Quran inheritance mistake

Samia

Salaam

Kaf-Lam-Lam = To lose father and child, lose direct heirs, be weary, tired, weak, have only remote relations

From Lane's Lexicon

Yes, all CA dictionaries say the same thing. I wanted to see if this is the meaning the quraan is using, or these dictionaries are just repeating a preconception

Tlepsh

Salaam Samia,
In my opinion a person is not burden on any one of these three Parents, children, or spouse.
If this person has any one of those three he is not a burden. He becomes burden when he has ?none? of those three.

Samia

Salaam Samia,
In my opinion a person is not burden on any one of these three Parents, children, or spouse.
If this person has any one of those three he is not a burden. He becomes burden when he has ?none? of those three.

Salaam Tlepsh
The qur'aan spoke of marital problems and set a final solution for them divorce. Also, Until this solution, one of them is a burden on the other.
As for inheritance verses the kelala was only mentioned in context of spouses' share (verse 411) and again alone in verse (4176). It was not mentioned in verse 411 when discussing the shares of children and parents.

Tlepsh

Salam Samia,
Please once more verify the meaning of Kalala as per the following devision of the inheritance statements in verses 411, 412, and 4176. My earlier definition is incorrect. A KALALA may or may not have children. This is clearly stated in verse 4176. I believe Kalala is one who has no parents and spose.

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance)
Normal Person
? to the male, a portion equal to that of two females
? if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance;
? if only one, her share is a half.
? For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children;
? if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third;
? if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth.
(The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.
? In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child;
? but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts.
? In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child;
? but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts.
Kalala with children
? If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, is KALALA, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth;
? but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts;
so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.
They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in ALKALALATI,
Kalala without children
? if (a) human(kalala) died, not for him a child, and for him a sister, so for her half what he left,
? and he inherits her (kalala) if 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 brethren men and women, so to the male equal fortune the two females,
God clarifies for you that you (not) be misguided, and God is with every thing knowledgeable.

Samia

Kalala with children
? If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, is KALALA, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth;
? but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts;
so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.
They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in ALKALALATI,

Salaam Tlepsh

This is where we differ. I suppose you are refereing to verse 412, which is about the share of spouses in all cases, including the kelala. I do not know how you infer from this that kalal here has children, when they are not mentioned
We should look now from the side of the heirs, i.e the children here. Verse 411, the main verse about children, does not mention siblings except in case there are no children. It's quite clear that the presence of children curtails brethrens right to inherit

Wakas

Kaf-Lam-Lam = To lose father and child, lose direct heirs, be weary, tired, weak, have only remote relations

From Lane's Lexicon

That is not from Lane's Lexicon.

Are you repeating the same mistake you were corrected on only a few days ago?
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598276.msg202338#msg202338

I recommend learning from one's mistakes and modifying actions/thinking appropriately.

unknownuser

Peace Tlepsh, Samia, all,

(&#1617 = It was, or became, dim, dull, or hebetated. He was, or became fatigued, tired, or wearied.
Kalla is used in verse verse 1676

Therefore in my opinion Kalalah means someone without parents, children, and spouse. One may became fatigued, tired, or wearied only when he has no parents, no children and no spouse.

kallun in 1676 definition and example is given has little to do with marital/personal status more about character; i.e. tiresome useless incompetent devoid of qualities requisite for effective conduct or action. We can infer from the root of the word is they are lacking and at issue is to solve the case examples involving all the possibilities without contradiction which the meaning clearly comes out as fatherless and spouse-less

Ex father, sibling
Distributions for various combinations of siblings are only stated in case of Kalala (412 and 4176)
With father alive deceased not Kalala, thus two unknowns variables ? sibling has to be dropped.

4176 They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in the Childless, if human died, not for him a Child

Illogical to state IF CHILDLESS not for him/her a CHILD.

Ex husband, mother, siblings, father {does not work, siblings are not inheritors with father}
1 ? 1/2 husband ? 1/6 mother ? 1/3 siblings = 0 father

Ex wife, sibling, mother {does not work, siblings are not inheritors with spouse}
1 - 1/4 wife ? 1/6 sibling ? 1/6 mother = 5/12 unallocated

http//www.mathcracker.com/piechartimage.php?data=3,%202,%202,%205&cat=wife,%20sibling,%20mother,%20unallocated

Yes, all CA dictionaries say the same thing. I wanted to see if this is the meaning the quraan is using, or these dictionaries are just repeating a preconception

Lane et al, are repeating preconceptions from contradictive hadith; see case stated earlier...

A work around was that 412 refers to uterine siblings or half sisters and brothers having the same mother but a different father to resolve the issue which brought about other confusion when total distribution is greater than the whole fix was to use algebra to proportionately decrease each amount by a common denominator called al-awl.

