Talk:Zakat

untitled comments

I have no edits to make, just the comment that I find the article difficult to understand as written. Respectfully suggest an edit or rewrite by a native english speaker? The thoughts or points are often not clearly connected. Thank you. May 18, 2008 ladeedah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladeedah (talk • contribs) 22:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you changed the newer template to the older one. In my oppinion Template:Muslim Beliefs is much more appropiate for this article than Template:Islam. It shows that there are several closly related articles, how they are related and also kills the myth that the five pillars are universal. More accurate in other words. Could you provide some arguments for changing back to the old template? --Striver 04:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

The text is clear, however, certain aspects of the discussion need to explained in a context. Regarding the prayers, it is correct that there are five prayers, but the first is not the dawn prayer. The first prayer is to occur before the dawn. This distinction should not be overlooked, as it is very important. There is a dawn prayer, but it is voluntary and not a part of what Muslims regard as the compulsory prayer.

The second correction goes to Zakat. There is not, in any strict terms, a mathematical calculation to determining Zakat. It literally should be translated as an act of charity. There is some Quranic guidance for determining the amount, but such is not based on a mathematical formula; rather, simply guides one to give from his net, i.e., from what one has in excess of his needs and obligations. Food is generally the preferred method of giving, and such should be offered to those who are hungry, poor, oppressed, etc. In modern times, one usually adjusts the meaning of Zakat to mean the giving of one's money. Perhaps this is best applied in places like the US and Europe where these forms of "value" exchanges are common. That said, Zakat will vary within societies and cultures, and may include many other things that have a value.

Zakat is a regular part of Islam practices and includes even works that are of good deeds. The Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) instructed Muslims that a good greeting, helping one to mount his or her horse, etc., all constitute Zakat. It also allows those who are poor and without to commit themselves to acts of charity.

One should also be careful not to mash-up the meaning of Zakat with certain aspects of "alms" giving that is outlined during the holy month of Ramadan. The giving of Alms during Ramadan includes certain preferred methods, and guidance. None of these preferred methods, however, is an exact calculation that is tied to one's income. Some confusions about the Zakat may have been exaggerated by Islamic practices that encourage Muslims to give donations by the end of Ramadan. The latter is a kind of assurance for those: 1) who may not have made aims donations during the earlier part of the year; 2) who are observing rites while on a pilgrimage at Mecca, or for other reasons.

The Wiki discussion also exaggerates the distinctions between major Islamic cultures, i.e., Sunni and Shai. While I am not comfortable speaking on the differences between Sunni and Shia practices relative to the five pillars, it is better to first state that this distinction is not only man made, but also in diametric opposition to instructions in the Quran and teachings by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). This position is best understood in a larger context. In Islam, one should be observant of, if not attracted to, differences among peoples. The Prophet expressly states that there should not be any racial or cultural distinctions between Muslims even it these believers come from different families, clans, or parts of the earth. It is fine to see that these believers may be, for lack of a better term, arrayed in different colors, shapes, and speech. However, these differences should be akin to the way one would observe hues of colors. This is a nuanced understanding that takes one away from making black and white distinctions among groups. The prevailing sentiment is that no distinctions should be made among Muslims that are based on cultures, races, etc. This point is inserted now because the WiKi definition explains the differences between Sunni and Shai as a matter that is de facto and permissible within the Islam.

To the extent that one should make differences between any person or group should be simply based on the degree to which that person or group is pious. Plain and simple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahim.moss (talk • contribs) 13:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Help Me Please

I am trying to send a letter to my friend about Zakah. Therfore she does not know anything about the Muslim beleif and how important it is to them. Please can you help me explain to her about Zakah? Thankyou

I have added a link in external links called "Important Information about Zakaah, Nisaab & Sadqah-Tul-Fitr" i personally when to mosque and got the accurate information though "Islamic Foundation of Toronto" do check it out, plus its very informative. (Imuslimz (talk) 01:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC))

Imuslimz - Self published blogs in this vein are not appropriate for Wikipedia. We also ask that people do not add links to their own sites directly to the external links sections. (See our external links guidelines.) Please update the article content using reliable published sources instead. -- SiobhanHansa 12:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Amount?

