Quran inheritance mistake
-
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 -
Hello Nun,
I think you are right that in a case when the deceased is a kalalatan(spouseless and childless) we should use 412 for the share of the siblings if the kalalatan has a father. If we had used 4176 for the share of siblings when there is a father we would be unable to solve a case with many mixed siblings and a father for we would have an equation with two unknowns(father's share when there are siblings is not specified and 4176 does not fix the share of siblings which would leave us with two unknowns) Therefore, in that case siblings should share the 1/3 and the father gets the remainder 2/3.
As a general rule, to find the share of the siblings of the kalalatan we should use 412 if there is a father and 4176 if there is no father. That is the critera to distinguish 412 and 4176 for the share of siblings. We need a general rule for logic and consistency.
I also think that when a kalalatan dies and leaves siblings together with a mother we should always use the share 1/6 for the mother because 411 gives a fixed share of 1/6 for the mother of a deceased kalalatan with siblings. For example, I do not agree with your solution for 1 mother, 1 sister. In that case, the mother should get 1/6 and the sister should get 1/2(consistent with the general rule, we use 4176 for the share of the sister who has no father)
-
Hello Onur,
I also think that when a kalalatan dies and leaves siblings together with a mother we should always use the share 1/6 for the mother because 411 gives a fixed share of 1/6 for the mother of a deceased kalalatan with siblings. For example, I do not agree with your solution for 1 mother, 1 sister. In that case, the mother should get 1/6 and the sister should get 1/2(consistent with the general rule, we use 4176 for the share of the sister who has no father)
Good that we have a consensus.
Now as to the case with mother and sister...
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 child = false
IF both parents alive = false
IF brothers/brethren = falseTherefore, the mother's share is not specified and dependent on sister...
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 half1 - 1/2 sister = 1/2 mother
In addition, if mother's share was 1/6 then there would also be 1/3 excess.
1 - 1/2 sister - 1/6 mother = 1/3
Peace
-
Hello again,
I took "mother's share is 1/6 if there are siblings" to mean that if the deceased has sibling(s) then mother's share is 1/6. One sibling or many siblings(I think that the word used in the verse includes both male and female siblings)... The same with "if the deceased has children.... wife's/husband's/parents' is X " meaning if the deceased has any child(ren), one or many..... Apparently you take mother's share 1/6 when there are many siblings and not just one. If someone asks me " Do you have siblings?" I could answer, " Yes, I have a brother/sister" There is no need to take the expression mean only plural- that would be too strictly literal.
-
Hi -
The word used ikhwatun is plural
If someone asks do you have siblings, the proper answer is ? No, I have a sibling.
The definition is precisely stated and defined within the text...
4176?and if they were brothers/brethren (siblings) men and women
-
Unfortunately, throughout all this discussion on inheritance and especially on the share of siblings of kalalatin, I have the impression that we do more arbitrary guesswork to save the Quran from inconsistencies than well grounded logical reasoning. I hope that this issue of inheritance will not lead me to unbelief.
-
Unfortunately, throughout all this discussion on inheritance and especially on the share of siblings of kalalatin, I have the impression that we do more arbitrary guesswork to save the Quran from inconsistencies than well grounded logical reasoning. I hope that this issue of inheritance will not lead me to unbelief.
If you look for inconsistencies you'll "reason" to unbelief and find them everywhere...
Look at all the ayat (verses, proofs, evidences, signs, etc.)
Look at the meticulous structure of Quran ? straight forward math.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=16442.msg175363#msg175363
Surah... #Verses... S+V... 57 Even... 57 Odd
1............7...............8............8.............
2..........286..........288..........288..........
3..........200..........203.....................20 3
....
110..........3..........113.....................11 3
111..........5..........116..........116..........
112..........4..........116..........116..........
113..........5..........118..........118..........
114..........6..........120..........120..........6555.......6236....12791........6236......6555
6236 6555 12791 = 19 x 328245026989
Look at the world around you and billions astonishing species each a work of art.
Peace
-
As you must have realized by now, I do not intentionally look for inconsistencies. My only intention is to have clear, consistent and rational answers to problems. I sincerely wish to have a rational faith compatible with science, math, common sense, human rights and justice etc. I have the suspicion though that some parts of the verses on inheritance are not original to Quran and may have been added later. Maybe future researchers can hopefully clarify this.
