What is the ruling regarding the intention for Zakat when the Imam seizes it forcibly?
Chapter on Zakat on Sheep
Al-Mughni
Book of Zakat
Primary text
According to Al-Kharqi, if a person pays Zakat voluntarily, it is not valid without intention, whether paid to the Imam or others. However, if the Imam seizes it forcibly, it is valid without the owner forming an intention, as the impossibility of forming intent in his case suspends the obligation upon him, analogous to a minor or an insane person. This is supported by the assertion that the Imam has authority over the one who defaults, and thus his action replaces the owner's intention, similar to the guardian of an orphan or an insane person. This differs from prayer, where substitution of the actor is not permitted, necessitating the intention of the performer.
Supporting text
Al-Qadi holds that if the Imam takes it, it suffices without intention, whether taken voluntarily or coercively, a view shared by Al-Shafi'i. They argue that the Imam's taking is like the division among partners, requiring no intention, and that the Imam possesses the authority to seize it, proven by his agreement to take it from a defaulter. Ibn Aqil and Abu Al-Khattab hold that it is not valid between the individual and God unless the owner forms the intention, as the Imam is an agent for the owner, the poor, or both, and his intention cannot substitute for the owner's, because Zakat is an act of worship requiring intent. The apparent validity in the external realm means the owner is not required to pay a second time, though internally the intent may be lacking, like a person uttering the testimony of faith without true belief.