theory by some other scholars is that it is ok if the land-lord does not take the agreed rent (kiraya maaf kar dey) and allow it be adjusted as payment of zakat.
But to be on the safe side, you must agree the rent first.
Pk1 thanks for replying. Yes if the tenant is aware that no rent is been taken because of adjustment as zakat then it should be considered. What if the tenant is someone from the family who is needy like sister or brother, still it can be considered as zakat? Some says zakat can’t be given to siblings.
Zakat surely can be given to siblings. Infact if they are deserving you will get more reward (sawaab) by giving it to them rather than some non-relative. The closer the relative the more preferred they are for zakaat. But please keep in mind that zakat can not be given to relatives whose “kifalat” is your obligation by religion and by law. E.G., your parents, wife, children. Brothers and sister does not fall into this category. Their “kifalat” is not obligatory for you but if you do “kifalat” to them you would get extra reward for doing “silla-e-rehmi”. W.Allah-u-alam
And one more thing, you don’t need to tell the receiver of zakat that it is zakat. You can just give them the money.
Salam intern, Very appreciative knowledge. Few ulmas say you have to tell the person you are not taking rent because of zakat. Giving money is a separate thing and adjusting zakat is separate. What you say?
I consulted a religious scholar about this. According to him it is not possible for a person to rent out a property on Zakat. The core reason behind it is the concept of "ownership". The person who is paying the Zakat must make the receiver of Zakat its owner. Even if it is a mere change of hands, the proper protocol must be followed. The scholar further added that the Zakat is paid on savings while the rent that is paid on your property is a profit. You must have had that sum saved for at least a year and then pay Zakat on it. Running profits can't be counted as savings. He also gave an example of our banking system. In our banks, Zakat does not get deducted from a current account no matter how big a amount that account has in it. Zakat is deducted from a savings account only.
I hope that answers the question in detail.
Thanks Jazak allah khair
Salam shehryar, Yes, it is allowed. You may give them the zakat without letting them know according to Hanfi Fiqh (the one pre-dominantly followed in Pakistan). I don't know about other Fiqhi but according to Hanfi Fiqh it's allowed.
Zayeed what if the person let someone needy to live in the house for adjusting the total zakat of the property, it could be for 5 months or so, then?
@shehryar dear its better if you call a mufti yourself as laymen can give opinions only. Please take the number of one very good mufti, mufti farooq. You have to keep calling at some convenient time. Cell number is 00923335266808.
Thank you jawad for providing the contact number.
Regards, Shehryar
No shehryar That would also be unacceptable. Reason is again the concept of "pwnership". You have to make him the owner of that money. You cannot leave some of your profit for this purpose. You haver to hjand it over and it is his discretion then whether he would want to have this amount paid as rent for his house or whatever he wishes to do with it. Because he is the owner of that sum and when you don't make him the owner and he does not have the free will to use this amount, certainly you're not fulfilling the condition that is a must in this case.