Ex husband, mother, 3 uterine brothers, 2 full brothers

1/2 husband + 1/6 mother + 1/3 uterine brothers (412) = 0 full brothers (4176)

The above was a supposed case during the caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab who ruled the 2 full brothers got nothing since there was nothing remaining to share. The full brothers argued that even if their father was a donkey or a stone cast into the sea and they had no paternal relationship, they still had the same and equal relationship with the deceased as the uterine brothers through the same mother. Umar reconsidered his ruling and allowed the full brothers to inherit equally with the uterine brothers in the shares thus

1 ? 1/2 husband ? 1/6 mother = 1/3 brothers

Which is both incorrect according to Qur'an because when there is a spouse siblings get NOTHING!

It is stated in 4176 kalala no child whereas 412 is a progression from children, parents, spouses, then spouseless person who can be a widower, divorced, or single person with children and reason sibling?s share limited to maximum of 1/3 and we use for this case 4176 no child

1 sister, mother
1/2 sister + 1/2 mother = 1

2+ sisters, mother
2/3 sisters + 1/3 mother = 1

1+ brother, mother (411...if brothers were for him, so to his mother the 1/6)
5/6 brothers + 1/6 mother = 1

2+ siblings mixed any combination, mother
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 siblings (to the male equal fortune the two females)

2+ siblings mixed any combination - to the male equal fortune the two females

There can be no contradictions; that is the correct interpretation.

unknownuser

Salam Samia,
Please once more verify the meaning of Kalala as per the following devision of the inheritance statements in verses 411, 412, and 4176. My earlier definition is incorrect. A KALALA may or may not have children. This is clearly stated in verse 4176. I believe Kalala is one who has no parents and spose.

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance)
Normal Person
? to the male, a portion equal to that of two females
? if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance;
? if only one, her share is a half.
? For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children;
? if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third;
? if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth.
(The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.
? In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child;
? but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts.
? In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child;
? but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts.
Kalala with children
? If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, is KALALA, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth;
? but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts;
so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.
They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in ALKALALATI,
Kalala without children
? if (a) human(kalala) died, not for him a child, and for him a sister, so for her half what he left,
? and he inherits her (kalala) if 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 brethren men and women, so to the male equal fortune the two females,
God clarifies for you that you (not) be misguided, and God is with every thing knowledgeable.

Peace Tlepsh,

That is correct except for mother; i.e. Kalala = Fatherless and/or Spouse-less

All the case examples work; if child use 412 else without child use 4176

Samia

Salaam Eid and Tlepsh

Since my questions are not being answere by any of you, let's go step by step and try to see wher we agree and where we differ, and on what grounds.
First question

Verse 411 How many deceased/kinds of deceased does this verse speak about? Please explain why?

Tlepsh

Pease Samia,
Please re-check the following
The inheritance verses are

411
About children, parents and brethren (deceased standard not kelala) The share of parents and brethren depands on the precence of the children. In presence of children brethren get nothing from a normal peron. If the normal person has no children then parents and brethren get their share.

412
First part Share of spouses of a normal person with or witout children.
Second part Share of brethren in case of a Kalala with children (because not stated to be childless as in verse 4176) where the brethren get 1/3 of the total and the rest is for the children.

4 176
Share of brethern alone since here kalala is stated to be childless. And the distribution between the brethren is explained.

Samia

Thank you Tlepsh

411
About children, parents and brethren (deceased standard not kelala) The share of parents and brethren depands on the precence of the children. In presence of children brethren get nothing from a normal peron. If the normal person has no children then parents and brethren get their share.

412
First part Share of spouses of a normal person with or witout children.
Second part Share of brethren in case of a Kalala with children (because not stated to be childless as in verse 4176) where the brethren get 1/3 of the total and the rest is for the children.

Please look at the two underlined statemnet.
1- In verse 411, brethren get nothing in presence of children undr any case. What makes them get a share in case of a "kelala with children"?
2- Brethren are mentioned in verse 412, but are not the main theme. The main theme is "spouses". Why do you think in this verse the "kelala" is spouseless, though it is not mentioned?

Tlepsh

Salaam Samia,

? 412 is a continuation of 411 and 4176 is a completion of 412.
? If kalala is childless why to state it twice in verse 4176

? If kalalah may have a spouse why there is no mention of it same as the children? i.e. (lays lahu zawja) or (lem yakun laha zawj) since in your understanding kalala may or may not have a spouse.

Samia

Salaam Samia,

? 412 is a continuation of 411 and 4176 is a completion of 412.
? If kalala is childless why to state it twice in verse 4176

? If kalalah may have a spouse why there is no mention of it same as the children? i.e. (lays lahu zawja) or (lem yakun laha zawj) since in your understanding kalala may or may not have a spouse.

Who will get the other half?

Tlepsh

Who will get the other half?

So from the verses how do we know that the spouse will get the other half?

unknownuser

Peace,

In 4176 Kalala no child the only other possible inheritor along with siblings is the mother

Ex mother, sister
1 ? 1/2 sister = 1/2 mother

Ex mother, 1+ brothers
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 brother

Samia

So from the verses how do we know that the spouse will get the other half?

