9:29

[r.gonzales]

DeExupery:

1. the aim of paying zakaah.
2. the obligation of paying zakaah.
3. how much is zakaah.
4. the punishment when not paying zakaah.

there are many reasons behind paying the zakaah. the first is that it is an obligation set by Allah. the second is that it purifies the wealth of the one paying it as Allah says, “take from their wealth a charity that through which you cleanse them and purify them.” the wealth that is paid to zakaah goes to seven categories of people listed in the verse given by gurrato, 9:60. 1) the poor and destitute, 2) the workers responsible for it (i.e., those employed to collect/distribute it), 3) those whose hearts are inclined (towards islam), 4) the slaves (to aid them to pay for their release and freedom), 5) those in debt (in order to help them pay their debts), 6) in Allah’s cause, and 7) and the son of the path (i.e., the traveller, in order to help him get back home).

zakaah is obligatory only on certain types of wealth. they are “the two coins” (i.e., gold and silver) which is basically any money you have, green crops and fruits, cattle (camels, cows and sheep) and buried treasure/wealth. how much you pay depends on the type of wealth and how much of that type you have, so to generalise and say 2.5% of all of one’s wealth isn’t entirely correct. if you have below a certain minimum amount of a certain type of wealth, there is no zakaah on it.

as for the one who refuses pay zakaah, if he refuses out of denying its obligation, then he has committed disbelief and apostasy. if he refuses but affirms its obligation he has committed a sin and the ruler takes the zakaah from him by force and he is fought against if need be, until he gives it. and as a punishment for his refusing to give the zakaah, half of the person’s wealth is taken instead of the specified amount as legislated by Allah and His messenger alluded to above.

DeExupery:

1. the aim of paying jizyah.
2. the obligation of paying jizyah.
3. how much is jizyah.
4. the punishment when not paying jizyah.

as mentioned numerous times already, the aim of jizyah is a recompense for the muslims’ leaving off fighting the non-muslims who choose to stay in the conquered lands. it ensures them safety and protection from all - whether it be from the muslims themselves or from foreign armies who try to invade that land.

the jizyah is to be taken from non-muslim citizens of a muslim state. it is not taken from women, children or those who have a treaty with the muslims (such as those who are not citizens, but are visitors for either visit, work or studies). as for how much, then this amount is set by the ruler and it is taken from each individual according to the extent of his situation, whether he be rich, poor or middleclassed, as was mentioned by as-sa’dee in his tafseer quoted above.

as for the one who refuses to pay the jizyah, then he has breached the treaty and covenant that was agreed to when the muslims conquered the land, and the ruling upon the one who has breached this treaty is similar to the ruling regarding the prisoner of war. if he accepts islam, then his killing is forbidden. if he doesn’t accept islam then the ruler choses his fate, either he is killed, he is given grace or he is ransomed (ref: al-wajeez fee fiqh al-kitaab al-'azeez, pg.491).

DeExupery:

Do they also free to bring their religious materials as they want?

being that we’re speaking about a peoples who were inhabitants of the conquered land, you’d think that they already had their property and possessions with them, including their religious materials.

DeExupery:

I don’t hear anyone here mentioning that moslems don’t pay tax in moslem countries. We are discussing the application of jizyah, which is obligatory in Quran, and we find as disturbing.
Tax is used to provide public facilities, etc.
In short, do you think people should pay tax because of WHAT THEY BELIEVE?

the context in which the jizyah is being discussed by many of you is that of you think that it isn’t fair and unjust to impose a tax on non-muslim citizens of a muslim state implying that muslims are free from taxation. but the one thing many of you also fail to realise, is that every citizen of a muslim state pays a tax - whether they are muslim or non-muslim. if you lived in a land and it was conquered by muslims, you’d be subjected to jizyah. if you accept islam, you still have to pay zakaah.

if you want to avoid taxation completely, migrate to another land, then come back to that muslim land as a labourer, a businessman or a student. these people stay in the muslim lands without paying jizyah or zakaah - i’m sure many of your christian friends living and working in saudi love this aspect of being there - high wages and no taxes.

