Inheritance Laws, time sensitive?
-
Peace Mushu,
Peace,
For the male is (the) likeness to (the) opulence/satisfaction of the two females . 4/11 and 4/176
A few things worthy of note
The word hazz (opulence/fortune/without need) is used instead of naseeb (share/portion) like in 4/7 and 4/33.
I believe this is important because the majority of us will never inherit a fortune from our parents, or anything that will satiate our needs/desires, which is what the word denotes. So why is this word used instead of naseeb?
The word mithlu (likeness/similar) is used instead of sawaan (equal/equivalent) as in 22/25.
When examining all the other ratios/shares in the rest of the verse, no word like mithlu is used anywhere except in this phrase. It could have said, ?for the male is the hazz/naseeb of the two females?. There doesn't seem to be any reason for the word mithlu to be there if the phrase was actually about a ratio.
Hence, why I question whether this phrase is a ratio at all. It may be suggesting that males are inclined to want more before they are satisfied or feel they are in good circumstance - like as much as the two females. Are we being reminded to keep this in mind when dividing the estate?
3/36 And not is the male like the female .
The phrase in question also appears in 4/176, after the mentioning of "ikhwatun" (brothers, or possibly siblings). Again, the way every other fraction/ratio is worded in the verse, this phrase seems a bit odd.
mith'lu/like or equivalent to mathematical equal sign
hazzin is their piece or part of the pie being inherited
2879 so he went forth to his people in his adornment; said those who desire the life the world
"O! Would that for us mith'la/like what has been given to Qarun
Indeed he owner hazzin/part great."411 and 4176 are different....
411 in your children -
a. to the male mith'lu/like ai/part the two/feminine
If above was left alone traditional understanding would apply, to each male = part the two femalesb. so if they are females over two so for them two thirds what left
This excludes any case over two i.e. 3+ from the first statement abovec. and if she is one so for her the half
This excludes the case of one daughter from the first statement aboveExamples
1 son 1/2, 2 daughters 1/2
1 son 1/3, 3 daughters 2/3 (2/9 each daughter)
1 son 1/2, 1 daughter 1/22 sons 2/3, 2 daughters 1/3 (or 1/3 each son, 1/6 each daughter)
2 sons 1/3, 3 daughters 2/3 (or 1/6 each son, 2/9 each daughter)
2 sons 1/2, 1 daughter 1/23 sons 3/4, 2 daughters 1/4 (or 1/4 each son, 1/8 each daughter)
3 sons 1/3, 3 daughters 2/3 (or 1/9 each son, 2/9 each daughter) for this case girls are favored 2x!
3 sons 1/2, 1 daughter 1/2 (or 1/6 each son, 3/6 daughter) case of a single daughter is favored 3x!4176 the case of kalala and siblings? disbursements is according to traditional understanding; shares 1/2 or 2/3 for the sisters are when they are alone (no brothers) and Qur'an precisely states "Wa ?In Kn 'Ikhwatan Rijlan Wa Nis'an" which covers all possibilities for mixed siblings apply "to the male equal share the two females" and gives definition of Ikhwatun in 411, at least two persons, one is male.
Here is the template for all cases? The Inheritance Issue Revisited
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599979.msg240753#msg240753
Peace
-
mith'lu/like or equivalent to mathematical equal sign
I understand why one would interpret it this way, however, my question is why the word is even there to begin with. If the phrase is a ratio, why not "for the male is the hazz of the two females"? That would have made it a clear ratio and would have matched every other fraction/share in the verse.
hazzin is their piece or part of the pie being inherited
2879 so he went forth to his people in his adornment; said those who desire the life the world
"O! Would that for us mith'la/like what has been given to Qarun
Indeed he owner hazzin/part great."From Lane's
Ha-Za-Za = To be in good circumstances, to be fortunate, to be rich/wealthy/opulent, possess competence or sufficiency, in no need, without wants or with few wants, prefer one person above another.
-
I understand why one would interpret it this way, however, my question is why the word is even there to begin with. If the phrase is a ratio, why not "for the male is the hazz of the two females"? That would have made it a clear ratio and would have matched every other fraction/share in the verse.
The rest are direct payouts while mith'lu describes the fortune pie chart or ratio, it helps visualize ...
411 in your children -
to the male mith'lu/like/equal ai/fortune the two femaleshttp//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1,2&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20male&chco=
so if they are females over two so for them two thirds what left
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t2,2,2,3&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20female|%20male&chco=
and if she is one so for her the half
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1&chs=200x100&chl=female|%20male&chco=
-
Peace SEid
The rest are direct payouts while mith'lu describes the fortune pie chart or ratio, it helps visualize ...