First, let me say I'm not Muslim and have very little knowledge of the religion beyond the basics. I have heard different things though as to the amount of the Zakat--2.5% and 10%. The article says 2.5% but I've heard a few people (including a Muslim) say it was 10%. I even had a professor who was raised Muslim say it was 2.5% a few days ago in an anthropology lecture, but in an article she wrote she said it was 10% (and she doesn't seem to remember ever saying it was 10%, but I have the article on my lap as I type this). Can someone clarify this? The Ungovernable Force 07:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

It's actually a lot more complicated than the article suggests: http://soundvision.com/info/zakat/howzakat.asp 03:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)Θʢγ

---

I study Islam in college and I understand that it's 2.5% of 'wealth' (not just salary) or 10% of your 'produce' (if you're a farmer and give some of your crops for example). However, there is also Sadaqa which is a charitable donation and this can be given on top of Zakat, but it's not the same thing as Zakat (it isn't obligatory). Hope this helps :)

Zakat as tax

Zakat is used to pay the salary Islamic clergy, build mosques and temples, and promote Islam. The poor have to wage jihad to gain more territory for everyone. Soup is given out to the poor on rare occasions and the like, but nothing meaningful. The main beneficiaries are mullahs as pointed out by Ali Dashti — who was an Islamic cleric, though dissenting. --Patchouli 08:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

An explanation of current opinions on Zakat and how it has impacted Islam would be great addition to the article. But we do need reliable sources, especially for something so controversial. Your recent edit is an unverified opinion, written in a fairly non-encyclopedic style. I didn't want to edit it wihtout reading the source you're using because I don't want to misrepresent the actual meaning. But I really don't think it can stay as it is. --Siobhan Hansa 11:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• My source is Ali Dashti, and I urge you to consult his article, too.

"Thus Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and revenue from the zakat (tax)."

On the "organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and revenue from the zakat" see also The Poor Tax (ZakAt): WAR BOOTY]. When I wrote, "The poor have to wage jihad," I was referring to the warfare as another source of revenue.

Perhaps I make lexical mistakes unwittingly and you can alter that and modify the text.--Patchouli 19:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

What you wrote in the article implied that Zakat encourages Jihad, whereas the sentence above by, my reading, merely says that Jihad and Zakat are both sources of wealth for Islam. And that Islam has become militant and punitive. But it does not say that Zakat (or even Jihad) are the reasons Islam has changed. There may be more in Dashti's work that does draw that conclusion, but it's not in this quote. On the basis of this quote I would probably change the article to say soemthing like - some critics of current Islamic practice, such as Ali Dashti believe that Zakat no longer serves the poor but has become necessary to support the religious machinery of Islam though the "religious machinery" bit is a jump from the quote alone. I don't think there's anything in the quote that makes a mention of Jihad relevent. Does that make sense?

I think it's also important to point out early on that the quotes on the Ali Dashti page aren't properly cited. Quotes should ideally come from an official translation (Mazda published an English language translation of Twenty Three Years - ISBN 1568590296 ) and should specify which publication of the book they come from and the page number(s) the quote can be found on. While this isn't the critical bit of the article writing (getting the content on the page right comes first!), it helps people defending the content's inclusion because they can actually point to the quote. Whereas, if you just say "well it's in this book" It's easy enough for others to say "no it's not" and if people can't find the quote easily, they're unlikely to let the content stand. --Siobhan Hansa 20:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

And I see you've already edited the article! So that makes most of my comments above irrelevent! --Siobhan Hansa 20:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

If this is an article about Islam, then why discuss some hearsay criticism about Muslims? Its off-topic

Dispute tag

Patchouli, as a non-Arab myself I have no difficulty reading this article. Could you point out which Arab words are left unexplained? Thanks --Siobhan Hansa 11:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I had no problem either; they are all explained. Remove the tag if you like.--Patchouli 19:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Are the aims of Zakat, as described here, accurate? I don't think they are and we should urgently look at the Aims section. Parkylondon 10:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

DOUBT

I don't believe this material about how zakat works. It is too well organized. My guess is that this is the ideal form of zakat according to one of the many possible source. Maybe the Shi'ite information is more accurate. It is certainly more plausible.

In my opinion the whole article should be condemned as POV. But I am not about to do anything about it today. DKleinecke 17:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Shiite example: numbers don't add up

Can anyone please clarify the numbers used in the Shiite example: "A man starts with $5000 in his bank account; on the same day after one lunar year passes, he has $1 in his bank account (having already paid his bills and debts), and so must take the fifth of his $1 earning, that is $120. What remains after the fifth (that is 1-1=$5480)"

• How come the man has a $1 earning after going from $5000 in his account down to $1? Looks like a 4999$ loss to me
• The fifth of $1 would be 20 cents, no?
• 1-1 =0, not 5480

Riemerb 08:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The numbers imply an increase of $600, for a new total of $5,600. Then the rest of what is said makes sense. I changed the article accordingly. Catawba 19:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy Dispute

The article is not complete and there're a few misunderstandings on this talk page. While I am addressing some of the issues on the talk page, my main concern (and the motivation for this dispute) is because of inaccuracy of the zakat article.

The article only talks about 2.5% on savings and does not even discuss ushr and khums which is part of zakat. I cannot update it right now, but I am flagging it so someone else can spend some time fixing it and in the meantime, users will know that this is misrepresenting Zakat.