 

[Ching_PBUH]

Heheheh… Protection money!!! It smacks of bullying and ungodliness … Protection money … ahhhhh… the notorious Mafia does that too! You pay all’s well. you don’t pay be prepared for the consequence! So much for free will and tolerance!

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

The claim is often made that zakat is obligatory for adult Muslims and Muslimahs but that the jizyah is obligatory for only adult dhimmi males.

First of all, the comparison is flawed. Non-payment of zakat won’t get a Muslim killed. Non-payment of jizyah will most probably do so, or at least severely punished.

Secondly, Tabari claims jizyah is obligatory male and female dhimmis. {Of course dhimmi children are not subject to the jizyah but then neither are Muslim children subject to the zakat.}

Tabari IX:75 “He who holds fast to his religion, Judaism or Christianity, is not to be tempted from it. It is incumbent on them to pay the jizyah protection tax. For every adult, male or female, free or slave, one full denarius, or its value in al-ma’afir [fine cloth]. He who pays that to the Messenger has the protection of Allah and His Messenger, and he who holds back from it is the enemy of Allah and His Messenger.”

Any Muslim care to tell us if the above translation is correct or not?

 

[r.gonzales]

Rodrigo Bivar:

Non-payment of zakat won’t get a Muslim killed.

read my post above regarding the one who refuses to pay the zakaah. also, refer to the history books and read about the wars of apostasy that were fought by aboo bakr as-siddeeq and what caused the wars in the first place. refusing to pay the zakaah out of denial and rejection of its obligation is disbelief and considered apostasy from the religion.
Rodrigo Bivar:

Secondly, Tabari claims jizyah is obligatory male and female dhimmis.

Tabari IX:75 “He who holds fast to his religion, Judaism or Christianity, is not to be tempted from it. It is incumbent on them to pay the jizyah protection tax. For every adult, male or female, free or slave, one full denarius, or its value in al-ma’afir [fine cloth]. He who pays that to the Messenger has the protection of Allah and His Messenger, and he who holds back from it is the enemy of Allah and His Messenger.”

Any Muslim care to tell us if the above translation is correct or not?

perhaps giving a proper reference would aid in getting an answer to your question. try naming a book that at-tabaree wrote that contains this statement.

 

[Booklover]

Here are some excerpts from an article which deals with the questions asked on this thread:

“I am telling you that my religion doesn’t tolerate other religion. it doesn’t tolerate. The only one law which needs to be spread, it can here or anywhere else has to be Islam.”

[ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) interview with Abdul Nacer Benbrika (Abu Bekr), the spiritual leader of the Victorian terror cell suspect). The Daily Telegraph, Sydney, Thursday, November 10, 2005, p.31]

More:

The only religion if the religion of Allah, Islam…16:52

Muslims (Islam) are the best of righteous prople…3:110

Allah has perfected Islam and it is the only religion for mankind
(last verse revealed, and so, the final word of Allah disclosed to
Muhammad)…5:3

Islam is the perfect religion; it will dominate all other
religions…9:33

Can’t worship anything other than Allah; Islam is the only
right religion (the purpose of an Islamic state)…12:40

There is only one God (Allah) and all should bow down
to Islam…21:108

Allah proclaims Islam (the religion of truth) over all other
religions…48:28

Allah has sent Muhammad to proclaim the ‘Religion of Truth’
(Islam) over all religions…61:9

What happens to those people who, despite the call to convert to Islam do not follow suit? In the language of the Quran, they are worse than animals, believe it or not. Here is how the Holy Quran grades the Kafirs (infidels).

The worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb (unbelievers) who do not understand Islam…8:22

How about using (read sword) on those who refuse to convert to Islam or deviate from Islam: After all, the Islamists are foaming: ‘Islam means peace’, ‘there is no compulsion in religion’, ‘killing one person is killing the entire mankind’, and so on. Because of such deliberate misleading propaganda by the cunning, crafty and sly Islamists and their bogies of western apologists of Islam one might find it hard to believer that there would be anything in the Quran but unbound ‘peace’, incessant ‘love’ and boundless ‘mercy’ for the infidels, Sadly, to the disappointment of these gullibele unbelievers, the Quran, in many verses, categorically exhorts the true believers to use force preemptively to convert the unbelievers to Islam. Here is a sample verse:

Allah sent down iron as a material for war and for other benefits; whoever deviates from Islam isa to be brought back with iron (i.e. with force, meaning use iron (sword) to force people to Allah’s religion)…57:25

And when all efforts to pursue the Kafirs to convert them to Islam have failed, or when the unbelievers resort to rejecting Islam openly, Islam stipulates that they be crucified or maimed. Read this terrible verse from Allah:

Punishment for waging war agains Allah (i.e. the unbelievers who reject Islam) and his messenger is execution (beheading) or crucifixion or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land…5:33

One might still insist that the above verse is applicable only in war situations, when Islam and its founder, Muhammad (or Muslims)are/were attacked in a physical fight. Perish the though, if you want to learn about ‘real Islam’. The words, ‘waging war’, in the above verse has very little to do with real combat( (like Iraq, Afghanistan). Any action, activity, remark, gesture, word/s, sound, utterance, look, manner, habit, conduct, style and so on, which are not in conformity with pure Islamic precepts are considered as blasphemous or ‘waging war’. Thus, even the slightest criticism of Islam, Muhammad, Quran or Sharia, verbally or in writing, might be treated as gross violations of Islamic tenets. These acts are absolutely blasphemous, and are punishable by death (by beheading, the Islamic method of slaughter). The conclusive proof of this dreadful provision is the appalling blasphemy laws enacted by most the Islamic Paradises. This is the meaning of freedom of thought in Islam—the freedom to mete out capital punishment to those who dare to mildly criticize Islam in any manner whatsoever. If anyone still has any suspicion of what I just wrote, let him consult the blaphemy lawof any Islamic states,which complies one-hundred-percent with the Quranic verse I quoted above.

Here’s the link to the complete article by Abul Kasem:

faithfreedom.org/oped/AbulKasem51205.htm

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

r.gonzales:

read my post above regarding the one who refuses to pay the zakaah. also, refer to the history books and read about the wars of apostasy that were fought by aboo bakr as-siddeeq and what caused the wars in the first place. refusing to pay the zakaah out of denial and rejection of its obligation is disbelief and considered apostasy from the religion.

So you think apostasy should be punishable by death? What about ‘no compulsion in religion’?

r.gonzales:

perhaps giving a proper reference would aid in getting an answer to your question. try naming a book that at-tabaree wrote that contains this statement.

More of this ‘I know Arabic’ boasting again? I’m using the Tabari reference commonly used on the internet. If you can’t find it, you can’t find it.

Volume IX is called, ‘The Last Years of the Prophet: The Formation of the State AH8-11’.

This little known fact about Jizyah applying to males and females is not disseminated among the Muslim sites.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

According to this article, Muhammad imposed the jizyah on both adult males and females. It was only Caliph Ali who made women exempt from Jizyah.

The rate of Jizyah could be onerous at times. Muhammad levied different rates of Jizyah for different people - some of which left them in ruins. He asked for 2,000 garments of a certain value + 40 dirhams per garment from the Najranites - they seemed to be ruined by this so much that Muhammad’s successors progressively decreased the amount of this jizyah.

The Prophet levied Jizyah usually at the rate of one dînâr (five rupees) and one jarîb (about 20 kilograms) of wheat per major male and female. In al-BaHrîn, however, he made a compromise on half the quantity of dates and coms.

One would suggest that in those days, one jarib of wheat was a big deal!!!

The dinar of those times was not the same as the dinars of today. The dinar was based on the Roman Denarius which was originally intended to be worth 10 asses but 2 centuries after introduction its value increased to 16 asses. The historical evidence of the value of the Muslim dinar is conflicting. However, one notes that the entire treasury of Yemen was only 60,000 dinars when it was handed over to Aisha around the time of the Battle of the Camel.

There is no doubt that the jizyah was merely one of the means of exploitation of dhimmis. There is no way to ‘humiliate’ the dhimmis if the jizyah is not onerous - which is the intention of 9:29.

