Ruling 1851. Khums must be divided into two parts: one part is the portion for sayyids[1] (sahm al‑sādāt), which must be given to a poor sayyid, an orphan sayyid, or a sayyid who is stranded on a journey. The second part is the portion for the Imam (ʿA) (sahm al‑imām), which at present [i.e. during the time of the Imam’s (ʿA) occultation] must either be given to a fully qualified jurist or spent for purposes that he authorises. And the obligatory precaution is that the jurist must be the most learned (aʿlam) marjaʿ[2] and be well aware of public affairs.

Ruling 1852. An orphan sayyid to whom khums is given must be poor. However, a sayyid who is stranded on a journey can be given khums even if he is not a poor person in his home town (waṭan).

Ruling 1853. If the journey of a sayyid who is stranded was for a sinful purpose, then based on obligatory precaution, he must not be given khums.

Ruling 1854. A sayyid who is not a dutiful person (ʿādil) can be given khums. However, khums must not be given to a sayyid who is not a Twelver Shia.

Ruling 1855. A sayyid who uses khums for sinful purposes cannot be given khums. In fact, the obligatory precaution is that khums must not be given to him if it assists him to commit sins, even if he does not spend it directly for sinful purposes. Similarly, the obligatory precaution is that a sayyid who consumes alcohol, does not perform prayers, or publicly commits sins, must not be given khums.

Ruling 1856. If a person claims that he is a sayyid, khums cannot be given to him unless two dutiful persons confirm it, or one attains certainty or confidence (iṭmiʾnān) by some other way that he is a sayyid.

Ruling 1857. Khums can be given to a person who is known to be a sayyid in his home town, provided that one is not certain or confident that he is not a sayyid.

Ruling 1858. If one’s wife is a sayyidah,[3] then based on obligatory precaution, he must not give his khums to her to spend on her living expenses [that are obligatory for him to provide]. However, if it is obligatory for her to meet the living expenses of others but she cannot do so, it is permitted (jāʾiz) for him to give his khums to her to spend on them. The same applies [i.e. as with the case mentioned at the beginning of this ruling, he must not, based on obligatory precaution,] give his khums to her to spend on her maintenance (nafaqah) that is not obligatory for him to provide.

Ruling 1859. If it is obligatory for a person to meet the living expenses of a sayyid or of a sayyidah who is not his wife, then based on obligatory precaution, he cannot provide for their food, clothing, and other obligatory maintenance from khums. However, there is no problem if he gives some khums to them to spend on things that are not obligatory for him to provide.

Ruling 1860. Khums can be given to a poor sayyid whose living expenses are obligatory for another person to meet but who cannot, or does not, meet the sayyid’s living expenses.

Ruling 1861.* The obligatory precaution is that one must not give a person entitled to receive khums an amount of khums that is more than his living expenses for the year in one go. And if one gives such a person his living expenses for the year in instalments, then once the amount reaches the level of his living expenses for the year, it is definitely not permitted to give him any more.

Ruling 1862. If there is no one entitled to receive khums in a person’s town, he can take it to another town. In fact, he can take it to another town even if there is someone entitled to receive it in his town, provided that this act is not considered nonchalance in paying khums. In either case, if the khums perishes, he is responsible (ḍāmin) for it even if he was not negligent in looking after it. Furthermore, he cannot deduct the costs for taking it [to the other town] from the khums.

Ruling 1863. If a person takes possession of his khums by way of agency (wikālah) of a fully qualified jurist or his representative, he [is deemed to have paid his khums and] is absolved of his responsibility. Furthermore, if he transfers it to another town in compliance with the direction of a fully qualified jurist or his representative, and in the process it perishes without him being negligent, he is not responsible for it.

Ruling 1864. It is not permitted for one to calculate an item as having a higher price than it actually does and then give it in lieu of khums. And as stated in Ruling 1805, it is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, one must not] give something else in lieu of khums – apart from money – except with authorisation from a fully qualified jurist or his agent.

Ruling 1865.* If a person is owed money by a sayyid who is entitled to receive the portion for sayyids, and the person who is owed wants to calculate the amount he is owed in lieu of the portion for sayyids that he is liable to pay, he must, based on obligatory precaution, first obtain permission from a fully qualified jurist, or he must give the portion for sayyids to the sayyid indebted to him who after that returns it to him in lieu of the money he owes him. Alternatively, the person who is owed the money can become an agent for the sayyid and take possession of it on his behalf as payment in lieu of what he is owed. As for the portion for the Imam (ʿA), if someone is owed money by a poor person, he cannot calculate the amount he is owed in lieu of the blessed portion for the Imam (ʿA) even if that poor person is unable to repay his debt. However, if the person who owes the money is entitled to receive the portion for the Imam (ʿA), leaving aside the fact that he owes money, then it is possible to give him the portion for the Imam (ʿA) while observing what was mentioned in Ruling 1851, and he can repay his debt with that money.

Ruling 1866. A person who must pay khums cannot make it a condition on someone entitled to receive it that he must return the amount to him.