Was Zakaat 2.5% in the Prophets Time?
-
Hi all,
I am debating with some Sunnis, and they are trying to prove that some details are in Hadith.
One argument is Zakaat, They claim that Abu Baker waged war on those who didn't give Zakaat (2.5%)
Did this really happen? How come they thought Zakaat was 2.5%
Peace
Al
Dr. Subhi Mansour once said that Abu Bakr did not wage war on them, but they on him. This could be true since the people who fought with Abu Bakr were from Najd. The same as the Kharijis and Musailamah and also later the Wahhabis. Its a rivalry between Najd and Hijaz.
There is nothing about 2.5 per cent. It sounds like a state tax. A certain amount. Its also not fair since 2.5 for a struggling person is not the same as 2.5 for the rich. But then the rich can say my 2.5 is much more in amount than the others 2.5. I think there is no difference between zakat and charity. Its about giving to others what they need from what you can do without.
-
It was mostly created during the Abbasids, when the economical system turned from social into emprical capitalism.
-
Hi all,
I am debating with some Sunnis, and they are trying to prove that some details are in Hadith.
One argument is Zakaat, They claim that Abu Baker waged war on those who didn't give Zakaat (2.5%)
Did this really happen? How come they thought Zakaat was 2.5%
Peace
Al
Peace
What is the literal meaning of zakat? Where in the Quran does it say zakat equals religious tax? What is in the Quran does not equal what is in the books of Bukhari etc..
Roshan
-
Peace,
It's common sense!
Some can afford more, some can't afford at all. You can't have a universal rate for those reasons.
2219
*And they ask you how much are they to give, say "The excess." It is thus that God clarifies for you the revelations that you may think.
*Taken out of context.
Where are you debating them?
Peace,
Imran.
-
When people can provide authentic historical proof from texts dated to the early periods, that there existed a "zakah" in early times, and it was 2.5%, and mainstream islam at that point was not in fact corrupted in any way, then there is a ground for argument.