If you would like to know more about Zakat, feel free to read this: http://www.renaissance.com.pk/nodeed98.html This is a journal published in Pakistan by Al-Mawrid institude (one of the leading Islamic sciences research institutes). You can find ample material in Sayyid Sabiq (from Al-Azhar university cairo)'s Fiqh-us-Sunnah - which you can easily get by googling.

Zakat is supposed to be paid to an Islamic government - that is why many Muslim countries officially charge zakat (example in case, Pakistan - unless you are a non-Muslim or do not adhere to the scholarly opinion that you can pay zakat to the government.) It is only in the case of lack of a government or living in an Islamic government that one ends up paying their Zakat elsewhere (i.e. to poor and/or to charity). (see http://www.renaissance.com.pk/deisma951.html)

Also someone mentioned above a link between Jihad and Zakat - they have no direct link. The only way they 'were linked' was when the government waged a war (which is how armed Jihad is supposed to be), and it uses Zakat (otherwise called tax) to purchase arms or build military.

Thanks - Omer (talk) 06:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The last few paragraphs clearly need deletion or serious editing as they are full of sweeping nonverifiable generalizations and an obvious anti-Islam bias. IrishHollow (talk) 14:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Which?

Is it zakat or zakah? Or are the terms interchangeable? 69.42.7.212 (talk) 19:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Arabic: زكاة is zakāt. People see the "ta marbuta" (ة) and mistakenly assume it is always pronounced as an h, but in cases like this (and the word for prayer - salāt) the long vowel means the t is not elided. Most Muslims are not Arabic speakers. Ogress _smash! 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm asking the same question. If both terms are used by Muslims then they should both be given in the introduction. Ltwin (talk) 16:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Favour

I'd be grateful if anyone could have a look at [1] and spot any errors. I appreciate I ought to post this on a Wikiproject Islam page but it is more relevant here and it does contain some quotes which might be useful for improving this article. --BozMo talk 11:37, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Unused and un-invested surplus

Preamble:

Allama Iqbal envisions the operation of the Qura’nic command – Qulil ‘Afw [Say to the people: ‘spend the surplus’ above the median level for the benefit of the common man, Al Qur’an 2:219] in the modern age in the following verses:

Jo harf-e- Qulil ‘Afw mein poshidah hai abtak Is daur mein shayad wuh haqiqat ho namoodar.

The truth hidden in the Qur’anic verse Qulil ‘Afw And hitherto unexplored, may be revealed unto mankind, In the present age.

THEORY OF SURPLUS VALUE IN ISLAM

The Theory of Surplus Value is a Qur’anic Conception, crisply defined in the Qur’an fourteen hundred years ago before Karl Marx, Thus:

“They ask you as to how much they should spend (for the cause of humanity for Allah’s sake). Say: The entire Surplus. (Al-Qur’an, 2:219).

Take the Surplus, promote good, and ignore the uninformed (for the truth and justice of Islam to prevail). (Al-Qur’an, 7:199)

This edict provides the wherewithal to the State of Islam, to ensure primary human rights to all and to abolish poverty, ignorance, inequalities and all the ills of the Society, - as decreed and ordained in the Magna Charta of Human Rights – the great Qur’an. It enunciates of the policy of public finance as well in the Kingdom of Islam.

Land and Natural resources are a part of the universe and they belong to Allah. Man, as His Khalifa and His manager, is entrusted with the efficient management of these natural resources to ensure proper exploitation, maximum production and equitable distribution of the joint product of man and nature, the free gift of Allah, to all mankind.

“To Allah belongs land (and the natural resources), the heirdom whereof He bestows upon whomsoever among His servants He may will” (Al -Qur’an, 7:128).

Land and natural resources have been created by Allah for the benefit and nourishment of all mankind and of all creatures. The function of the Government of Allah is to see that these are not misappropriated for selfish individual aggrandizement of wicked people and followers of the devil at the cost of all others.

MAN AND NATURE ARE THE AGENTS OF PRODUCTION

Man and Nature co-operate with each other in the production of wealth for the benefit of all mankind in the Kingdom of Allah. They, therefore, have each a share in the joint product. Nature’s share is collected in the Baitul Maal (State Treasury) by the Khalifa for equitable distribution among the disabled, the sick, the poor and the destitute, in order to help them to stand on their own legs, to remove inequalities, and to bring the stragglers into line to march forward and join the race with the soldiers of Allah to encircle the globe.

“And it is Allah Who confers on some of you superiority over some others in wealth and means. Why not then those who have been favoured with abundance give it away to their dependants in such a manner that they all become equal. Do they deny that this abundancy is a favour of Allah to them? (Al-Qur’an, 16: 71).

