فان هذين الخبرين الاصل فيهما سماعة وتختلف روايته لان الرواية الاخيرة قال فيها: سألته ولم يذكر المسؤول، وهذا يحتمل أن يكون المسؤول غير من يجب إتباع قوله، وزاد أيضا فيه الفرق بين زكاة الحنطة والشعير والتمر والزبيب، وقد قدمنا من الاحاديث ما يدل على انه لا فرق بين هذه الاشياء، والرواية الاولى قال فيها: سألت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام وذكر الحديث، وهذا الاضطراب في الحديث مما يضعف الاحتجاج به ولو سلم من ذلك كله لكان محمولا على الاستحباب بدلالة ما قدمناه من الاخبار وانه لا يجوز تناقضها. ويحتمل أن يكون أراد بقوله عليه السلام: في كل خمسة أوساق وسق الخمس، وإن كان أطلق عليه إسم الزكاة، لان الزكاة في الاصل هي النمو، وإنما سميت الزكاة في الشريعة به لما يؤول إليه من عاقبته من استحقاق الثواب وهذا المعنى موجود في الخمس فلا يمتنع إطلاق الاسم عليه، ألا ترى انا نطلق إسم الزكاة على النافلة وغيرها لما يؤول إليه من إستحقاق الثواب، والخمس يجب إخراجه بعد إخراج الزكاة والذي يدل على ذلك ما رواه:
As for these two reports, their basis is Sama’ah, and his narration differs. In the latter narration, Sama’ah said: “I asked him,” but Sama’ah did not mention who was asked. This leaves open the possibility that the one asked was someone whose statement is not binding. He also added in that narration a distinction between the zakat of wheat, barley, dates, and raisins, whereas we have already presented hadiths indicating that there is no difference between these things. As for the first narration, Sama’ah said in it: “I asked Abu Abdillah عليه السلام,” and then mentioned the hadith. This inconsistency (idtirab) within the hadith is among the things that weaken its use as proof. Even if the report were free from all of that, it would still be carried upon recommendation, due to the reports we have already presented, and because it is not permissible for the reports to contradict one another. It is also possible that by the saying of the Imam عليه السلام: “In every five wasqs (awsaq) there is one wasq,” the Imam عليه السلام intended khums, even though he applied the name ‘zakat’ to it. This is because zakat, in its original meaning, refers to growth. It was only called zakat in the Shariah because of what it leads to in the end, namely deserving reward. This meaning is also present in khums, so it is not impossible for the name zakat to be applied to it. Do you not see that we apply the name zakat to voluntary charity (nafilah) and other acts because of what they lead to of deserving reward? Khums must also be taken out after zakat has been taken out. And what indicates this is what he narrated (in the following hadith):