Peace,

In 4176 Kalala no child the only other possible inheritor along with siblings is the mother

The mother's share is fixed at 1/6 in case there are no children and there are brethren (411)

unknownuser

Salaam Samia,

The mother's share is fixed at 1/6 in case there are no children and there are brethren (411)

Ikhwatun requires the presence of a male same as with rijalan for example.

411

4176

1258

4910

If no father and no brethren/Ikhwatun, the mother?s share is variable else contradictions.

Ex mother, sister {4176 sister 1/2}
1 ? 1/6 mother ? 1/2 sister = 1/3 unallocated

Or if the assumption is that Kalala has no spouse, no parents, and no child, then 1/2 for sister never really comes in play since there is no one for her to share with and likewise with 2/3 if they are two.

4176 They ask your clarification, say "God decrees in alkalalati, if (a) human died, not for him a child, and for him a sister, so for her half what he left, and he inherits her if 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 brethren/Ikhwatun men and women, so to the male equal fortune the two females, God clarifies for you that you (not) be misguided, and God is with every thing knowledgeable.

Ex 1+ brothers, mother (411...mother 1/6)
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 brothers

Ex sister, mother
1 ? 1/2 sister = 1/2 mother

Ex 2+ sisters (i.e. presence of two), mother
1 ? 2/3 sisters = 1/3 mother

Ex 2+ siblings mixed, mother (411...mother 1/6)
1 ? 1/6 mother = 5/6 siblings (to the male equal fortune the two females)

Samia

Salaam Eid

Ikhwatun requires the presence of a male same as with rijalan for example.

Thanks for the correction. I meant siblings
I also agree with the rest of the post, except that I consider the calculations are valid for the standard person. If it were a kelala as I understand, instead of mother, put spouse, and the calculations will slightly differ when the share of the spouse will be 1/4 (1/2 if husband) instead of the share of the mother at 1/6. Notice that the share of the spouse is mentioned in presence and absence of children, otherwise variable (i.e in presence of only siblings)

Case of a male kelala

Ex 1+ brothers, spouse (412...spouse 1/4)
1 ? 1/4 mother = 3/4 brothers

Ex sister, spouse
1 ? 1/2 sister = 1/2 spouse

Ex 2+ sisters (i.e. presence of two), spouse
1 ? 2/3 sisters = 1/3 mother

Ex 2+ siblings mixed, spouse (412...spouse 1/4)
1 ? 1/4 spouse = 3/4 siblings (to the male equal fortune the two females)

unknownuser

Salaam Eid
Thanks for the correction. I meant siblings
I also agree with the rest of the post, except that I consider the calculations are valid for the standard person. If it were a kelala as I understand, instead of mother, put spouse, and the calculations will slightly differ when the share of the spouse will be 1/4 (1/2 if husband) instead of the share of the mother at 1/6. Notice that the share of the spouse is mentioned in presence and absence of children, otherwise variable (i.e in presence of only siblings)

Case of a male kelala

Ex 1+ brothers, spouse (412...spouse 1/4)
1 ? 1/4 mother = 3/4 brothers

Ex sister, spouse
1 ? 1/2 sister = 1/2 spouse

Ex 2+ sisters (i.e. presence of two), spouse
1 ? 2/3 sisters = 1/3 mother

Ex 2+ siblings mixed, spouse (412...spouse 1/4)
1 ? 1/4 spouse = 3/4 siblings (to the male equal fortune the two females)

Salaam Samia,

If spouse that's were the entanglement comes in, no way to distinguish whether to give for example the sister 1/6 mentioned in 412 or 1/2 in 4176; something has to toggle between the siblings in the two verses which historically it was conjectured that the siblings in 412 were half siblings or uterine siblings same mother different father whereas the siblings in 4176 are full siblings.

You of course argue (I think) that 412 is Kalala with spouse and 4176 Kalala who leaves no spouse.

I argue 412 is Kalala who leaves a child while 4176 is without child as stated.

Also, if Kalala with spouse is 412 then we have this issue....

Ex wife, sibling, mother {does not work, siblings are not inheritors with spouse}
1 - 1/4 wife ? 1/6 sibling ? 1/6 mother = 5/12 unallocated

http//www.mathcracker.com/piechartimage.php?data=3,%202,%202,%205&cat=wife,%20sibling,%20mother,%20unallocated

In addition, if Kalala without spouse is 4176 and parent less, then no one to share 1/2 with sister.

Which makes the verse never applicable.

No longer a Sunna-rejecter

That is not from Lane's Lexicon.

Are you repeating the same mistake you were corrected on only a few days ago?
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598276.msg202338#msg202338

I recommend learning from one's mistakes and modifying actions/thinking appropriately.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9597104.msg202824#msg202824

Besides, it is from Lane's if you can read what it says at Study Quran PRL.
http//www.studyquran.co.uk/PRLonline.htm

They always give a reference to Lane's Lexicon. Check if you want to.