require that a full year elapse for both the capital owner and the manager. This is his position in the Book of Zakat in al-Mudawwana, since, once a full year has elapsed for the manager from the day he received the wealth, a full year has also elapsed for the capital owner. He is also bound to assess the minimum threshold by combining the capital owner’s capital and share of the profit with any other wealth he may have acquired earlier or at the same time. Yet no such position is reported from Ibn al-Qāsim or known to be part of his school of thought. [He is likewise bound to assess the minimum threshold by combining the manager’s share of the profit with any other wealth he possesses on which a full year has elapsed. This, too, is neither reported from him nor known to be part of his school of thought.] Had he adopted these two criteria for assessing the minimum threshold that makes zakat obligatory upon the manager on his share of the profit, his position would have been consistent with treating the manager’s profit in a profit-sharing partnership as subject to zakat on the basis of both parties’ ownership jointly.

Section

As for the fourth topic—determining when payment of zakat becomes obligatory—its explanation requires distinguishing several cases. The manager must either be absent from the capital owner, who does not know the condition of the wealth in his hands, or be present with him, so that the owner knows the condition of the partnership capital in the manager’s hands.

If the manager is absent, there is no disagreement that the owner is not required to pay zakat on his wealth in the manager’s hands until it returns to him and he learns its condition. If it returns to him after several years, he pays zakat on it for the preceding years, in accordance with the rulings we shall explain, Allah willing, concerning traders who continually turn over their stock and those who do not.

If, however, the manager is present with him and the owner knows the condition of his wealth in the manager’s hands, there are four possible cases. First, both continually turn over their stock. Second, the capital owner continually turns over his stock, but the manager does not. Third, the capital owner does not continually turn over his stock, but the manager does. Fourth, neither continually turns over his stock.

If both continually turn over their stock; or if the capital owner does not but the manager does, whether the amount in his hands is the larger or smaller portion—according to the view that, when one of two holdings is continually traded, zakat on that holding is assessed according to its own annual trading cycle, whether it is the smaller or larger holding; or if the capital owner continually turns over his stock but the manager does not, and the wealth in his hands consists of capital used for continual trading or capital not so used, and it is