Fiqh al-Zakah is a modern jurist's own comprehensive treatment of zakat, Islamic almsgiving, and this record holds it plainly at the tier appropriate to one scholar's own partisan legal position rather than to neutral outside description: Yusuf al-Qaradawi wrote from within a specific tradition of Sunni jurisprudence, and this record states his positions here as his own stated fiqh rather than as a settled, universally accepted ruling. Use it to document what this specific modern jurist argues about the rules and scope of zakat; it is not evidence that his specific rulings represent the position of every school of Islamic law, since it is one jurist's own comprehensive statement of his own legal reasoning.
Facts
Citation
AuthorYusuf al-Qaradawi
PublisherScientific Publishing Centre, King Abdulaziz University
Publication Year1969
URLhttps://archive.org/details/fiqh-al-zakah-volume-2
Source Typeprimary-text
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
Yusuf al-Qaradawi's comprehensive modern treatment of zakat. A partisan work of Sunni jurisprudence, cited for the positions it states rather than as neutral outside description. NotesA modern jurist's comprehensive treatment of zakat. A partisan work of Sunni fiqh, cited for the positions it states rather than as neutral description.
Connections
Associated With
This source names Sunni directly: "from within a specific tradition of Sunni jurisprudence, and this record states his positions here as his own stated fiqh rather than as a settled, universally accepted ruling."
Source Fiqh al-ZakahYusuf al-Qaradawi
Claims Backed By This Source (37 claims)
This source backs 37 claims across the atlas. As facts: 12 well-attested. As cited relationships: 19 holds. Plus 6 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Schools of Religious Law, 23 claims: 18 holds, 5 general references.
- Sources, 9 claims: 8 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Practices, 5 claims: 4 well-attested, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.