Some time later the jizyah was so heavy that the poor dhimmis had to resort to selling their women and children to pay the tax.

Sometimes, assessees of Jizyah found themselves under the painful necessity of selling their women and children to be able to pay Jizyah. Accordingly, 'Amar bin al-'ÂS levied collective Jizyah of thirteen thousand dînârs on the residents of Barqah near Alexandria and gave them the option of raising money by selling their women and children for payment of Jizyah.

voiceofdharma.com/books/jtsi/ch02.htm#4

 

[r.gonzales]

Rodrigo Bivar:

So you think apostasy should be punishable by death? What about ‘no compulsion in religion’?

the verse that states there is no compulsion in religion refers to forcing non-muslims to accept islam. it does not apply to muslims who apostate from the religion.
Rodrigo Bivar:

I’m using the Tabari reference commonly used on the internet. If you can’t find it, you can’t find it.

at-tabaree is the name of a scholar. he has a couple of very large, volumous books. referencing a quote simply saying “tabari” doesn’t exactly tell me which book the quote is from…
Rodrigo Bivar:

Volume IX is called, ‘The Last Years of the Prophet: The Formation of the State AH8-11’.

This little known fact about Jizyah applying to males and females is not disseminated among the Muslim sites.

thanks for the more specific reference. that tells me it’s in his taareekh. i’ll get back when i find the exact quote to verify it.

as for your “little known fact”, there’s an authentic narration from umar bin al-khattaab where he ordered the commanders of the armies to not impose the jizyah upon the women and the children and to only impose it upon whoever the treaty has been made with (i.e., the treaty of dhimmah).

 

[Boa_Constrictor]

Dear Rasheed,

the verse that states there is no compulsion in religion refers to forcing non-muslims to accept islam. it does not apply to muslims who apostate from the religion.

Jizyah also is one of the means used to humiliate and to exploit the non moslems, that in the end they are forced to embrace Islam and get a relief from that burdensome 'religion" tax.

As I told you, it’s funny to find a religion that prescribes to kill people who want to leave it. Sound like a cult.
It also reminds me of a text from “Hotel California” (which I heard was based on the story of some cult in USA - rumored)…
“you can check in anytime you want, but you can never leave…”

at-tabaree is the name of a scholar. he has a couple of very large, volumous books. referencing a quote simply saying “tabari” doesn’t exactly tell me which book the quote is from…

With your extensive knowledge and as an avid reader of Islamic sources, at least you may have already read Tabari and remember from where Rodrigo took the article.

firstly, if an advancing muslim army has conquered a land, the jizyah tax is levied against those people who wish to stay and live under muslim rule.

Forget to comment on this. So, who says that every war done by moslems are defensive? you stated it yourself.

whoever the treaty has been made

Islamic treaties are always interesting to me. Tell me about it more detail.

Boa

 

[r.gonzales]

Boa Constrictor:

As I told you

as you told me??? uhh… sorry, new member, but i don’t know who you are. you have a total of three posts to your username, none of which have you saying that you find it “funny to find a religionthat prescribes to kill people who want to leave it.”

btw, if you’re christian, your scriptures call for the death penalty for some crimes lesser than apostacy… does that sound funny to you too?
Boa Constrictor:

With your extensive knowledge and as an avid reader of Islamic sources, at least you may have already read Tabari and remember from where Rodrigo took the article.

and what do you know of my “extensive knowledge”?
Boa Constrictor:

So, who says that every war done by moslems are defensive? you stated it yourself.

and where did i ever state that every war fought by the muslims is a defensive one?

 

[Boa_Constrictor]

Dear Rasheed,

as you told me??? uhh… sorry, new member, but i don’t know who you are. you have a total of three posts to your username, none of which have you saying that you find it “funny to find a religionthat prescribes to kill people who want to leave it.”

You can call our meeting as “deja vu”. But do you agree that killing apostates sounds like a thing that cults do?

btw, if you’re christian, your scriptures call for the death penalty for some crimes lesser than apostacy… does that sound funny to you too?

What is that? Wanna know. But in my opinion, even stealing is more evil than apostasy.

and what do you know of my “extensive knowledge”?