-
I have the suspicion though that some parts of the verses on inheritance are not original to Quran and may have been added later. Maybe future researchers can hopefully clarify this.
159 That We, We descended the reminder/remembrance, and that We (are) for it, protectors/guards.
Nothing to clarify that would be a contradiction same as this sentence...
If someone asks me " Do you have siblings?" I could answer, " Yes, I have a brother/sister"
-
Salaam Onum,
Unfortunately, throughout all this discussion on inheritance and especially on the share of siblings of kalalatin, I have the impression that we do more arbitrary guesswork to save the Quran from inconsistencies than well grounded logical reasoning. I hope that this issue of inheritance will not lead me to unbelief.
Only one reason is enough for you to become an unbeliever? tempt nope tempt
Wait! "Wasbir hatta yahkumAllah"
"Wait till Allah decides for you"
Regards,
mmKhan -
Salaam mmkhan,
you can agree or disagree with(believe or not believe in) most verses in the Quran depending on your moral preferences, your purpose in life, world-view, culture etc. Verses on ethics, women, justice, social organization, war and peace are examples of that.
But when it comes to mathematics and analytical logic, the rules are universal and objective. We cannot get away from problems with statements like " I think that ...." or "I believe that..." The universal rules are there whether we believe in them or not. Therefore, logical and mathematical inconsistencies and problems in the inheritance verses cast doubt on the entire Quran. This is the source of the crisis that I am going through. One problem concerns the feasibility of the method by which we say X.(SUM OF SHARES)=1 and then find X and multiply each inheritor's share with X. The other concerns the issue of kalala and the contradiction between 412 and 4176 on the share of siblings of the deceased kalala. (Traditional muslims have in fact acknowledged this contradiction and "found a way out" by saying that 412 refers to half siblings and 4176 refers to full siblings.)
These are the sources of my suspicion that some parts of 411-12 and 4176 may have been added later to the revealed text. Maybe God will show signs of this and that would be the way how God protects the Quran in accordance with 159.
I liked what you said. I will wait till God decides for me
-
Salaaman Onur,
Sorry for typing mistake in your name in previous message.
Dear! forget about mathematics, universal rules, etc... remember what Allah said
223 "And if you doubt any part of what We have, bestowed from on high, step by step, upon Our servant, then produce a surah of similar merit, and call upon any other than God to bear witness for you -if what you say is true!"
Wain kuntum fee raybin mimma nazzalna AAala AAabdina fatoo bisooratin min mithlihi waodAAoo shuhadaakum min dooni Allahi in kuntum sadiqeena
(223)
224 "And if you cannot do it-and most certainly you cannot do it-then be conscious of the fire whose fuel is human beings and stones which awaits all who deny the truth!"
Fain lam tafAAaloo walan tafAAaloo faittaqoo alnnara allatee waqooduha alnnasu waalhijaratu oAAiddat lilkafireena
(224)
And don't try to run fast, you will fall down on your face and you will lose your teeth. (a friendly advice)
If you don't have a capacity to understand the aayaats, it does NOT mean that AlQuraan is contradictory or fake. It clearly means that you are not capable to handle such a huge matters. Allah says
1038 "And yet, they assert, "has invented it!" Say "Produce, then, a surah of similar merit; and call to your aid whomever you can, other than God, if what you say is true!"
Am yaqooloona iftarahu qul fatoo bisooratin mithlihi waodAAoo mani istataAAtum min dooni Allahi in kuntum sadiqeena
(103
1039 "Nay, but they are bent on giving the lie to everything the wisdom whereof they do not comprehend, and ere its inner meaning has become clear to them Even thus did those who lived before their time give the lie to the truth and behold what happened in the end to those evildoers!"
Bal kaththaboo bima lam yuheetoo biAAilmihi walamma yatihim taweeluhu kathalika kaththaba allatheena min qablihim faonthur kayfa kana AAaqibatu alththalimeena
(1039)
The other concerns the issue of kalala and the contradiction between 412 and 4176 on the share of siblings of the deceased kalala. (Traditional muslims have in fact acknowledged this contradiction and "found a way out" by saying that 412 refers to half siblings and 4176 refers to full siblings.)
