someone more entitled than him, or equally entitled, when equitable distribution is possible. According to these scholars, a person fulfils his obligation if he gives all the zakāt on his wealth to a single recipient belonging to one category, provided that the recipient is entitled to that amount. For example, if someone owes a debt of one thousand dirhams that he cannot repay, giving him one’s entire zakāt of one thousand dirhams fulfils the obligation.

This is the view of the majority of scholars, including Abū Hanīfa and Ahmad, according to the well-known position reported from him. It is also the position transmitted from the Companions, such as Hudhayfa ibn al-Yamān and ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās, and is attributed to ʿUmar himself. It is authentically reported in Sahīh Muslim that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to Qabīsa ibn Mukhāriq al-Hilālī:

“Stay here, Qabīsa, until the zakāt reaches us, and we will order that it be given to you.”

In Sunan Abī Dāwūd and elsewhere, it is reported that he said to Salama ibn Sakhr al-Bayādī:

“Go to the zakāt collector of Banū Zurayq, and let him give you their zakāt.”

These two hadiths show that he gave a community’s zakāt to a single individual. However, it was the ruler who ordered this, and cases of this kind are disputed. There are arguments on both sides of the issue that this fatwa cannot accommodate.

Our concern here is the second fundamental issue: zakāt al-fitr. Is this charity treated like zakāt on wealth, or like charitable dues attached to the person, such as expiations? There are two views. Those who hold the first view, and also maintain that distribution among all the categories is obligatory, require such distribution for zakāt al-fitr as well.