Quran inheritance mistake
-
My objection is similar to you having 100 chocolate to share with your team and your own share increasing despite the addition of 20 members to your team.
We?re not talking soccer team; there?s difference between a goalie and 10 players and a mix in a household of 1 daughter and 10 sons or 1 son and 10 daughters. That?s what you?re missing ? it?s all based on the mix.
IF husband without child ? vs. ? with child.
IF wife without child ? vs. 1/8 with child.
IF no child and both parents mother?s share = 1/3But let?s stick to my scenario for a moment since in most Muslim families, the mother and father usually live with the son after the son is married (or one of the sons; or two or more sons may all live in the same household). The daughter typically moves in with her new husband?s family.
Would it be fair to the son to split what the deceased parents leave behind 50/50 with his sister? Also, how is ?inheritance? defined? Does it include all assets/property (including house lived in by parents) or just savings (money)?
No, let?s stick my scenario; the son is a gambler and every imaginable problem case.
Traditional family living habits of any particular culture have nothing to do with it.
Definitions of inheritance on the Web
http//www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=defineinheritance&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title -
No, let?s stick my scenario; the son is a gambler and every imaginable problem case.
Traditional family living habits of any particular culture have nothing to do with it.
Definitions of inheritance on the Web
http//www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=defineinheritance&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=titleNun, are you a lawyer? Because you have provided an answer but it does not answer the question I originally asked. I agree once again, traditional family living habits of any particular culture have nothing to do with inheritance laws in the Quran. And I most certainly agree that in the scenario you provided, the daughter should get half.
Now let's go back to my scenario once again. Let's pretend you're the father and you died suddenly without leaving a will. I was your wife and I passed away before you. We both lived with our son and his family (and our son and his wife both took good care of us in our old age) until death did us part. Our son is a wonderful man who doesn't gamble, drink or waste his money, but he has 8 children to support and doesn't make much money. His wife is a homemaker and doesn't have any income. Our daughter at the time of your death is married and living with her husband and his family on the other side of town. They have 1 child and are quite well off. In your opinion, is it fair that our son and daughter split the inheritance 50/50? Because in my humble opinion, in this particular case, it is not.
-
But truthseeker, what you are asking for is not rules to ditribute inheritance where there is no will, ehst you are asking for is a few millions of volumes contemplating every case in which a person dies and leaves anything to inherit. There are every kind of situation and each case is different, and many cases or all would be unfair from some point of view.
I know of case upon case where males benefit most from the home of the parents, benefit from the domestic services of the sisters, from more largesse from the parents while they are young, and then marry and even if they live with the parents it is the sister or the sisters who really look after the parents, who mostly end moving out from their sons, because they just not only do not look after them but pester them, while they blame the wife for it. So, should the brothers get anything at all? Well, this is a kind of case that is not rare at all, quite the opposite. So, if you are making rules for a particular case, every particular case should get its rules. But then that would mean millions of volumes on rules of inheritance. That or not to make any rules at all and let people find what is fair once somebody dies if there is no will. But if you make rules to suit a particular case, you must make rules to suit EVERY particular case.
I suppose you have written a will.
Salaam
-
Peace,
Ok, if it is not a soccer team and it is all about the rationale in mixed cases. Tell me the rationale behind 1 male= 2 female.
Then tell me the rationale behind your distribution between 1 daughter and 18 brothers.
Then tell me, if these rationales match or contradict?And please do not compare 1 daughter and 18 brothers with 1 brother and 18 daughters because that is not what I am asking.
-
Nun, are you a lawyer?
No.
In your opinion, is it fair that our son and daughter split the inheritance 50/50? Because in my humble opinion, in this particular case, it is not.
My opinion and your humble opinion of what is fair are irrelevant unless; as huruf stated...
Quicken? WillMaker Plus 2008
by Nolo
http//www.nolo.com/product.cfm/ObjectID/6E9ED903-C9B4-42E0-9C2E235DD87A0A8ATell me the rationale behind 1 male= 2 female.
God knows best.
Then tell me the rationale behind your distribution between 1 daughter and 18 brothers.
Not my distribution and God knows best.