411 in your children -
to the male mith'lu/like/equal ai/fortune the two femaleshttp//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1,2&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20male&chco=
This is what I'm questioning. Mithlu is not "equals/equivalent", there is a word for that in the quran - sawaan (see 22/25). Mithlu means likeness/similar to, so to me it is evident the phrase is not referring to a clear-cut ratio.
Also, hazz does not mean portion. If a son and two daughters were inheriting ?30 from their deceased parents, you would find it difficult to find anyone who would consider that a fortune. Hazz means to be without need/opulent, which does not describe the reality for most people, who will inherit only small amounts from their parents.
-
Peace SEid
This is what I'm questioning. Mithlu is not "equals/equivalent", there is a word for that in the quran - sawaan (see 22/25). Mithlu means likeness/similar to, so to me it is evident the phrase is not referring to a clear-cut ratio.
Also, hazz does not mean portion. If a son and two daughters were inheriting ?30 from their deceased parents, you would find it difficult to find anyone who would consider that a fortune. Hazz means to be without need/opulent, which does not describe the reality for most people, who will inherit only small amounts from their parents.
Peace Mushu,
It's relative and "like portion" perfectly fits the verse and describes a ratio.
From Lane's
Ha-Za-Za = To be in good circumstances, to be fortunate, to be rich/wealthy/opulent, possess competence or sufficiency, in no need, without wants or with few wants, prefer one person above another.
Cannot always go by Lane's which was compiled in 1863, closest English meaning using context is part/portion...
3176 intends Allah that not He will set for them hazz/part in the Hereafter
411/176 to the male mith'lu/like ai/part the two females
513/14 forgot hazz/part from what they were reminded
2879 "O! Would that for us mith'la/like what has been given to Qarun
Indeed he owner hazz/part great."4135 and not it is granted only (to the) owner hazz/part great
-
Peace SEid,
Peace Mushu,
It's relative and "like portion" perfectly fits the verse and describes a ratio.
I disagree. A 'perfect' fit with the verse would have been "for the male is the naseeb of the two females", but that's not what the phrase says.
Cannot always go by Lane's which was compiled in 1863, closest English meaning using context is part/portion...
3176 intends Allah that not He will set for them hazz/part in the Hereafter
411/176 to the male mith'lu/like ai/part the two females
513/14 forgot hazz/part from what they were reminded
2879 "O! Would that for us mith'la/like what has been given to Qarun
Indeed he owner hazz/part great."4135 and not it is granted only (to the) owner hazz/part great
Fortune/opulence fits in every one of those verses, so I see no reason why one would translate it as part/portion when the dictionary says otherwise. In fact, 41/35 makes little sense if you translated hazz as part/portion. Besides, if you make hazz into portion, you end up with a synonym with naseeb. Why would the quran have synonyms?
Anyway, this was just a repetition of the things I've said before. From what I see, the language in this phrase doesn't lend itself well to being a ratio.
-
Peace Mushu,
Peace SEid,
I disagree. A 'perfect' fit with the verse would have been "for the male is the naseeb of the two females", but that's not what the phrase says.
Fortune/opulence fits in every one of those verses, so I see no reason why one would translate it as part/portion when the dictionary says otherwise. In fact, 41/35 makes little sense if you translated hazz as part/portion. Besides, if you make hazz into portion, you end up with a synonym with naseeb. Why would the quran have synonyms?
Anyway, this was just a repetition of the things I've said before. From what I see, the language in this phrase doesn't lend itself well to being a ratio.
Peace Mushu,
It?s written as it is written and context is on inheritance, dividing shares (i.e. math, ratios, and portions).
Lanes http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume2/00000231.pdf
Fortune; or particularly good fortune; syn. . (S, Nh, Myb, K) and (Nh and a share, portion, or lot (S, Msb, K or particularly a share, portion, or lot, of something good or excellent ...
411 in your children - to the male like the two females
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1,2&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20male&chco=
-
Peace,
Usually and in most cases the main problem with issues like these is not with the interpretation or explanation, but mainly with justification.
Yes, we often do hear or justify such and such and use it as a substitute of an argument.
For example in this case, many are trying to understand why God has decided that a female take 1/2 share of that of a man? And then try and justify it by saying that men are the one who provide for the family..