The capitalist idea of land, labour, capital and entrepreneurs as factors of production is an anathema in Islam. Land is part of Nature. Labour and entrepreneurs are the capitalist divisions of man into classes and masses.

Nature and Man are two agents of Allah for the production of wealth in this world. After man is paid his dues in return for his industry, there remains an undistributed surplus which, in the capitalist state, is unjustly appropriated by the capitalist classes in one form or other in return for undertaking no risk of uncertainty of a productive enterprise.

The Surplus is the Natures share of the national products- on the wealth produced in the Kingdom of Allah.

In the Kingdom of Allah, there is no division of man into classes. There is only one ‘Ummat’ of mankind. The surplus of the joint product of Man and Nature is the share of Nature or the share of Allah placed at the disposal of the Viceroy to feed the stragglers and to help them to join the company of workers rightfully and honourably.

Karl Marx was not originator of the Theory of Surplus Value. His definition of the Theory was also wrong. This was natural, for he came to a confused conclusion after analyzing the nature of capitalist production. According to him, the measure of the value of an article is the amount of labour necessary to produce it. The labourers, however, produce more than they consume but under the capitalistic regime, they lose the surplus value of what they produce over and above their wages. He thus sowed the seeds of class-struggle, strikes, lockouts and the division of men into militantly hostile groups.

But labour cannot produce anything in vacuum. It can produce only in co-operation with Nature and with help of natural resources which are free gifts of Allah to all mankind. Capital is the by-product of Man’s industry and Nature’s co-operation, and it consists of the undistributed surplus value left after payment to man of his dues fully, for his industry, organization and leadership. Capital also, therefore, is a free gift of Allah to all mankind.

HOW TO DETERMINE THE SURPLUS?

Plain living and high thinking has been the actively living motto of Islam. The criterion should be the lives of Muhammad (Sm.) and rightly guided Caliphs. Building up of a balanced character through complete self-realization by each individual is the first and fundamental principle of the state of Islam. State capitalism or state socialism or state communism, negating or dwarfing the personality of the common man has no place in Islam.

The main function of the head of the state of Islam is to serve as a friend, philosopher and guide – freely accessible to every individual citizen or corporate body of individuals for the fullest development of self of the individual or the corporate body, in harmony with the Divine order which is subject to eternal laws to be discovered by discerning minds and acted upon by the entire humanity.

One of the Divine attributes is that Allah is Rabbul ‘Alamin – that He is the Sustainer and Nourisher of the universes. Allah gives everything but takes nothing in return except submission to His Sole Sovereign Divinity and accord with His order and the laws of Harmony in the universe. The man who is to serve as His Khalifah - His Viceroy – is invested with this Divine attribute which is fully developed in him so that he can feel the oneness of the life eternal and forgo the transient for what is an eternal continuity. He will then have his outlook on the permanent aspect of life beyond this decaying world and be able to hold a firm grip on it and its resources to minister to the comforts, prosperity and happiness of others and acquire satisfaction for himself by seeing others under his care happy, prosperous and peaceful. For his material comforts or gains, he comes last of all, he being the residuary legatee in the Kingdom of Allah.

Theory of Surplus Value cannot work in a secular system:

The guiding principle to regulate work and distribution of wealth in the state of Islam is ‘from each according to ability, to each according to needs for a respectable living.’ This principle worked successfully in the state of Islam alone. Because it promises a future life in which every individual is accountable to his Sovereign Master for his performances in his earthly term. And he will receive rewards for his loyalty to the Revealed Constitution [The Qur’aan] or punishments for his disloyalty.

But this guiding principle cannot work in any other system. It has failed in Communism. Capitalism and other [secular or man-made] systems do not believe in, and do not accept, this principle. In the state of Islam, Nature is an agent of production. The surplus (Al-‘Afw) above the cost of production is the share of Nature, which must go to the state treasury (Baitul Maal) to promote and finance welfare services and meet the essential demands of its citizens in distress and in dire needs, to eradicate poverty, misery, ignorance and unskilled labour and not to multiply the number of beggars. Appropriation of un-invested surplus by the state prevents hoarding, dissolute living and extravagance.

Notes:

Zakaat is the compulsory state levy at prescribed rates on the annual net savings after meeting all kinds of liabilities and expenditures.

Unused and un-invested surplus (al-‘afw), however, is to be surrendered to, and to be collected by, the state of Islam, which guarantees security of means and employment on a world basis to all. These measures have been enacted to finance the welfare programme of the state to eradicate and banish poverty, ignorance and all kinds of maladies from the world.

Excerpts collated from: 1. The Intelligent Man’s Guide to Islam (1969), by Muhammad Khalilur Rahman 2. The Clarion Call of the Eternal Qur’aan (1991), by Muhammad Khalilur Rahman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasireddin (talk • contribs) 16:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)