Haah, this is the first time I found you to become very humble. The last time you brag alot about your ability in Arabic, etc.

and where did i ever state that every war fought by the muslims is a defensive one?

So, it’s not? Then do you think even Mohammed broke what Quran prescribe? Do not trangress?

Boa

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

r.gonzales:

Rodrigo:

So you think apostasy should be punishable by death? What about ‘no compulsion in religion’?

the verse that states there is no compulsion in religion refers to forcing non-muslims to accept islam. it does not apply to muslims who apostate from the religion.

How can there be no compulsion in religion if Muslims cannot apostate?

r.gonzales:

Rodrigo:

I’m using the Tabari reference commonly used on the internet. If you can’t find it, you can’t find it.

at-tabaree is the name of a scholar. he has a couple of very large, volumous books. referencing a quote simply saying “tabari” doesn’t exactly tell me which book the quote is from…

I did reference Tabari IX:75 – which most people would take as his history book given what we’re talking about.

r.gonzales:

Rodrigo:

Volume IX is called, ‘The Last Years of the Prophet: The Formation of the State AH8-11’.

This little known fact about Jizyah applying to males and females is not disseminated among the Muslim sites.

thanks for the more specific reference. that tells me it’s in his taareekh. i’ll get back when i find the exact quote to verify it.

Many thanks.

r.gonzales:

as for your “little known fact”, there’s an authentic narration from umar bin al-khattaab where he ordered the commanders of the armies to not impose the jizyah upon the women and the children and to only impose it upon whoever the treaty has been made with (i.e., the treaty of dhimmah).

Yes, I knew about Umar and his three grades of Jizyah and his exemptions, but Muhammad apparently did order jizyah for women as well as men. See my post above. Malik’s Muwatta also proscribed jizyah for women and children.

Secondly, the Quran is not explicit on whether women are excluded or how much jizyah was to be paid: it all depended on the Muslim ruler’s interpretation.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Small fact Muslims forget to mention when they claim Muslims pay more zakat than kafirs pay Jizyah. In most history - the level of jizyah was probably more than the zakat, particularly if combined with the punitive doubling of other taxes like commercial taxes and land taxes.

According to D.S. Margoliouth, the Jews of Aila had to pay a higher rate - one-quarter of their produce. Margoliouth contrasts this rate with the rate of zakãt (=alms or poor-due) imposed on Muslims and says that “twenty-five percent of the produce means ten times the amount imposed on the Muslims as alms”. On this reckoning, the Jews of Khaibar had to pay a poll-tax twenty times the amount of the corresponding zakãt money.

I think the historical amount of jizyah is about twice that of the zakat. Certainly, Muslim rulers never considered going softer on the kafirs than on their Muslim subjects because the injunction of 9:29 was to ‘humiliate’ the kafir.

Also, the Muslims calculate their zakat based on the nisab of 20 mithqal of gold (i.e. 20 dinars or 200 dirhams). If their wealth own less than the nisab they don’t pay anything. If their wealth exceeded the nisab they paid 2.5% of the total. {The maximum rate is 20% these days but I think it was a flat 2.5% in old times}

Kafirs have to pay the jizyah even if they were penniless. In 1679, Aurangzeb reintroduced Jizyah at the usual rates of 48 dirhams on the rich, 24 on the middle class, and 12 on the poor.

Al-Karakhi says that the poor person is one who owns two hundred dirhams or less, while the middle group owns more than two hundred and up to ten thousand dirhams, and the wealthy [are those] who own more than ten thousand dirhams.

Following the tradition, Aurangzebalso stipulated that the Dhimmî should carry the Jizyah with his own hand and should come on foot. He should pay it standing, while the Jizyah-collector is sitting. The Dhimmî-s hand should be below that of the collector, who should snatch away the Jizyah from the former’s hands with the remark, ‘Pay the Jizyah, O Dhimmî!’

The Turks used to hit the head of the dhimmi when they collected the jizyah so as to ‘humiliate’ them.

This means that for the poor kafir who has less than 200 dirhams to his name had to pay 6.5% jizyah. For the totally penniless kafir he still had to pay the jizyah.