Peace
-
Why do we get so upset about this question? Nobody is damned, nobody is told you are not as good as anybody else. You are merely reminded that when you leave people behind you and you live possessions behind you that with them you may leave problems also. Again, and again the Truthful, honest Quran IS NOT A RECIPE BOOK, it is a guide. We have to know where we want to go, if we do not know that, no amount of instructions on anything will enlighten us much. Also as with any guide, we cannot limit ourselves to simply follow instructions and "couldn't care less whether the result is there or not it is not my resonsibility". No, we are the subjects we assume responsibility, we think throughly as to what we are told and try to get the gist of it and to look at if from every angle and finally get as much guidance as possible from it.
So the Quran gives recommendations, advice, instructions, or however we want to translate "yussikum". It could have said nothing on the matter, and let us break our horns on any situation, or borrow roman law or keep traditional law... However, it does give instructions, and fairly detailed and fairly ununiform. It does so to help us, it doesn't do so so that we can go to hell in the afterlife if we do not agree. What if some person was distracted enough to not leave a will? Shall the successors fight to death for what is left? So it is a mercy. And the way it does is that spreads reasonably the succession, and within the scope of a comprehensive set of rules without becoming unwieldy, it sets parameters which for sure leave room for anybody to feel wronged, but not a lot of room and not very wronged. That is the fate of any law that is geared to resolve the most potential problems without creating more or bigger ones. In that sense I do think that the purpose of the rules is attained. They are wieldable, they do not lean overwhelmelly one way or another either to give too much or to give too little to anybody bearing in mind most circumstances ruling most of the time on most of societies. Do we want to change those rules? The easiest thing make a will. Many people forget or don't care to make a will... Well, everybody is not going to be pleased with the rules when applied to them, but nobody will be too displeased either comparatively with what it could be. And at any rate if it is considered that circumstances in society are such that that fairness and balance intended in the Quran cannot be maintained, let that society come with ideas and examine very thoroughly the question, and if it can come with an improvement, let it try, it will be its responsibility just as it is its responsibility to apply fairly the Quranic rules or any rules at all and to make sure that the rules it applies are indeed the least unfair that can be had. Because, again, the very nature of these rules is that one size doesn't fit all, and that in fact there is no general case ever, only particular cases. With these instructions or with any others, no particular case will ever be solved. It is like building a dam. Some people may suffer more prejudice from it than others, or benefit more, but the dam is made for the general welfare, and so that everybody gets something of the dam. The difference in benefit derived, cannot be solved putting or eliminating the dam, but through other social means. And let us not forget, a Quranic society MUST have social means to redress as much unfairness as is humanly possible. Ideally inheritance should not be too important, other than sentimentally.
Excuse the long speech.
Salaam
-
My opinion and your humble opinion of what is fair are irrelevant unless; as huruf stated...
Quicken? WillMaker Plus 2008
by Nolo
http//www.nolo.com/product.cfm/ObjectID/6E9ED903-C9B4-42E0-9C2E235DD87A0A8AGod knows best.
Peace
Okay, I guess that would be the most logical answer. Thanks.
-
But truthseeker, what you are asking for is not rules to ditribute inheritance where there is no will, ehst you are asking for is a few millions of volumes contemplating every case in which a person dies and leaves anything to inherit. There are every kind of situation and each case is different, and many cases or all would be unfair from some point of view.
I know of case upon case where males benefit most from the home of the parents, benefit from the domestic services of the sisters, from more largesse from the parents while they are young, and then marry and even if they live with the parents it is the sister or the sisters who really look after the parents, who mostly end moving out from their sons, because they just not only do not look after them but pester them, while they blame the wife for it. So, should the brothers get anything at all? Well, this is a kind of case that is not rare at all, quite the opposite. So, if you are making rules for a particular case, every particular case should get its rules. But then that would mean millions of volumes on rules of inheritance. That or not to make any rules at all and let people find what is fair once somebody dies if there is no will. But if you make rules to suit a particular case, you must make rules to suit EVERY particular case.
I suppose you have written a will.
Salaam
If I were to do that, the only thing anyone would inherit would be a huge debt, and I don?t think they would like that very much.
About the inheritance rules, I realize that going into more detail would get too complicated. I guess one would hope that in instances where the distribution appears to be unfair, people will do what is fair and just.
-
Dear Nun de Plume,
As I was going over your posts to solve the mystery of kalalatan, I wanted to ask you why/on what basis you use 412 and not 4176 to determine the share of the sister in a scenario with 1 sister, 1 mother
How do you distinguish between the siblings' share in 412 and 4176?