I think we still need to do some work into learning how to use logic and science rather than social statusRegards
-
For example in this case, many are trying to understand why God has decided that a female take 1/2 share of that of a man? And then try and justify it by saying that men are the one who provide for the family..
I think we still need to do some work into learning how to use logic and science rather than social statusPeace,
It's not always the case, rather a straight distribution depending on # of females.
Example case of only one daughter, she gets 1/2 regardless # of sons...
411 ...and if she is one so for her the half
1 daughter, 1 son -- each gets equal share or 1/2
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1&chs=200x100&chl=female|%20males&chco=
1 daughter, 2 sons -- daughter gets 1/2, each son 1/4 (she gets 2X)
1 daughter, 3 sons -- daughter gets 1/2, each son 1/6 (she gets 3X)There's nothing to interpret or explain, it's a case of follow the instructions verbatim.
-
Peace,
It's not always the case, rather a straight distribution depending on # of females.
Example case of only one daughter, she gets 1/2 regardless # of sons...
411 ...and if she is one so for her the half
1 daughter, 1 son -- each gets equal share or 1/2
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1&chs=200x100&chl=female|%20males&chco=
1 daughter, 2 sons -- daughter gets 1/2, each son 1/4 (she gets 2X)
1 daughter, 3 sons -- daughter gets 1/2, each son 1/6 (she gets 3X)There's nothing to interpret or explain, it's a case of follow the instructions verbatim.
My understanding or misunderstanding is as follows (Pls clarify so i can get rid of the confusion)
If 1 daughter alone (with no sons), then she gets 50%, but if 1 daughter and 1 son, then the daughter gets 1 share and the son gets 2 shares i.e. 33.33% to daughter and 66.67% to son.
-
My understanding or misunderstanding is as follows (Pls clarify so i can get rid of the confusion)
If 1 daughter alone (with no sons), then she gets 50%, but if 1 daughter and 1 son, then the daughter gets 1 share and the son gets 2 shares i.e. 33.33% to daughter and 66.67% to son.
That's where a lot of confusion and numerous contradictions come from assuming the case for the daughters in 411 is only when they are alone and miss reading the over two part which then leaves no instructions for when there are exactly two daughters?
General formula 1 - Parents - Spouse = Children (depends on # of females)
Example inheritors Children
1 daughter/son = 100% any sole inheritor, no need for inheritance laws.If mixed, distribute per 411 Instructs you Allah in your children -
to the male like portion the two (feminine)
so if there are females over two (feminine), so for them 2/3 what he left
and if she is one, so for her the 1/2If 2 daughters -- to the male like portion the two (feminine)
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1,2&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20each%20male&chco=
2 daughters 1/4 each, 1 son gets 2/4
2 daugthers 1/6 each, 2 sons 2/6 each
2 daughters 1/8 each, 3 sons 2/8 eachIf 3+ daughters -- so if there are females over two (feminine), so for them 2/3 what he left
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t2,2,2,3&chs=300x100&chl=female|%20female|%20female|%20males&chco=
3 daugthers 2/9 each (2/3 total), 1 son gets 1/3 remaining
3 daugthers 2/9 each (2/3 total), 2 sons get 1/3 remaining or 1/6 each
3 daugthers 2/9 each (2/3 total), 3 sons get 1/3 remaining or 1/9 eachIf 1 daughter -- and if she is one, so for her the 1/2 (i.e. she always gets half the children's pie)
http//chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=p&chd=t1,1&chs=200x100&chl=female|%20males&chco=
1 daughter 1/2 total, 1 son gets 1/2 remaining
1 daughter 1/2 total, 2 sons get 1/2 remaining or 1/4 each
1 daughter 1/2 total, 3 sons get 1/2 remaining or 1/6 eachThe fully detailed explanation and for all cases is at the end of this thread?
The Inheritance Issue Revisited
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599979.msg240753#msg240753
Peace
-
Thanks SEid
What will be distribution guideline in case the deceased man leaves behind
3 daughters (2/3rd)
1 wife (1/8th)
1 father (1/6th)
1 mother (1/6th)
because the above exceeds 100%Thanks for your help
Peace Patanahi,
In this case ...
1 - 1/6 father - 1/6 mother - 1/8 wife = children
1 - 4/24 - 4/24 - 3/24 = 13/24 children
Now we go to children and since it's only girls they get the whole 13/24;
it would be exactly the same if for example there were 3 sons instead.3 daughters (i.e. if over two) get 2/3 of remainder of the children's pie if they were mixed.