Is not Khums a cause for social difference?
Question: A communist leader has been reported to have said: I have studied all the religions so that I may be attracted towards one of them. Thus I found the religion of Islam to be superior to other faiths. But I regret to say that in this too I found a weak aspect. It is that Islamic law gives preference to the descendants of the Holy Prophet (a.s.) over other Muslims and has made Khums as their prerogative?
Answer: As mentioned in the reply to the previous question, basically there is no difference between Khums (which is the share of Sadaat) and Zakah. That is, both are related to the needy people of the society. Each is paid according to their needs and whatever is left is considered a part of Baitul Maal. The only thing is that since the descendants of the Holy Prophet (a.s.) have a sort of superiority that is why their needs are fulfilled not by the name of Zakah but by different name. It is also obvious that the Sadaat on the basis of their relationship cannot ignore even a little bit any of the Islamic laws and from the aspect of social laws there is no difference between them and other people.
The gist of this discussion is that contrary to what people think the law of Khums is not in any way a distinction for Sadaat and from the monetary point of view there is no difference between Khums and Zakah (which is for other poor people). That is the needy Sadaat are not given a higher monetary assistance than other people, and neither is Khums given for well-to-do Sadaat.