When Aurangzeb takes the Hindus of Hyderabad, he found them so poor they couldn’t pay. So out of ‘kindness’ he postponed the jizyah by one year - i.e. he gave them one year to come up with the cash. What a nice man.

 

[Boa_Constrictor]

*Very horrible.

Any comment from Gonzales or Brother Guratto?

Boa*

 

[r.gonzales]

Rodrigo Bivar:

How can there be no compulsion in religion if Muslims cannot apostate?

as i said, the verse means that no non-muslim is to be forced to accept islam. once a person has embraced islam, he must abide and adhere to its laws and tenets. it has a specific meaning, not a general and absolute one.
Rodrigo Bivar:

I did reference Tabari IX:75 – which most people would take as his history book given what we’re talking about.

yes you did give that referece, and as i mentioned, that doesn’t exactly tell me which book it refers to. it can easily refer to his tafseer which is also has many volumes.
Rodrigo Bivar:

but Muhammad apparently did order jizyah for women as well as men. See my post above. Malik’s Muwatta also proscribed jizyah for women and children.

no mention of maalik’s muwatta’ in your above post, unless it’s in the link you provided, which isn’t working for me at the moment…
Rodrigo Bivar:

Secondly, the Quran is not explicit on whether women are excluded or how much jizyah was to be paid: it all depended on the Muslim ruler’s interpretation.

welcome to post #61…

r.gonzales:

the jizyah is to be taken from non-muslim citizens of a muslim state. it is not taken from women, children or those who have a treaty with the muslims (such as those who are not citizens, but are visitors for either visit, work or studies). as for how much, then this amount is set by the ruler and it is taken from each individual according to the extent of his situation, whether he be rich, poor or middleclassed, as was mentioned by as-sa’dee in his tafseer quoted above.

 

[r.gonzales]

Boa Constrictor:

You can call our meeting as “deja vu”.

let’s not and just say what seems to be more true; that “boa constrictor” is not the first user account that you have on this site.
Boa Constrictor:

What is that? Wanna know. But in my opinion, even stealing is more evil than apostasy.

here’s one such passage from the bible that calls for the stoning of an apostate.

If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage." (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)

here’s a whole list of other crimes that the bible calls for the death as a punishment: web.telia.com/~u15509119/ny_sida_6.htm
Boa Constrictor:

The last time you brag alot about your ability in Arabic, etc.

firstly, mentioning the fact that i can read arabic doesn’t constitute bragging. secondly, many people like you who try to attack islam try to do so using translations of statements originally made in arabic. many times these quotes are misinterpreted and/or mistranslated. so my ability to read/understand arabic is an asset in being able to verify said quotes. this is a fact and me mentioning it in a discussion where his fact is belittled or trivialized is far from bragging.
Boa Constrictor:

r.gonzales:

and where did i ever state that every war fought by the muslims is a defensive one?

So, it’s not?

answer the question, where did i ever state that every war fought by the muslims was a defensive one?? or did you forget your claim against me?
Boa Constrictor:

So, who says that every war done by moslems are defensive? you stated it yourself.

 

[Booklover]

r.gonzales:

as i said, the verse means that no non-muslim is to be forced to accept islam. once a person has embraced islam, he must abide and adhere to its laws and tenets. it has a specific meaning, not a general and absolute one.

So in other words, there is no free will for anyone who wants to leave Islam, just death!

 

[Booklover]

r.gonzales:

here’s one such passage from the bible that calls for the stoning of an apostate.
here’s a whole list of other crimes that the bible calls for the death as a punishment: ["]http://web.telia.com/~u15509119/ny_sida_6.htm]]("http://web.telia.com/~u15509119/ny_sida_6.htm)

Why would we condemn stoning in Islam if we were doing the same thing?? We wouldn’t see anything wrong with it would we?

You may know lots about Islam, but statements like the one above show how ignorant you were of the religion you left!

 

[raceland]

Dear Rodrigo

It’s nice of you to quote Margoliouth, but this guy doesn’t know the difference between Qur’an and Hadith, how will he know the difference between Jizyah and zakah. ; not to mention that he’s an extremely prejudiced, hostile, and antagonistic orientalist opposed to Islam.

all the info you provided is interesting but it fits in a history book like the one you’re familiar with, inwhich every tom, dick, and harry who knows how to hold a pen writes in it.

