Unlocking a comprehensive concept of sadaqah

INDIVIDUALS are separated into four classifications of sadaqah, which have a powerful impact in the formation of the economics of giving in our civilised folks today to protect the rights of the disadvantaged.

One may discover a person who is “willing to donate” some parts of his wealth to help needy and poor folks in which they possess “financial capacity” to do so. This person is known as “generous rich folk”, described as the best type of individual in terms of sincerity and munificence.

This person helps elevate shared prosperity for the reduced magnitude of poverty rate. The merits are two-fold.

First, affluent folks’ donation has developed from the “sense of empathy” towards the disadvantaged in society – transferring wealth via zakat and other measures deemed appropriate.

Second, poor and needy people who have been funded may develop a “sense of respect” towards the muzakki (zakat payer) in the case of zakat and it is continually improving in terms of impact when consistency in culture is prioritised through the integration of roles of different parties for goal congruency.

There is a “generous poor folk” who has a willingness to give but has limited financial capacity in creating the atmosphere. There is also a “stingy rich folk” who has no willingness though imbued with the capacity to claim the spot.

A person who is termed as “helpless poor folk” can also be found – limiting in terms of willingness and money.

Poverty is a recurring issue that is relatively found in all civilisations without pinpointing the specific geographies, tribes and socioeconomic status, inter alia. Food and shelter poverties are two relative problems that occurred in developing and developed countries, respectively.

Education is argued as a solution. The forward-thinking is still at disadvantages to poor people because the taking of education is pricey today and needs a consistent allocation of budget yearly for meeting routine activities related.

Besides, not all poor folks possess enhanced intellectual capacity owing to confined natural endowment and the training earned through the development of knowledge, skill and ability (KSA) is insufficient that maintains the dependency. This also proves why poverty is still persistent and hard to overcome, with ceteris paribus.

This write-up intends to answer these questions – Q#1 – Are zakat, waqf, sadaqah and infaq the same? Q#2- Does zakat sufficient to fight poverty?

Sadaqah is comprehensive in terms of coverage. Sadaqah is broken down into compulsory and recommended (CR). The compulsory measures include zakat on mal (wealth), zakat on health/body and mandatory infaq.

The recommended or nonmandatory includes monetary and non-monetary. The monetary includes waqf, hiba, wasiat and hiba, among others. The non-monetary includes deeds toward oneself, other fine people and other creations.

Zakat is defined as increase, purity, growth and blessing – be it mal or body. When nisab and hawl are attained, one is paying zakat to eight individuals known as mustahiq (zakat recipients).

Waqf is termed as restricting movement, transport or exchange. The payer and payee can be anyone.

Sadaqah is righteousness covering obligatory giving and voluntary giving of alms. It is given by a person according to certain conditions to meet in the case of zakat, and without limits like infaq. Further, it can be monetary and nonmonetary. Good deeds like smiling and talking softly are forms of sadaqah. Seen cheaper in this world but expensive in the hereafter.

Infaq has two components namely obligatory infaq, which is given by a husband to his wife. Voluntary infaq is given at one’s convenience and can be any “excess” derived from the principal of zakat payment.

If one pays zakat for a sum of RM40, afterwards paying that sum using RM50 to the amil (zakat collector) and ask the latter to keep the change. The change of RM10 is defined as infaq. Generally, it is termed as “spending”.

Led by a deficiency in the KSA, one is continued facing poverty in his life if the generated poverty sourced from the KSA is not handled with self-wisdom whilst still depending on others to decide the best.

This may also a sort of tale that zakat alone cannot exterminate poverty though it is the major contributor to circumscribe the poverty industry in the country. Some concerns related to zakat are provided.

First, there is a likelihood of the zakat funds’ inaccessibility in a rural area among the recipients due to the geographical constraints can diminish the effectiveness of the zakat funds’ role in eradicating radical inequalities.

Second, some information about the recipients is relatively unknown to the zakat institution owing to knowledge taboo. Henceforth, the identification of qualified recipients may find its hardest way in balancing the scale.

Third, there is a perceptual perspective in that the mustahiq inclines to depend on the monthly contribution funded by the institution. The effort to reduce poverty among them might be defined as difficult and worse comes to worst indecisive.

Fourth, there is a narrow definition of zakat recipients. A new asnaf definition should be established to capture the new complexities that exist in our present society. For instance, disabled persons deserved the zakat funds because of physical and mental incompetence, at best.

Fifth, there exists a lack of synthesis with redistribution measures – zakat funds can help to recover the well-being of the mustahiq. A supportive environment is needed to eradicate poverty.

For instance, a mustahiq who runs a business with minimal infrastructure should be assisted with virtual coaching if any and the like if the zakat institution would aim to produce a change in outcomes and impacts.

Going forward, zakat is a part of obligatory sadaqah that has been essential to making reduced poverty via shared prosperity, when the interplay of positive and voluntary measures is formally established.

However, the integration of all measures which is shaped based on the tawhidic paradigm can further breed an impact for escalated mutual prosperity among the disadvantaged at reduced poverty, leading to continued well-being and peace of mind and therefore love, happiness and brotherhood are upheld at the proper scale, at least.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT: This writing is based on research funded by the Center for Research and Innovation, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) – SDK0246-2020