I would hope that it would nonetheless discharge the obligation, yet the first opinion is the school’s settled doctrine.

Whoever owns a house and a servant such that, were they both sold, the proceeds would do no more than purchase a similar house and servant, is not considered wealthy, and it is lawful for him to receive zakah. Even if, from the price of his servant, there remained—over and above what would secure a comparable house and servant—an excess of forty dirhams, the charity is still not forbidden to him. There is no fixed amount that must or may be given to a single recipient, yet I prefer that no one be granted more than two hundred dirhams purely as a recommended limit. If, however, he is given a sum upon which zakah itself becomes due, or even more, that is acceptable according to Mālik.

ʿAbd al-Malik said: “He should not be handed a full niṣāb and then have any part of it deducted.” Mālik nonetheless allows zakah to be paid to someone who already owns a niṣāb that does not suffice for him because of the size of his family or his limited means of earning.

The obligatory charity is not lawful for any member of Banū Hāshim—that is, the family of Abū Ṭālib, the family of al-ʿAbbās, and anyone else of their Hāshimite lineage.

Zakah ought not to be sent away from the district where the payer and his wealth reside, except to someone in acute need or to a needy relative whose maintenance is not incumbent upon him. If a person does send part of his zakah outside the locality for other than these reasons, yet still gives it to legitimate recipients, he is not required to repeat the payment.

Mālik, his companions, and the scholars of Medina before them differed regarding a man who, not knowing their status, gives his zakah to someone who is affluent, a slave, or an unbeliever. There are two opinions:

1. He acted on his best judgement and bears no further liability.
2. The payment does not suffice because he failed to place it where he was commanded. This is analogous to Mālik’s ruling concerning the expiation of oaths, for he said: if, in the expiations of oaths, one were to give