categories: First, that the situation does not change. In this case, the payment fulfills its purpose, suffices for the one paying Zakat, and he is neither obligated to pay a replacement nor does he have the right to reclaim it, just as if he had paid it after its obligation. Second, that the situation of the recipient changes, such as by dying before the completion of the year, becoming wealthy, or apostatizing before the completion of the year. This is in the same ruling as the previous category, and this is what Abu Hanifa said. Al-Shafi'i said: It does not suffice, because what was a condition for Zakat, if it is missing before the completion of the year, it does not suffice, just as if the wealth perished or its owner died. We argue: He paid the Zakat to its eligible recipient, so the change in his situation does not prevent the fulfillment, just as if he became wealthy through it. Also, it is a right that he paid to its eligible recipient, so he is absolved of it, like a debt one pays in advance of its due date. What they mentioned is invalidated by the case where he becomes wealthy through it, and the analogy in the original premise is invalid. Furthermore, the difference between them is clear; for when wealth perishes, it becomes evident that the obligation never existed; so it is similar to the case where one pays dirhams to a creditor thinking he owes them, then it becomes clear that he does not. Similarly, if a guarantor pays a debt, and it turns out the one guaranteed has already paid it. In our case, the right is obligatory and its eligible recipient has received it. The third category is that the situation of the wealth owner changes before the completion of the year by his death, apostasy, the perishing of the nisab, its decrease (4), or its sale. Abu Bakr said: He does not take it back from the poor person, regardless of whether he informed him that it was an accelerated Zakat or did not inform him. The Qadi said: This is the school of thought in my view, because it reached the poor person, so he has no right to reclaim it, just as if he had not informed him. Also, it is Zakat that was paid to its eligible recipient, so reclaiming it is not permissible, just as in the case where the situation of the poor person alone changes. Abu Abd Allah Ibn Hamid said: If the one paying it is the collector (al-sa'i), he reclaims it in any case. If the one paying it is the owner of the wealth and he informed him that it is an accelerated Zakat, he takes it back, but if he spoke in general terms (without specifying), he does not take it back (6).