Zakaah is only intended for purifying Wealth

1.1           Zakaah is only intended for purifying Wealth

In Islam, the intention of Paying Zakaah is clearly specified. This intention further strengthens our claim.

حدثنا عثمان بن أبي شيبة حدثنا يحيى بن يعلى المحاربي حدثنا أبي حدثنا غيلان عن جعفر بن إياس  أبو وحشية عن مجاهد عن ابن عباس قال لما نزلت هذه الآية والذين يكنزون الذهب والفضة قال كبر ذلك على المسلمين فقال عمر رضي الله عنه أنا أفرج عنكم فانطلق فقال يا نبي الله إنه كبر على أصحابك هذه الآية فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إن الله لم يفرض الزكاة إلا ليطيب ما بقي من أموالكم وإنما فرض المواريث لتكون لمن بعدكم فكبر عمر ثم قال له ألا أخبرك بخير ما يكنز المرء المرأة الصالحة إذا نظر إليها سرته وإذا أمرها أطاعته وإذا غاب عنها حفظته

Zakaah (Kitab Al-Zakaah)  Dawud:: Book 9: Hadith 1660

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

When this verse was revealed: "And those who hoard gold and silver," the Muslims were grieved about it. Umar said: I shall dispel your care. He, therefore, went and said: Prophet of Allah, your Companions were grieved by this verse. The Apostle of Allah (Peace Be Upon Him) said: Zakaah obligatory simply to purify your remaining property, and He made inheritances obligatory that they might come to those who survive you. Umar then said: Allah is most great. He then said to him: Let me inform you about the best a man hoards; it is a virtuous woman who pleases him when he looks at her, obeys him when he gives her a command, and guards his interests when he is away from her.
 Allah has made

This observation of Allah's Apostle (Peace Be Upon Him) that Zakaah is not obligatory but for purifying the excess wealth therefore remain; as a strong proof in support of our decision.

People in contrary principle published a book that none of the Authentic Narrations remain in support of "Zakaah intended only for Purifying wealth"

But, the above cited Narration falsifies their claim.

If the intention of Zakaah is only to purify wealth, it becomes obvious that there is no need to pay Zakaah for the wealth for which Zakaah has been previously paid.

After finding this Hadhees in support of our decision, people in contrary principle tries to reject this by claiming that the narrator chain of this Hadhees is broken.

The Narrator chain is as follows:

1. Author Abu Dawud.

2. Utman bin Abeeshiba.

3. Yahya.

4. Yaqla.

5. Kylon.

6. Jaffer bin Iyas.

7. Mujahid.

8. Ibn Abbas (May Allah be pleased with them).

9.  Umar (May Allah be pleased with them).

10. Allah's Apostle.

In this row, the Narrators report from the predecessors.

It is said in this list that Kylon (5) reports from Jaffer bin Iyas (6). They claim that since both of them have never met, this is "Munkadhi" and should be rejected.

For such claim, they should point out the reason. Instead, they show Imam Albani's claim as evidence.

When denial with no reason of Great Scholars, well versed in Science of Hadhees like Ibnu Hajar, Thahabi, Ibnu Mayeen, Yahya bin Syed are not accepted, they claim this Narration as Broken with the misconception that research work of Nasirudheen Albani, who belongs to our Era, is free from error.

It is been observed that people follow blindly when Nasirudheen Albani's say is positive on a particular matter. But, there are proofs that Albani have told an Authentic Narration Da'eef, Da'eef Narration Authentic, and which is not present in Narration as being present. Though Albani is an Excellent Scholar, being a Human, he is also prone to errors. It is to be noted that there is no Scholar of Hadhees Science exclusive of these deficiencies.

The claim of Albani that this Hadhees is broken is based on this:

Ø      Jaffer Bin Iyas.

Ø      Utman bin Kathan.

Ø      Kylon.

This Hadhees is documented in Hakim with this Narrator chain.

In this Narration, Uthman exists between Jaffer and Kylon. Since he is missing in the narration documented in Abu Dawud, Albani says that this Hadhees is Broken.

But, since Uthman bin Katthan existing in Narration of Hakim is Feeble, this Hadhees cannot be accepted.

It is meaningless research to decide upon the existence of a person in a Da'eef  narration would falsify an Authentic Narration if he is left out in the narrator's chain of an authentic narration.

Actually, when asked if Kylon could have met Jaffer, the answer would be "possible" because Kylon's demise took place in Hijri 132 and that of Jaffer bin Iyas is Hijri 126.

غيلان بن جامع  بن أشعث المحاربي أبو عبد الله الكوفي قاضيها ثقة من السادسة مات سنة اثنتين وثلاثين م د س ق    (تقريب التهذيب ج: 1 ص: 443)

Thahdheebuth Thahdheeb 1/443

جعفر بن إياس  أبو بشر بن أبي وحشية بفتح الواو وسكون المهملة وكسر المعجمة وتثقيل التحتانية ... مات سنة خمس وقيل ست وعشرين ع تقريب التهذيب ج: 1 ص: 139  

Thahdheebuth Thahdheeb 1/139

There is only 6 year gap between their demise. This is relatively much more sufficient period for them to have met each other.

Moreover, Jaffer bin Iyas belongs to Basra and Kylon to Kufa. There is no surprise in people from adjacent cities to have met.

We all agree that the Narrations documented in Saheeh Muslim is Authenticated. Imam Muslim, in his preface quotes that when both the narrators are Reliable, and when both have existed in same Era, and when conditions prevailed for both of them to have met; it is sufficient for us to assume that one of them have perceived from the other. Imam Muslim have documented the Narrations in Saheeh Muslim based on this criterion. Scholars of Hadhees Science have also accepted this. Hence, Kylon hearing from Jaffer cannot be rejected.

Neither there is a basis nor Proof for both of them not having met. This is a wrong decision of Albani which is not accepted by anyone. They justify this stand of falsifying an Authentic Narration with a Da'eef Narration.

Some more Narrations strengthens that Zakaah is for purifying Wealth.