Talk:Nisab

I did some cleaning up and fixed some ambiguous sentences. I'd like to continue working on it -- this is my first article -- and if there's anything I should be doing, please let me know. Cunningcourage (talk) 16:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Where in the Quran ?
Where in the Quran it states the 20...??? I think you confuse with the Hadith! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.36.33.229 (talk) 01:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Indented line

Quran does not even mention 2.5 percent Zakat, let alone anything about the Nisab. Just do a calculation on let us say a Widow has 100,000 worth of cash at hand, and she is retired or never worked on her own, and inflation is 2.0 percent. She stands to lose a lot of money to Zakat and Inflation. This system being promoted by "Shariah" is extremely inefficient. Zakat of 2.5 percent has absolutely no basis in Quran! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.200.23 (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Whether 2.5 is inefficient or efficient is irrelevant to the fact that Islamic law does state the 2.5 nisab. You can simply add a note that this was derived from the Sunnah.(Nawawi676 (talk) 04:36, 23 July 2020 (UTC))

Need to be comprehensive
The article is short of reflecting the wide scope of applications of nisab and seem to focus on how nisab is to be calculated for gold and silver. I added sections on nisab for livestock and agricultural produce. There needs to be a section on nisab for merchandise, minerals and treasure troves (rikaz). Also the article does not clarify how nisab should be established. The one year rule is not accurate. For instance, schools of thought differ whether nisab should be maintained at the end of the year, both ends of the year or throughout the year. Finally, the article relies on a single source for the evaluation of classical dinar and dirham to modern currency. There is a large literature and difference of opinions on this matter.(Nawawi676 (talk) 04:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC))

New Changes
I just made 2 edits to this page. I believe the first should be uncontroversial, as it mostly consists of grammatical and wording changes intended to make the article read more naturally in English.

My second edit (which I deliberately separated from my first edit in case anybody wanted to revert the changes in question) removed two things. First, I deleted the implied and unsupported claim that a coin must be worth more than the materials used to create it; see the pre-1982 US penny as a counterexample. Second, I removed the reference to the World Islamic Mint because a Google search leaves me highly skeptical that this organization is at all notable. Imyourfoot (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2014 (UTC)