Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India c8.s4: 4.4. Zakat

Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India c8.s4

Language
English

4.4. Zakat

c8.s4.1

Zakat or "*Zakah*" or alms tax can be defined as that portion of a man's wealth which is designated for the poor. The term is derived from the Arabic verbal root meaning "to increase", "to purify" and "to bless". It finds its origin in Allah's command to "take *sadaqah* (charity) from their property in order to purify and sanctify them (at-Taubah:103)... In this *ayat* "Purify means to purify them from stinginess, greed, and meanness... As an obligation upon Muslims, *zakah* is one of the essential requirements of Islam. If somebody disputed its obligation, he would be outside of Islam, and could legally be killed for his unbelief unless he was a new Muslim and could be excused for his ignorance." And as is usual in injunctions of the Quran and Hadis, there is a threat held out to those who refrain from paying Zakat. Both Bukhari and Muslim relate from Abu Hurairah that the messenger of Allah said: "No owner of a treasure who does not pay *zakah* will be spared, for his treasure will be heated in the Fires of Hell and then made into plates. His flanks and his forehead will be branded with them until Allah pronounces judgement on His servants during a day lasting fifty thousand years."¹⁴⁷

c8.s4.2

In short, Zakat is a religious tax levied on the Muslims. By paying Zakat and thereby sharing his property with the needy a Muslim purifies himself of avarice. Generally speaking Zakat amounted to one-fortieth or two-and-half per cent of the property. But since it is an act of piety to pay Zakat, and since it is based on a clear injunction of the Quran, it must be realized by the imam. In fact it is the ruler's duty to take Zakat from the defaulter and rebuke him if he refrains from payment. Zakat is not levied on primary necessities of life like dwelling houses, clothes, utensils, slaves and animals used for ploughing or riding."¹⁴⁸ It is charged only on "apparent property" such as gold and silver, herds and merchandise, and only when such property exceeds a certain taxable minimum (*nisab*).

c8.s4.3

There are three conditions which qualify a man to pay Zakat. First, he must have reason and maturity, for there can be no responsibility without them. Second, he must live in Dar-ul-Islam, because the payment of Zakat is an act of worship and as such it can be rightly performed by Muslims only. Third, he must be a freeman, because a slave is not supposed to own property.¹⁴⁹ These conditions exempt infants, non-Muslims, lunatics, slaves and even debtors, that is, insolvent persons, from payment of Zakat tax.¹⁵⁰ The Zakat on the apparent property was collected by the state according to the fixed rate, but the Zakat on non-apparent property was given to the beneficiaries directly by the property owner according to his own discretion and judgement.¹⁵¹ As explained in the article in the *Arab Times* referred to above, "Zakah must be paid by every Muslim who has a nisab, which is the minimum of one's holdings liable to *zakah*." *The nisab is conditioned by the following:*

c8.s4.4

1) *Zakah* should be paid on any amount of money remaining after meeting the expenses for such necessities as food, clothes, housing, vehicles and craft machines.

c8.s4.5

2) A complete year of Islamic calendar should pass, starting from the very day of the nisab's possession, without any decrease during the year. in case of its decrease (being less than *nisab*), the year count (*hawl*) starts from the day of the *nisab* to completion.

c8.s4.6

Commenting on the issue, an-Nawawi said: "In our view and the views of Malik, Ahmad and the majority of scholars, the amount of property liable for payment of *Zakah*, such as gold, silver, or cattle, is tied to the completion of *nisab* through the turn of a whole year. If the nisab decreases in any time of the year, (the counting of) the year discontinues."

c8.s4.7

Zakat was perhaps the most difficult to assess and still more difficult to realize. It was levied on "apparent property". Now, we know that in the medieval times people used to hide their possessions lest the sultan should come to know of their wealth. Zakat could not be realized forcibly since "compulsion-vitiates its character". Again, it could only be applied to a property held in possession by the owner for at least one year.¹⁵² If a person just to avoid payment transferred his taxable property to someone else including his own wife, even a day before the date of payment, he escaped from paying.¹⁵³ On the other hand pious Muslims sometimes paid Zakat in advance for two or three years.

c8.s4.8

The Muslim jurists divide the revenue of a Muslim state into two categories - secular and religious. The secular taxes, consisting mainly of Khams, Kharaj, and Jiziyah were levied on non-Muslims.¹⁵⁴ The religious tax was Zakat levied on Muslims. In India it seems to have been shared by Hindus also as it included customs duties. The revenue derived from Zakat was expended for charitable purposes and the other taxes were earmarked mostly to satisfy secular demands.

c8.s4.9

There is a desire to equate Zakat with Jiziyah to emphasise the fairness of the Islamic fiscal system. The Muslims pay Zakat and the non-Muslims Jiziyah. But the analogy is fallacious. The rate of Zakat tax is as low as 2½ per cent and that on the apparent property only. All kinds of concessions are given in Zakat with regard to *nisab* or taxable minimum. In its collection no force is applied because force vitiates its character. On the other hand the rate of Jiziyah is very high for the non-Muslims - 48, 24 and 12 silver *tankahs* for the rich, the middling and the poor, whatever the currency and whichever the country. Besides, what is central to Jiziyah is the humiliation of infidel always, particularly at the time of collection. What is central in Zakat is that it is voluntary; at least it cannot be collected by force.

