sum of shares bigger than whole
-
Dear OPF,
Thank you for replying. But it still fails to make sense to me. Why do yo treat the woman's husband diferently form her parents? You decide to include him in the sharing process after her daughter and parents take their shares. What do you base this decision of yours on?
(Verse 12 reads "you shall inherit one-half of what your wives leave behind, provided they have left no child; but if they have left a child, then you shall have one-quarter of what they leave behind..." It does not indicate that the husband's share is supposed to be one-quarter of the remainder.)
Please be rest assured that I do not take seriously what the faith freedom infidels write. I even tried to argue against their biased claims in their forum once.
Peace,
Hasan AkcaySalaam Hasan
This is what I understood from OPF's and the two verses
Verse 12 reads "you shall inherit one-half of what your wives leave behind, provided they have left no child; but if they have left a child, then you shall have one-quarter of what they leave behind....after any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt;"
The underlined part only exists for the husband, not the others. The first verse starts with the children and parents, the second verse is about espouses. The children and parents have priority over the husband, so their share becomes a debt and the husband inherits after the debt is paid. Also, the husband's share is not definite but depends on whether the wife has children or not. The parents' and children's shares are constant, not dependent on any factor.
-
Dear Samia, I have always valued the points you make; so thank you for this explication too. However I need to be sure that I understand correctly what you say about the rules coveyed in the relevant verses.
what they leave behind after any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt... You say The underlined part only exists for the husband, not the others. I cannot agree with that. As you observe correctly the first verse starts with the children and parents; but it contains the same expression as you unhderlined
The first verse (An-Nisa 11)
CONCERNING your children, God enjoins (this) upon you The male shall have the equal of two females' share; but if there are more than two females, they shall have two-thirds of what their parents leave behind; and if there is only one, she shall have one-half teheof.
And as for the parents, each of them shall have one-sixth of what he leaves behind, in the event of his having left a child; but if he has left no child and his parents are his heirs, then his mother* shall have one-third; and; and if he has brothers and sisters, then his mother* shall have one-sixth after any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay
*I understand so does his father.
-
The children and parents have priority over the husband, (Samia).
That is human's commentary rather than God's truth.so their share becomes a debt
The debt mentioned in the verses refers to the debt that the decesed had made before.and the husband inherits after the debt is paid.
The children, the father, the mother (An-Nisa 11), the husband, and the wife (An-Nisa 12)... all of them, without discrimination, are supposed to get their shares after the debts of the deceased are paid off.Also, the husband's share is not definite but depends on whether the wife has children or not.
Neither is the children's share definite. It depends. Take the daughter's share for example. If she is the only daughter, her share is half of what the deceased has left; if they are two or more daughters, their share is two-thirds of what the deceased has left.The parents' and children's shares are constant, not dependent on any factor.
No. This is not true. Their shares depend on whether the deceased spouse has a child or not. For example the father of a child whose mother has died gets one fourth of the inheritence whereas his share is half of it if his wife is childless.Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
author=brook link=topic=15537.msg149959#msg149959 date=1191387152]
The children and parents have priority over the husband, (Samia).
Hasan That is human's commentary rather than God's truth.Samia I based this on the fact that the inheritance verses start with the children, and the fact they will inherit no matter how the relation between them and the deceased is. Moreover, the verse of the will indicates explicitly the parents and nearest of kin.
so their share becomes a debt
Hasan The debt mentioned in the verses refers to the debt that the deceased had made before.Samia If the verse does not mention any debt in their case, this could be an indicator that their share is part of the debt mentioned after the case of parents, but not after any of the cases of children. I know this is what the Islamic law says, but not what the verses say. It is not ignored out of forgetfulness or neglect.
and the husband inherits after the debt is paid.
Hasan The children, the father, the mother (An-Nisa 11), the husband, and the wife (An-Nisa 12)... all of them, without discrimination, are supposed to get their shares after the debts of the deceased are paid off.Samia Please compare the two verses In verse 12, after every condition, the debt is mentioned. It is mentioned three times in one verse, which indicates that it is not a general rule. In verse 11, it is only mentioned if the deceased does not have children. Verse 12 also mentions this in case there are children. So it is specific to espouses after the children get their share.
Also, the husband's share is not definite but depends on whether the wife has children or not.
Hasan Neither is the children's share definite. It depends. Take the daughter's share for example. If she is the only daughter, her share is half of what the deceased has left; if they are two or more daughters, their share is two-thirds of what the deceased has left.Samia The children are one entity. The sum for all of them is not altered by the presence of anyone else, but their presence changes the share of the parents, and the espouse, for example, and bars the siblings altogether.
The parents' and children's shares are constant, not dependent on any factor.
Hasan No. This is not true. Their shares depend on whether the deceased spouse has a child or not. For example the father of a child whose mother has died gets one fourth of the inheritence whereas his share is half of it if his wife is childless.Samia Yes, you are right.
-
Salaam Samia.
You are definite that the husband inherits after the children and the parents bercause their shares become a debt to be paid off first. But the proof you provide seems to have some weak points. Will you please alaborate.