These are the sources of my suspicion that some parts of 411-12 and 4176 may have been added later to the revealed text. Maybe God will show signs of this and that would be the way how God protects the Quran in accordance with 159.
Contradiction? ??? How? ??? I don't see any nope
Please let me see where you got stuck in 412 and 4176
And read carefully,
4152 "HAVE YOU given thought if this be truly from God, the while you deny its truth? Who could be more astray than one who places himself deeply in the wrong?
Qul araaytum in kana min AAindi Allahi thumma kafartum bihi man adallu mimman huwa fee shiqaqin baAAeedin
(4152)
4153 "In time We shall make them fully understand Our messages in the utmost horizons and within them?selves, so that it will become clear unto them that this is indeed the truth. Is it not enough that thy Sustainer is witness unto everything?"
Sanureehim ayatina fee alafaqi wafee anfusihim hatta yatabayyana lahum annahu alhaqqu awalam yakfi birabbika annahu AAala kulli shayin shaheedun
(4153)
May Allah guide us all towards the truth.
Regards,
mmKhan -
Selam mmkhan,
The second problem/contradiction that I referred to is that according to 412, when a man dies as a kalalah and has a brother OR a sister, the brother or the sister get 1/6, if there are more siblings they all share a 1/3. Whereas, in 4176, under the same circumstances,that is, when a man dies as a kalalah, the sister gets 1/2(remember that in 412 it was 1/6) and the brother gets whatever is left to him(remember that in 412 the brother's share was fixed at 1/6)
The general problem is that siblings are specified different/contradictory shares under the same circumstances.
As I said, traditional muslims tried to find a solution to this saying that the siblings in 412 are half siblings whereas siblings in 4176 are full siblings. But, this traditional solution is arbitrary and has no Quranic basis. I hope that you have a solution. Thanks
Onur
-
As I said, traditional muslims tried to find a solution to this saying that the siblings in 412 are half siblings whereas siblings in 4176 are full siblings. But, this traditional solution is arbitrary and has no Quranic basis. I hope that you have a solution. Thanks
Onur
IF 2+ siblings
412?so if they were more than that, so they are partners in the 1/31 ? 1/3 siblings = 2/3 unallocated?
411 God directs you in your CHILDREN
Children who have the same biological mother are FULL siblings.
Children who have the same biological father are FULL siblings.No such thing as half siblings.
412
IF childless/spouseless kalalatan4176
IF fatherless/childless/spouseless alkalalati -
Nun, what you do is to assume the truth of the Quran in the first place. You distinguish between the kalalatan cases in 412 and 4176 for the whole thing to work. The Quran does not make this distinction. The Quran does not explain that 412= childless/spouseless and 4176= childless/spouseless/fatherless. It is you and me(to some degree) who make this distinction(perhaps no other person than you and me are aware of this distinction ) The distinction, I admit, is a nice one. But it makes sense only if we assume that there cannot be a contradiction in the Quran and two cases should be distinct despite the obvious fact that the same word is used in both(kalalatan).
-
Onur, I do not assume and know there are no contradictions.
Is it an obvious fact the same word is used below?
Alam tara ila allatheena ootoo naseeban mina alkitabi yashtaroona alddalalata wayureedoona an tadilloo alssabeela
444 Did you not see to those who were given a share from The Book, they volunteer the misguidance and they want that you (also) be misguided (from) the way?Onthur kayfa yaftaroona AAala Allahi alkathiba wakafa bihi ithman mubeenan
450 See how they are fabricating on God the lies/falsehood, and enough with it, (as an) evident sin/crime. -
Both 412's second part and 4176 talk about the same status, that of kalala. What is your proof that fatherless is added to the status of kalala in 4176 other than that this is (perhaps) the only meaningful way to solve the contradiction?
In the example you give with 444 and 450, we see words with the same roots but radically different meanings. This radical difference does not exist in our discussion of 412 and 4176 where clearly the same status is discussed. In fact, 4176 starts with a claim to clarify kalala.
Therefore, what is your proof that there are two types of kalalas other than that that is what we have to assume to avoid contradiction?