Dear Hadi,
Assalāmu ʿalaykum wa raḥmatullāhi wa barakātuh,
I would like to ask a question regarding zakāt and ṣadaqah.
My father was ill, and during that time our family members helped us financially so that we could purchase his medication. Sadly, my father has since passed away. I now intend to return the money that was given to us to those family members. The total amount I intend to repay is approximately 50K euros.
The family members have not asked for the money to be returned, nor have they set any deadline. From my monthly salary of approximately 3000 euros, I cover rent, food, medical visits, and other essential expenses. I set aside around 1000 euros each month with the intention of saving and gradually repaying this debt.
My questions are as follows:
1. Am I required to pay zakāt in my current situation?
2. Is it permissible for me to give ṣadaqah while I am still in debt?
3. Is the following narration fabricated, weak or authentic: "The ṣadaqah of a person who is in debt will not be accepted.”
Jazakallahu khairan
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your question. It is an interesting one, and a dilemma that we are sure many people face.
As we say in many columns, we cannot and do not give fatwas, but rather do our best to give what we hope isA is informed advice, and Allah SWT knows best.
In Islamic law, the relationship between debt and zakat is treated with great seriousness because it involves the rights of other people (huquq al-ibad), which are given a high priority.
We will try to address both parts of your question, regarding both zakat and sadaqah, basically outlining how we would approach the question.
With respect to zakat, the foundational principle is that it is only obligatory upon wealth that reaches the minimum threshold (nisab) and remains in one’s possession for a year (hawl).
The majority of classical jurists hold that just being in debt does not automatically exempt a person from paying zakat, basing this on the fact that the Prophet (pbuh) when sending his representatives to collect zakat, never instructed them to ask whether the person they were collecting from had debt or not. However, the majority do feel that debt can affect whether zakat is due, and can also impact the amount that has to be paid. This view is attributed to the Hanafi school, many Malikis, and the Hanbalis, and it is also reported from a number of Companions. One of the clearest early statements comes from the Caliph Uthman ibn Affan (radiyallahu ʿanhu), who said during Ramadan, “This is the month of your zakat. Whoever has a debt, let him pay his debt, then give zakat on what remains.” Malik ibn Anas recorded this report in al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, and it became a key proof-text for later jurists.
On this basis, Ibn Qudamah states in al-Mughni that if a person possesses wealth equal to the nisab but is also burdened by debt that would consume that wealth, then no zakat is due, because zakat is only taken from excess wealth beyond one’s essential needs and liabilities. This view is prominent in the Hanafi and Hanbali schools: that debt mitigates the obligation of zakat because ownership of wealth is incomplete when another person’s right is attached to the wealth. Even within the Maliki school, where there is some internal disagreement, many authorities held that personal debts which are immediately due, reduce zakatable wealth.
The Shafi’i school is the primary classical exception, feeling that debt does not cancel zakat on cash or trade goods if the nisab is reached, because zakat is a right attached to the wealth itself rather than the person’s net worth. Nonetheless, even within the Shafi’i tradition, scholars recognized hardship cases, and later jurists acknowledged that crushing or immediately due debts could effectively excuse a person from payment. For this reason, many contemporary scholars, even when influenced by Shafi’i methodology, adopt the majority position in modern financial contexts.
To the best of our limited knowledge, many modern fatwas and juristic councils largely follow this majority approach, holding that debts which are due in the present year may be deducted from zakatable assets, and if what remains falls below the nisab, no zakat is required.
Therefore, our advice to you is to calculate your wealth as you would to ordinarily pay zakat. From this, subtract what you intend to repay your relatives in the coming year. If the remainder is above the nisab, pay zakat on that amount (wealth minus the debt payment for the year). If your wealth falls below the nisab, then zakat is not due (and God knows best).
The issue of nisab itself is very complex, and is outside the scope of your question. The generally accepted position, based on Prophetic hadith, is that it is wealth that you possess for a year (i.e., that you did not need to spend on your living expenses) that exceeds about 87 grams of gold (which currently would be somewhere between $7,000-$12,000 US dollars).
Voluntary sadaqah is another issue. In principle, giving charity while in debt is permissible and may even be rewarded, but only when it does not infringe upon obligatory responsibilities. Islamic law consistently prioritizes obligations over voluntary acts. The Prophet (pbuh) warned strongly about neglecting duties owed to others, particularly debt, saying “The soul of the believer is held back by his debt until it is paid,” a hadith reported by al-Tirmidhi.
For this reason, some jurists explain that if a person’s debt is immediately due and giving sadaqah would delay repayment or harm the creditor, then such charity is blameworthy. Some scholars articulate this principle by stating that acts of voluntary devotion do not draw one closer to Allah if they are accompanied by the violation of people’s rights, emphasizing that the Shariah consistently gives precedence to binding obligations over voluntary acts.
At the same time, Islam does not forbid all charity from someone who is in debt. If a debtor is meeting basic needs, servicing the debt responsibly, and gives a small amount of charity that does not harm repayment, such charity is permissible and rewarded. This is supported by the Prophet’s encouragement to give even the smallest charity, as in his statement, “Protect yourselves from the Fire, even with half a date,” narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim. The key distinction made by the jurists is not whether the giver has debt, but whether the charity compromises an obligation.
As for the claim that the Prophet (pbuh) said that “no ṣadaqah is accepted from a person in debt,” we could not find an authentic hadith to this effect. We do not know of a sound narration that states that a debtor’s charity is categorically rejected. We believe, and God knows best, that the correct understanding is that sadaqah from a debtor is generally praiseworthy if it does not compromise repayment obligations, but that neglecting or delaying debt repayment in order to give charity is morally and legally blameworthy.
We feel that these opinions are especially valid in your case: that you should pay zakat if your wealth (calculated in the manner above) allows, and that small amounts of voluntary sadaqah are encouraged, as you can afford. We say this because you do not have a contractual obligation of debt. Your relatives did not lend you money for a fixed term, etc. Rather, you, being a noble person, feel that you have to repay the money they spent to help your father – a sentiment which we support and applaud.
Once again, we stress that this is not a fatwa, but advice reflecting what we would personally do in your position, and God knows best.
May God reward you for your devotion both to Islam and to your family and obligations.