Peace,
Onur -
Dear Nun de Plume,
As I was going over your posts to solve the mystery of kalalatan, I wanted to ask you why/on what basis you use 412 and not 4176 to determine the share of the sister in a scenario with 1 sister, 1 mother
How do you distinguish between the siblings' share in 412 and 4176?
Peace,
OnurHello Onur -- hope all is well.
4176 only deals with how to distribute 1/3 (if parent/s alive) or the whole if no parents amongst 2+ siblings
Case mother, sister (does not involve 2+ siblings, use 412)
1 - 1/6 sister = 5/6 mother412...and if (he) was/is a man to be inherited kalalatan (without child) or a woman (wife), and for him (is) a brother, or a sister, so for each one from them (B) the 1/6, so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3
IF 1 sister 1/6 from total inheritance
IF 1 brother 1/6 from total inheritance
IF 2+ siblings they all together get 1/3 from total inheritance (see 4176 on how to distribute)4176 They ask your opinion/clarification , say "God decrees/decides in alkalalati, if (a) man/human died, not for him (without) a child, and for him (is) a sister, so for her half what he left, and he inherits her if (there) was not for her a child??
Case mother, sister, brother (2+ siblings thus 1/3 is used from 412)
1 ? 1/3 (sister + brother share from 412) = 2/3 mothersister gets 1/2 of 1/3 as does the brother else without a parent they each get 1/2 of the whole.
Refer to the prior template...
Here is a recap of inheritance verses with no contradictions, surpluses, etc., along with attached pdf and cases examples.
Peace
-
Hi Nun,
The last sentence of 4176 indeed concerns how to distribute in a case when the al kalalati has more than two siblings. But the first part involving "she gets 1/2" and "he inherits her" precedes and is independent of the condition (more than two siblings) Which still leaves me with the puzzle of what the sister of the alkalalati gets, 1/2(4176) or 1/6(412) in a case with parents(assuming that we accept kalalatan=childless and spouseless) -
Hi Onur,
412 stipulates case for 1 sister OR 1 brother ? they get 1/6 from total inheritance.
Else IF 2 or more they get 1/3 which is divided according to 4176
4176 "she gets 1/2" and "he inherits her" is case for 2 siblings; 1 sister + 1 brother.
The above cannot be the case IF only 1 sibling for that case has already been given in 412
Therefore...
Case sister; brother; mother; father
1 ? 1/3 (sister + brother from 412) = 2/3 (1/6 mother + 1/2 father)Thus sister gets ? * (1/3) or 1/6 as does the brother while parents get the rest.
Why spouseless?
Salaam Samia,
It?s stated that the kalalatan man in 412 has no woman (i.e. spouse)
Likewise, the alkalalati person in 4176 must also be spouseless if terms are same.
4176 They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in alkalalati, if (a) human died....
Qur?an gives the definition ? in 412 kalalatan is spouseless and 4176 childless. Thus if we combine the two descriptions, closest translation for kalalatan would be a ?loner? person unmarried and childless.
Peace
-
Salaam Nun
Thank you for the replyAre you sure it's not
If a man, or a woman, inherited as a kilala?
This means "man" in this verse is gendered, and not generic.
That's because generalization here does not apply. If he has a wife, she will inherit 25% of his inheritance and if she has a husband he inherits 1/2 (when there are no children) and this case is explained in the beginning of the verse.
More over, the definition given for kilala is that a man (here is genderic) who dies leaving no children. It did not say (nor a wife).
The definition -
Hi Samia,
Please solve according to your understanding...
Case wife, sister, brother
I have it the wife gets the whole inheritance and siblings get nothing since 412 and 4176 are not applicable being there is a spouse same as if the person had children which they would also get the whole thing.
-
Hi Nun,
I do not see from a literal reading of 4176 that the brother and the sister need to be together.
I think that 4176 reads as follows if an alkalalati man dies and has a sister, she gets 1/2 and if an alkalalati woman dies and has a brother, he "inherits her". There is no indication that the sister of the alkalalati man has also a brother.
How do you infer that the siblings in the first part of 4176 are 1 brother AND 1 sister? From what I can see, there is no explicit or implicit reference to this AND. -
Hi Onur,
Good observation...
412 sister gets 1/6
4176 sister gets 1/2It appears the above is a quagmire unless alkalalati in 4176 is fatherless.
