Surah Adh-Dhariyat: (19) And in their wealth is a right...

Issue 1: Attribution of Wealth

He attributed the wealth to them (the believers), whereas in other places He said: {Spend of what Allah has provided you} (Ya-Sin: 47) and {and of what We have provided them, they spend} (Ash-Shura: 38).

We say: The reason for this difference is that in those places, the mention was for incitement (to spend). Therefore, what removes the hindrance and counteracts the reluctance was mentioned alongside it, saying: "It is the provision of Allah, and Allah provides for you, so do not fear poverty and give." However, here, it is a description of praise for what they have already done, so there was no need for the emphasis on greed prevention.

Issue 2: The Meaning of "Right" (Haqq)

The common understanding of the Haqq (right) is the amount determined by religious law, which is Zakah (obligatory charity). If this is the case, then this statement cannot be a description of praise, because a Muslim having the Haqq (Zakah) in his wealth is not a praiseworthy attribute, as every Muslim is subject to it. Even a disbeliever, if we hold that he is addressed with the branches of Islam, has a known right in his wealth; however, if he converts to Islam, it is waived from him, and if he dies without converting, he is punished for abandoning it, and if he pays it without being a Muslim, it is not accepted. So, how can this be understood as praise?

We say the answer to this is in several ways:

First: We interpret it as referring to what is sought by religious law, which includes the portion due to the asker and the deprived one who has no means to ask and whom the Lawgiver prevents from demanding. This prevention might be because the claimant is not deserving, or because the one obligated has no remaining right to be demanded. Thus, the Almighty said that in their wealth is a right for the asker (which is Zakah), and a right for the non-asker (which is voluntary charity, Sadaqah). The owner is not demanded for the latter, and the asker is deprived of demanding it as a matter of Jizyah or Zakah. Rather, it is sought through a voluntary request. In this sense, it is as if He said: "In their wealth is Zakah and Sadaqah." And Sadaqah in wealth only occurs through its obligation, its determination, and its setting aside for the poor and needy.

Second: The statement {And in their wealth is a right for the asker} means that their wealth is a container (dharaf) for their rights. The preposition fī (in) denotes containment. A container is only sought for what it contains. It is as if the Almighty said: They do not seek or accumulate wealth except that they make it a container for rights. Undoubtedly, what is sought from the container is what it contains, and the container is their wealth. Thus, He made their wealth a container for rights, and this is the highest form of praise.

If it is argued that saying "Their wealth is for the asker" would have been more eloquent, we reply: No. This is because someone who possesses forty dinars and gives it away in charity, his charity is not lasting. But if he strives, trades, lives for years, and pays Zakah and Sadaqah, the amount he pays out will be greater. This is similar to prayer and fasting: if someone overexerts himself in them until he becomes incapable, he is not like one who performs them moderately. This is alluded to in the Prophet's saying (peace be upon him): "Indeed, this religion is strong, so enter it gently. For the one who rushes ahead neither covers the ground nor spares his mount."

Regarding the Asker (Sā'il) and the Deprived (Maḥrūm)

There are several interpretations regarding the Sā'il (asker) and the Maḥrūm (deprived):

First: The Sā'il is the articulate one, meaning humankind. The Maḥrūm is every living creature other than humans—the animals that are deprived. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "There is a reward for every living, moist liver [i.e., every living creature]."

Second (The more apparent and famous view): The Sā'il is the one who asks, and the Maḥrūm is the one who refrains from asking, whom some people think is rich and thus give him nothing. The first view is like His saying: {Eat and graze your livestock} (Tā-Hā: 54). The second view is like His saying: {And feed the contented and the beggar} (Al-Hajj: 36). The Qāni' (contented) is like the Maḥrūm.

If it is argued that in the first view, the ordering is perfectly logical, as meeting the need of the articulate being takes precedence over meeting the need of the beasts, what is the logic behind the ordering in the second view?

We reply there are two aspects to this:

1. The need of the Sā'il is met before the need of the Maḥrūm because the Sā'il makes his condition known through his speech and asks due to his lack of wealth, so his need is prioritized. The Maḥrūm is unknown, so his need is not met until he is discovered. Thus, the mention is in the actual order of events.
2. It is an indication of the abundance of giving. He gives to the Sā'il, and if he does not find those who ask, he himself seeks out the needy, thus becoming both the asker and the one being asked about.

Third: Verbal beauties are not neglected in wise speech. The statement of someone saying, "Their return is to Us, and upon Us is their reckoning," is not like the Almighty's saying: **{Indeed, to Us is their return Then indeed, upon Us is their reckoning}* (Al-Ghāshiyah: 26). Speech has a body, which is the wording, and a spirit, which is the meaning. Just as a person whose spirit is illuminated by knowledge should illuminate his outward body with cleanliness, so too with speech. Many a wise word fails to affect souls due to the weakness of its wording.

Knowing this, His saying: **{And in the early hours of the morning they seek forgiveness And in their wealth is a right for the asker and the deprived}* is superior in wording to saying: "And in the early hours of the morning they seek forgiveness, and in their wealth is a right for the deprived and the asker."

If it is asked why the Sā'il is mentioned before the Maḥrūm here, based on the reasons mentioned, yet the Maḥrūm (the Qāni') is mentioned before the Sā'il (the Mu'tarr) in the verse {the contented and the beggar} (Al-Hajj: 36)?

We reply that it has been said that the Qāni' is the asker, and the Mu'tarr is the one who does not ask, so there is no difference between the two places. Another view is that both the Qāni' and the Mu'tarr do not ask, but the Qāni' does not approach or leave his house, while the Mu'tarr approaches by offering greetings and lingering, without asking. Another view is that the Qāni' does not ask, but the Mu'tarr does ask.

Based on this last view, the flesh of the sacrificial animal is distributed without a claimant demanding it (like Jizyah or Zakah). Zakah has a claimant and asker, who is the collector (Sā'ī) and the Imam. Thus, His saying {for the asker} refers to Zakah, and His saying {and the deprived} means the one prevented, referring to voluntary charity. One precedes the other, unlike the distribution of meat.

Then the Almighty said:

! 7 < { And in the earth are signs for those who are certain (in faith) } . > 7 !

<