Anonymous1 wrote:

Ushur are taxes on harbi trader.

That *were initially* taxes on harbi traders. It did not stay that way.

It was an import duty initially added because a governor in Iraq/mesopotamia had written to hadhrat Umar (ra) that the bordering states had import duties. It was initially applied to only traders from those states.

Towards the end of Hadhrat Umar (ra)'s rule import duties were also applied on all traders: People from Dar ul Harb, people who paid the Jizya and also Muslims (who paid the zaka'ah too). This is why there are two differing quotes about the ushur that can be found in the books, one mentioning the former case about when it started and one the latter.

This tax is seen by some as showing how taxes that were not in the qur'an and sunnah can be applied by the state. People who disagree have their own views on why that is not the case.

Lilly wrote:

Lilly wrote:

and Baitul-maal? what goes in it? Zakaat? Sadaqa? donations? (also considered sadaqa?) other?

Is that what you mean by "putting sadaqa under zakaat" ? No i was just asking if Sadaqa also went in Baitulmaal or was is just zakaat.

Sadaqa is charity. it does not need to be collected by a central treasury - it is simply a matter of someone seeing something as a worthy person/cause and giving money. I assume some could potentially see the state as the worthy cause and give it to the state too.

You wrote:

Anonymous1 wrote:

Ushur are taxes on harbi trader.

That *were initially* taxes on harbi traders. It did not stay that way.

What evidence are you using to say Umar(ra) applied it on people other than harbis?

that pdf book you linked to, the chapter you told me to have a look at. (that and the other article I linked to yesterday which added further explanation.)

You wrote:

that pdf book you linked to, the chapter you told me to have a look at. (that and the other article I linked to yesterday which added further explanation.)

I've read the chapter an it seems to be saying Umar(ra) only applied this tax on the harbis... maybe you can point to which page you're looking at?

I seem to have lost a link to the pdf you linked to.

The other article that also confirmed it was this one where it expanded on it:

Hadrat Umar introduced import duties which were charged on the articles of trade and merchandise imported into Islamic State. Abu Musa Ashari, the Governor of Iraq apprised the caliph about the fact that the Roman and Persian Governments of the neighbouring countries were levying import tax on the Muslim traders who visited their countries to sell their articles of trade. So the Islamic State also levied a tax of 10% on the goods brought into Muslim territories by Harbi traders as a reciprocal measure. Later on, the tax was also extended to the Zimmi and Muslim traders at the rate of 5% and 2.5% respectively. These import duties on mercantile goods are called ‘ushur’ by the Muslim jurists. In the modern world these taxes are called import duties or custom duties or tolls.

(the pdf link IIRC had mentioned accounts of the two rates, but had not gone any further to show if they were from one place or one time or not, but that two separate persons gave differing accounts to the amount.)

You wrote:

I seem to have lost a link to the pdf you linked to.

The other article that also confirmed it was this one where it expanded on it:

Hadrat Umar introduced import duties which were charged on the articles of trade and merchandise imported into Islamic State. Abu Musa Ashari, the Governor of Iraq apprised the caliph about the fact that the Roman and Persian Governments of the neighbouring countries were levying import tax on the Muslim traders who visited their countries to sell their articles of trade. So the Islamic State also levied a tax of 10% on the goods brought into Muslim territories by Harbi traders as a reciprocal measure. Later on, the tax was also extended to the Zimmi and Muslim traders at the rate of 5% and 2.5% respectively. These import duties on mercantile goods are called ‘ushur’ by the Muslim jurists. In the modern world these taxes are called import duties or custom duties or tolls.

(the pdf link IIRC had mentioned accounts of the two rates, but had not gone any further to show if they were from one place or one time or not, but that two separate persons gave differing accounts to the amount.)

Still no references that Umar(ra) applied the taxes to non-Harbis and even this citation does not say that. It vaguely mentions later on the tax was extended not stating by whom and on what grounds - you seem to conclude that Umar(ra) had done that. Any particular reason?

because I read it. unfortunately because the discussions are spanning multiple topics, finding your link to the pdf is troublesome.

EDIT - even without the link, was the import duty something that had been commanded in the qur'an? (if so, why was its implementation waited on til the report that the neighbouring empires were charging it?)

You wrote:

because I read it. unfortunately because the discussions are spanning multiple topics, finding your link to the pdf is troublesome.

EDIT - even without the link, was the import duty something that had been commanded in the qur'an? (if so, why was its implementation waited on til the report that the neighbouring empires were charging it?)

The tax doesn't need to be mentioned in the Quran as the texts allow Muslims to escalate matters in war in accordance with the enemy - whether it be taxes, punishments etc

One however cannot generalise this rule.

Why can't the rule be generalised?

You wrote:

Why can't the rule be generalised?

Because the verses and ahadith that allow matters to be escalated, normal sharia laws violated etc are specific to the subject matter of war - thus rules specific to a given subject matter cannot be applied to other subjects.

This is the maxim you are violating in some other disucssions, by trying to apply texts that are specific to one subject matter to others. If you take this approach to its logical conclusion, everything is halal, haram, mandoub, mubah, makrooh simultaneously as all texts that provide one hukm can be extended to every subject resulting in a plethora of rules for each subject - an absurdity - and truth is not found in absurdities.