even if he is wealthy; or [a debtor] on his own account, provided he is poor.

His statement: “even if he is wealthy.”

That is, a debtor who incurs a liability in order to reconcile people is given from zakat even if he is wealthy, because in this case we give him due to the need for his service. Whoever is given due to a need for his service is not required to be poor.

His statement: “or [a debtor] on his own account, provided he is poor.”

The second category of debtors is one who is indebted on his own account—that is, for a matter personal to himself. Such a person is given [from zakat] if he is poor. Poverty here is not like poverty in the first category; rather, here poverty means being unable to repay the debt, even if he possesses enough to support himself and his dependants for a year or more.

Thus, if we suppose that a person owes ten thousand riyals, while his monthly salary is two thousand riyals and his monthly living expenses are two thousand riyals, should we pay the ten thousand riyals on his behalf?

The answer is: yes, because he is now poor with respect to the debt. We do not give him zakat on account of his general poverty, since his salary is sufficient for him. Rather, we give him on account of the debt: he is poor and unable to repay it.

Is it permissible for us to go to the creditor and give him what is owed to him without the debtor’s knowledge?

The answer is: yes, it is permissible, because this falls under the saying of Allah the Exalted: “and for freeing those in bondage” [Quran 9:60]. It is governed by the preposition “for,” while “those in debt” is coordinated with “those in bondage.” Whatever is coordinated with a word governed by a preposition is understood to be governed by that same preposition; thus, the sense is: “and for those in debt.” The preposition “for” does not indicate transfer of ownership, so it is permissible for us to pay it to the one who is owed it.