On every Eid, people whine about the high cost of animals for sacrifice. However, this year marked a notable first: the exorbitant prices posed a significant challenge for middle-class people. A key factor exacerbating this crisis is the tie of sacrificial nisab (threshold) to silver, which, being cheaper than gold, affects those not deemed “Saheb Nisab” under Zakat standards—typically the lower middle class. Consequently, this year has sparked scholarly debate on whether the nisab should be recalibrated to gold, potentially easing the burden on this socioeconomic group.
When I speak of “scholars” here, I refer not to casual commentators on social media but to those deeply immersed in jurisprudence, rigorously analyzing these issues. Some among them advocate shifting the nisab measurement to gold, arguing it would alleviate significant hardship for the lower middle class, freeing them from the onerous obligation of sacrifice. They emphasize that adherence to silver as the nisab is causing undue hardship, echoing a sentiment rooted in religious ease, as exemplified by Allah’s decree that obligations should not impose unbearable difficulty. This principle, seen clearly in the rules governing Hajj, underscores the importance of considering financial capacity in matters of religious duty.
Furthermore, this approach aligns with broader principles of Islamic jurisprudence, which prioritize easing hardships wherever possible. Historical examples, such as Imam Abu Hanifah’s counsel on prioritizing eating before prayer when necessary, illustrate this compassionate approach. Similarly, the concept of “exodus from difficulty” (Izalat al-Maslik) allows for flexibility within legal interpretations to adapt to changing circumstances without compromising core religious tenets.
It should be well kept in mind that Shariat is the “law department” of religion. And in this law department there are very few issues where Quran or Sunnah has given any law. No one has the authority to change such laws. Even the whole Ummah cannot change them together. But the most dominant part of these laws are those that are speculative. These laws are formulated by religious legal experts known as jurists. Therefore, when Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlavi, may God have mercy on him, felt that even these speculative laws were being considered as religion during his time, he warned with full clarity that speculation is not a jurisprudential religion.
It’s crucial to note that such adjustments do not undermine the sanctity of religious law; rather, they reflect the flexibility inherent in jurisprudential interpretation. As noted by scholars like Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlavi, Islamic jurisprudence is not static and can adapt to new contexts, ensuring that the spirit of the law—ease and compassion—is upheld.
In short, revising the nisab from silver to gold for sacrificial purposes would not only alleviate financial strain but also uphold the fundamental principles of Islamic law that prioritize ease over hardship. This move would be in keeping with the wisdom of religious scholars throughout history who have sought to ensure that religious obligations remain feasible for all believers, especially those of modest means.