IF spouseless/childless kalalatan (i.e. loner)
412...and if (he) was/is a man to be inherited kalalatan (without child) or a woman (wife), and for him (is) a brother, or a sister, so for each one from them the 1/6, so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3Case sister, father
1 ? 1/6 sister = 5/6 fatherIF fatherless/spouseless/childless alkalalati (the loner)
4176 They ask your opinion/clarification , say "God decrees/decides in alkalalati, if (a) man/human died, not for him (without) a child, and for him (is) a sister, so for her half what he left, and he inherits her if (there) was not for her a child, and if they were two, so to them the two thirds from what he left, and if they were brothers (siblings) men and women, so to the male equal/alike (the) share (of) the two females, God clarifies for you that (E) you (not) be misguided, and God is with everything knowledgeable.Case sister, mother
1 ? ? sister = ? motherThe above is the only thing which makes sense in that 411-12 starts with children, then spouses, then parents, and finally how to deal with childless/spouseless and fatherless loner.
I"ll need to re-visit and check everything again -- this God math is perplexing.
peace
-
Hi Nun,
I agree that there must be a differentiation betwen the kalalatan in 412 and 4176. Otherwise, we have different shares for the same cases.(Samia that is the problem that we are trying to solve. That is why we are trying to come up with multiple definitions for kalalatan)
Your proposal is a possibility. Unfortunately, all we can do is to guess and use logic to differentiate between the share of siblings for 412 and 4176.
I want to ask you the following. In your solution to a case with 1 sister, 1 mother why did you not use 1/6 for the mother which is specified in 411 as her share if the deceased has siblings?(father's share in a case with siblings is not specified. this is food for thought)
Onur -
Hi Onur,
I have it thus for parents and siblings...
411
...and to his PARENTS, to each one from them the 1/6 from what he left, if for him was a child,
?so if (there) was not for him a child, and his parents inherited him, so to his mother the 1/3,
?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6,IF both parents alive, mother?s share is fixed at 1/3
1 ? 1/3 mother = 2/3 fatherIF brothers/brethren ikhwatun mother?s share fixed at 1/6
IF no father or brothers/brethren ikhwatun, mother?s share is variable.
412
IF childless/spouseless kalalatan
...and if (he) was/is a man to be inherited kalalatan (without child) or a woman (wife), and for him (is) a brother, or a sister, so for each one from them the 1/6, so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3IF brother, mother, father
411?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6
412?and for him (is) a brother, or a sister, so for each one from them the 1/6
1 ? 1/6 brother ? 1/6 mother = 2/3 fatherIF 2+ brothers, mother, father
411?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6
412?so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3
1 ? 1/3 brothers ? 1/6 mother = 1/2 fatherIF sister, mother, father
411?so if (there) was not for him a child, and his parents inherited him, so to his mother the 1/3,
412?and for him (is) a brother, or a sister, so for each one from them the 1/6
1 ? 1/6 sister ? 1/3 mother = ? fatherIF 2+ sisters, mother, father
411?so if (there) was not for him a child, and his parents inherited him, so to his mother the 1/3,
412?so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3
1 ? 1/3 sisters ? 1/3 mother = 1/2 fatherIF 2+ siblings mixed, mother, father
411?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6
412?so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/3
1 ? 1/3 siblings ? 1/6 mother = ? fatherIF fatherless/childless/spouseless alkalalati
4176
They ask your opinion/clarification , say "God decrees/decides in alkalalati, if (a) man/human died, not for him (without) a child, and for him (is) a sister, so for her half what he left, and he inherits her if (there) was not for her a child, and if they were two, so to them the two thirds from what he left, and if they were brothers/brethren men and women, so to the male equal/alike (the) share (of) the two females, God clarifies for you that you (not) be misguided, and God is with everything knowledgeable.IF 1+ brothers, mother
411?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 brothersIF sister, mother
4176 ?and for him (is) a sister, so for her half what he left
1 ? ? sister = ? motherIF 2 sisters, mother
4176 ?and if they were two, so to them the two thirds from what he left
1 ? 2/3 sisters = 1/3 mother
1st sister 1/3
2nd sister 1/3IF 2+ siblings mixed, mother
411?so if brothers/brethren were for him, so to his mother the 1/6
4176?and if they were brothers/brethren (siblings) men and women, so to the male equal/alike (the) share (of) the two females
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 siblings -
Hi Nun, this looks plausible to me. In your view, what 4176 does is that it expands the definition of kalalatan to include "fatherless" and thus increase the share of the siblings. This makes sense. I will however try to investigate the issue further to see if there are any flaws. Thanks
Onur