c8.s4.10

In India Zakat ceased to be a religious tax imposed only on the Muslims. Here Zakat was levied in the shape of customs duties on merchandise and grazing fee on all milk-producing animals or those which went to pasture, and was realized both from Muslims and non-Muslims. According to the Islamic law, "import duties for Muslims were 5 per cent and for non-Muslims 10 percent of the commodity." For, Abu Hanifa, whose Sunni school of law prevailed in India, would tax the merchandise of the Zimmis as imposts at double the Zakat fixed for Muslims.¹⁵⁵

c8.s4.11

*Mushroom Levies*

c8.s4.12

Besides the four regular taxes, there were various kinds of local imposts levied. Alauddin Khalji imposed house tax and grazing tax (*ghari* and *charai*). He also levied a tax on all milk producing animals. These and many others like tax on selling flowers, on betel leaves, octroi duty on sale of grain and pottery, stall tax (*tah bazari*), tax on gambling, amusements and dancing girls mentioned by Afif continued till the time of Firoz Tughlaq. They were collected in the capital city and some other important cities. Firoz Tughlaq ordered their abolition in 777 H/1375 CE as they were considered to be not in accordance with the Shariat. This resulted in a loss of 30 lakh tankahs annually,¹⁵⁶ which shows that income from such imposts was not inconsiderable.

c8.s4.13

Such imposts, however, used to grow like mushroom; these were regularly pruned but also regularly collected from time to time so that with Jiziyah and Pilgrim Tax, Akbar also abolished duties on *gao-shumari* (each head of oxen), *sar-i-darakhti* (on each tree), *peshwar* (vocational tax on artificers), darogha's fees, tehsildar's fees, treasurer's fees, lodging charges, *hasil bazar* (market duties) and many more. These imposts were "equal in amount to the income of Hindustan."¹⁵⁷ So also did Jahangir. He also issued instructions forbidding levy of many such cesses. He writes in his memoirs that he prohibited collection of imposts "under the names of *tamgha* and *mir bahri* (river tolls), and other burdens, which the jagirdars of every province and district had imposed for their own profit."¹⁵⁸ Similarly a farman of Aurangzeb preserved in *Mirat-i-Ahmadi* "directed the jagirdars of the province of Gujarat not to realise cesses such as *rahdari*, *mahi*, *mallahi*, *tarkari*, *tab bazari*, etc., which had been abolished, from traders and merchants."¹⁵⁹ "Zekhaut, Sermohary and Tumgha had yielded to Akbar sixteen hundred Hindustani *manns* of gold, equal to sixteen thousand *manns* of Iraq," says Jahangir at another place.¹⁶⁰ These imposts brought profit to local officials if they did not always add revenue to the royal exchequer.

c8.s4.14

The discrimination and humiliation for non-Muslims in the Muslim state was not confined to the collection of Kharaj or other major taxes only. It extended to *tamgha* or customs duties also. These levies on Hindus used to be high, on Muslims often reduced or wholly rescinded. The government was unduly keen to exempt Muslims from the levy. Prior to the Battle of Khanua against Rana Sanga, Babur abolished "throughout all the territories" the customs duties or *tamgha* on Musalmans - though its yield was large and though it had been established and maintained by former rulers. "For it is a practice outside the edicts of the Prince of Apostles (Muhammad)."¹⁶¹ Naturally in an Islamic state Muslims were treated with special favour. For Jahangir writes: "As I had remitted in my dominions customs duties amounting to krors, I abolished also all the transit dues (*sair-jihat*) in Kabul. From the provinces of Kabul and Qandahar large sums used to be derived every year from customs (*zakat*), which were in fact the chief revenue of those places. I remitted these ancient dues, a proceeding that greatly benefited the people of Iran and Turan."¹⁶²

c8.s4.15

Jahangir also writes, "I had done away with the whole of the customs dues and charges of Kabul, and whichever of my descendants and successors should do anything contrary to this would be involved in the wrath and displeasure of God. Up to the time of my accession these were fixed and settled, and every year they took large sums on this account from the servants of God (the Muhammadan people in general). The abolition of this oppression was brought about during my reign."¹⁶³ Similarly, customs duties at Cambay were abolished. The Royal scribe writes that "in the time of the Sultans of Gujarat the customs of this part came to a large sum. Now in my reign it is ordered that they should not take more than one in forty," i.e. 2½ per cent. In other parts they collected 10 to 16 per cent. "In Jeddah, which is the port of Mecca, they take one in four (25 per cent) or even more." Jahangir claims to have "the grace to remit the whole of the customs dues of his dominions, which came to a countless sum, and the very name of customs (*tamgha*) has passed away from my empire."[164](javascript:void(0)) But all this was Jahangir's wish and his good intentions. The customs duties were collected by officers who were corrupt and unrelenting. In fact, customs duties were also a source of oppression and exaction. Still as Edward Terry notes, the customs duties were "not high, that strangers of all nations" may have greater encouragement to trade with the Mughals.[165](javascript:void(0))

c8.s4.16

In conclusion a few points may be noted about the tax system in the Muslim state. Of the four major taxes sanctioned by Canon Law, viz. - Zakat, Khams, Jiziyah and Kharaj, only Zakat was obligatory on Muslims, while the other three were due from non-Muslims. The rate of Zakat was light. It was just two-and-a-half per cent or one-fortieth of taxable property. Besides, force could not be used in the collection of Zakat. On the other hand, in the collection of the other three major taxes taken from non-Muslims force was freely used. Medieval chronicles are replete with stories of oppression and torture in the- collection of taxes from non-Muslims realised through war and terror. The Muslim state was run on the dictates of Islamic scriptures. Their main plank was discrimination between Muslims and others. In matters of taxes all concessions were given to the Muslims and all strictness and humiliation extended to the non-Muslims.

Cites (1)