Talk:Zakat

Islam Start‑class Top‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taxation Start‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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))[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]