Talk:Riba

message: Hi! It seems that the uncited reference to usury in Islam being amounted to interest itself is founded...I recently read a NY Times article discussing this...perhaps someone can track it down and cite it.   22:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No-one has answered this, and it needs answering. Is Riba usury in the old sense (any form of interest) or in the new sense (unreasonable rates of interest) or in smoe other sense (in which case it isn't usury) William M. Connolley (talk) 12:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

text: This is a great question and brings up my concern about the absurd one-sidedness of this article. The Islamic legality of interest, and if it is interest or usury is hotly contested. As currently written the article gives you no indication of this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.199.139.26 (talk) 20:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interest Itself 

message: The actual translation reference linked to the USC website is:
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Devour not usury, doubled and multiplied; but fear Allah; that ye may (really) prosper. 
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Devour not usury, doubling and quadrupling (the sum lent). Observe your duty to Allah, that ye may be successful. 
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not devour usury, making it double and redouble, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, that you may be successful. 
it does not say compounded over and over.58.65.196.77 (talk) 12:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation 

message: Taken from this article :
"...an increase in capital without any services provided and risk taking , which is prohibited by the Qur'an..."
Did someone put this here as a pun ? lol thats how we got the global recession.  is this really stated in the Quran, and if so can someone then provide a reference ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.157.193.63 (talk) 10:06, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Global recession 

message: This article reads like an opinion piece advocating abolishing interest. Should we label it as having NPOV problems until the arguments in it can be attributed to someone or put into context? 128.12.204.242 (talk) 06:29, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Am making big changes in the article, doing research and rewriting. This subject, very important to revivalists and Salafi is not well known to most wikipedia editors and I think as a consequence the article was a total mess. 
Am doing major trimming since some quranic quotes were repeated several times by editors interested in online dawah, and not in what was already in the article. 
Am leaving in quotes from hadith and Quran but not in quote form. Is it in violation of wikipedia best practices? Probably but the quotes are so important to Islamic revivalists that they will just be added again by them. They are more numerous and have more time and energy than wikipedia sticklers.  
Some of my writing is .... not the best but will be rewritten. --BoogaLouie (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Major rewriting

message: At long last my rewrite is done. I'm sure it could use a few tweeks but I've gone over it too many times to work on it now. --BoogaLouie (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Finished

message: The references to the quran translations on the MSA website are gone. Someone can update the links to point to quran.com for the translations.
Khawar.nehal (talk) 12:53, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: have used this site with pickdall translation several places in the article. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:00, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: links to quran.com

message: I find it strange to use an made up English word, riba, while usury already exists. Thus articles in both languages are not linked Green Data (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Usury