Small fact Muslims forget to mention when they claim Muslims pay more zakat than kafirs pay Jizyah. In most history - the level of jizyah was probably more than the zakat, particularly if combined with the punitive doubling of other taxes like commercial taxes and land taxes.

let me give you some examples of how zakah is calculated:

· Zakah of gold/silver or their equivalent is 2.5% of wealth exceeding Nisab, to be paid annually. Nisab is equal to 85 grams of pure gold or 624 grams of silver.

· Zakah of trade wealth is like that of its monetary equivalent.

· Zakah on a debt: if it is liable to be redeemed at any time, then it is counted with its equivalent of gold/silver and trade Zakah; if not, its Zakah of only a year is paid once it has been redeemed.

· The Zakah of a buried treasure is 20% of it and should be paid once found.

· The Zakah of metals is 20% like the buried treasure. As for raw gold and silver extracted from the ground, their Zakah are either like buried treasure or like gold and silver.[2]

· Zakah of cultivated land crops is paid once the crop has ripened and has been harvested. Its Nisab is 612 kilos, which equals 1,346.40 lb. There is no Zakah on production that is less than this amount. If the production depends only on rainwater, or without any human labor or irrigation, the due Zakah is one-tenth of the total. If equipment and tools are used for irrigation, then the Zakah due is half of one-tenth of the total production.

· Zakah on industrial production and the return of land and estates: There are two schools of thought: to consider it either as trade wealth i.e., the Zakah is 2.5%, or like cultivated crops, that is, one-tenth on the invested wealth produced without effort, or half one-tenth, if effort is exerted.[3] In another school, it is considered as trade wealth i.e. Zakah is 2.5%.

{The maximum rate is 20% these days but **I think ** it was a flat 2.5% in old times}

There are other kinds of Zakah, but it’s not the topic here. But as you’ve noticed the zakah can reach 20% and that’s paid by muslims and that was in the “old times” too. So you got this wrong, it wasn’t a flat 2.5%. Now, while the zakah paid by muslims goes to the poor and needy, the Jizya paid by non muslims goes to their own protection only. Two categories of the poor and needy to which zakah goes are - non-Muslims for their good neighborhood or to ward off their harm and - The wayfarer: He is the traveler who runs out of money in a strange land (and that might be a non muslim too). Also the Qur’an mentions another category of a non muslim’s eligibility for zakat, In this surah Allah swt describes pious muslims and one of their description is “And they give food, inspite of their love for it (or for the love of Him), to Miskin (poor), the orphan, and the captive,” [76:8] so the captive is also eligible for the zakah.

So, there is 1-what you think, 2- what people like Margoliouth think, and there is the truth. As you can see they are miles apart.

If a non-muslim living in a muslim land, was not able financially to pay the Jizyah tax, then he’s exempted. Exemptions are for the poor, for females and children (according to Abu Hanifa), for slaves, and for monks and hermits.

Someone mentioned that Jizyah is meant to humiliate non muslims and to force them embrace Islam. This doesn’t make sense, cause if they embrace Islam they will pay the zakah tax, so it’s not a smart move, unless they are hypocrites. And this leads us to the second point the death penalty for ridda (apostasy).

This harsh penalty acts as a deterrent to anyone who wants to enter Islam just to follow the crowd or for hypocritical purposes. This will motivate him to examine the matter thoroughly and not to proceed unless he understands the consequences of that in this world and in the Hereafter. The one who announces his Islam has agreed to adhere to all the rulings of Islam of his own free will and consent, one of which rulings is that he is to be executed if he apostatizes from the faith. In other words, If you don’t like it then don’t convert.

 

[raceland]

Booklover:

Why would we condemn stoning in Islam if we were doing the same thing?? We wouldn’t see anything wrong with it would we?

You may know lots about Islam, but statements like the one above show how ignorant you were of the religion you left!

on the contrary it shows how ignorant you are in the religion you’re still in.