For example in Verse 12 the expression after debts is mentioned three times because, you say, there are children. But the third time it is mentioned it is about the person (kalaalah) who has no children; therefore whose only inheritors are sisters and brothers.
On the other hand, you say that in verse 11 it is only mentioned if the deceased does not have children. I am confused. When would you expect it to be mentioned; when there are some children or when there no children?
And please explain this
If the verse does not mention any debt in their case, this could be an indicator that their share is part of the debt mentioned after the case of parents, but not after any of the cases of children. I know this is what the Islamic law says, but not what the verses say. It is not ignored out of forgetfulness or neglect.
Moreover, you say, the verse of the will indicates explicitly the parents and nearest of kin. I will write about this later, God willing.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
A woman who dies leaves behind 300 units of money to her husband, mother, father, and only daughter. What is their share each?
According to An-Nisa 11 her husband gets 14, her mother 16, her father 16, her only daughter 12.
But when I add up the shares, the sum appears to be bigger than the whole 312 + 212 + 212 + 612 = 1312.
What does the mistake stem from?
It can never be bigger than the whole so in ALL CASES the equation is set equal to 1.
Let?s use basic algebra derived from Al-Kitab al-Jabr wa-l-Muqabala (meaning "The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing" by mathematician Muhammad bin Ms al-Khwrizm.
Let x = unit of distribution ordained by God in this particular case
1/4x + 1/6x + 1/6x + 1/2x = 1
3/12x + 2/12x + 2/12x + 6/12x = 1
13/12x = 1
x = 12/13
Therefore...
Daughter gets 1/2 * 12/13 = 6/13
Husband gets 1/4 * 12/13 = 3/13
Father gets 1/6 * 12/13 = 2/13
Mother gets 1/6 * 12/13 = 2/13Math check 6/13 + 3/13 + 2/13 + 2/13 = 13/13 = 1 (i.e. the whole)
The above formula works in ALL cases or simply use online Islamic Inheritance Calculator?
http//members.aol.com/IslamicSoftware/irthie.html#preferences
Peace
-
I think I found the problem. If it is one daughter, why give her half if there are no siblings?
Forget about all my calculations ;D. I was mislead by this "half".
The will and debts are paid.
The remainder Give the husband his 1/4
Give the parents their share
The daughter takes all the rest.NB The first verse (411) is about children of mixed genders.
-
I think I found the problem. If it is one daughter, why give her half if there are no siblings?
it's really common sense; e.g. if 10 daughters, it would be naive to multiple 10 x 1/2 = 5! ;D
-
It can never be bigger than the whole so in ALL CASES the equation is set equal to 1.
Let?s use basic algebra derived from Al-Kitab al-Jabr wa-l-Muqabala (meaning "The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing" by mathematician Muhammad bin Ms al-Khwrizm.
Let x = unit of distribution ordained by God in this particular case
1/4x + 1/6x + 1/6x + 1/2x = 1
3/12x + 2/12x + 2/12x + 6/12x = 1
13/12x = 1
x = 12/13
Therefore...
Daughter gets 1/2 * 12/13 = 6/13
Husband gets 1/4 * 12/13 = 3/13
Father gets 1/6 * 12/13 = 2/13
Mother gets 1/6 * 12/13 = 2/13Math check 6/13 + 3/13 + 2/13 + 2/13 = 13/13 = 1 (i.e. the whole)
The above formula works in ALL cases or simply use online Islamic Inheritance Calculator?
http//members.aol.com/IslamicSoftware/irthie.html#preferences
Peace
Can you explain how that takes precedence over the line of thought I took? One way there is a surplus, the other way there is a perfect 1. Why the latter?
-
No surplus in this case; what's to be split according to Qur'an is whatever is left after all loans/depts are first paid.
Another example let's assume there are two daughters above...
The naive questioners of Qur'an will add as below to make it appear Qur'an contradicts.
3/12 (husband) + 2/12(mother) + 2/12(father) + 6/12(daughter1) + 6/12(daughter2) = 19/12
The correct formula would again be...
1/4x + 1/6x + 1/6x + 1/2x + 1/2x = 1
x = 12/19
Therefore...
Daughter1 gets 1/2 * 12/19 = 6/19
Daughter2 gets 1/2 * 12/19 = 6/19
Husband gets 1/4 * 12/19 = 3/19
Father gets 1/6 * 12/19 = 2/19
Mother gets 1/6 * 12/19 = 2/19Another example to clearly illustrate the point
Lets assume there are only 5 daughters.
1/2 + 1/2 + 1/2 + 1/2 + 1/2 = 5/2 which is clearly naive
Should be calculated...
1/2x + 1/2x + 1/2x + 1/2x + 1/2x = 1
x = 2/5
Thus each daughter gets 1/2 * 2/5 = 1/5
Hope that makes sense; these types of supposed contradictions are rather clich? and were addressed centuries ago and probably the reason Algebra was invented due to necessity to deal with Islamic inheritance calculations.
Peace