Inheritance according to Qur?an
-
These are your trasnslation and then explanation
and to each(individual; noun) We made/appointed heirs
Individuals are made/appointed/entitled as heirs from what left their parents, etc. and not as you infer/read that each individual is guaranteed three or more heirs which is easily proven a false reading
See both. Why are you making mockery of yourself that you do not know even simple English?
Your translation says
"We have appointed heirs to each individual".
Get out of your madness to know what is there in the Verses about inheritance.
-
Get out of your madness to know what is there in the Verses about inheritance.
Mazhar -- I asked you to stay on topic, do not spam this thread; instead you post useless information.
You said that Allah said that each person will have three or more heirs -- that is proven false and a lie!
-
Mazhar -- I asked you to stay on topic, do not spam this thread; instead you post useless information.
You said that Allah said that each person will have three or more heirs -- that is proven false and a lie!
Your own translation says they are more than two. Reconcile your translation and respond to basic contradictions of yours.
-
Your own translation says they are more than two. Reconcile your translation and respond to basic contradictions of yours.
No it does not -- each individual is heir. Only way translation cannot contradict reality. it's same as...
6132 and to each (individual; noun) degrees from what they have done (plural; i.e. each individual) and not your Lord unaware of what they have done (plural; i.e. each individual)
In summary, like saying We made you each heirs entitled to a share from what left their parents, etc. not as you claim that Qur'an contradicts reality and each will have at least three heirs -- that is ridiculous!
-
My dear Noon,
Peace
If you are really interested to get complete picture and perception of Inheritance discourse, I have simplified the Article, best trying to make it reader friendly but not allowing him to float on the surface of the text, rather keep using his own intellect at every parargraph to grasp it before moving to next and agree or prove it wrong, in any sense, language, grammar, context, concordance.
The points towards I have been trying to draw your attention, like tanween and time-line---use of time adverb I have covered therein.
Allah the Exalted has covered all, even if there are hundreds of ground situations, in just five sub classifications. You can have hundreds of mathematical equations by just referring to those 5 classifications.
You might also notice the beauty of succintness by superb choice of words in the Ayah which could cover multiple situations. Please do pay attention to the meanings and perceptions by noticing what type of a word is it.
Daughter not Son is the central theme of Inheritance. It is incumbent upon death expecting wealthy person to bequeath for the Mother and Father; and nearer relatives.
-
My dear Mazhar,
You are a dumb OX devoid of simple logic and you wrote stupid article.
You are clueless on simple distributions; you run away from questions.
You distribute shares to son when it clearly says 2/3 is to females only.Qur'an is for people of intelligence not for stupid cattle without a brain!
Goodbye!
-
Noon,
Do open it and read it carefully. Don't be childish, take some time reading it, and then come back if you find objection on any para. Just quote para No. and what you say about it.
No one should waste time reading your stupid stuff. Stop spamming/polluting this thread.
-
No one should waste time reading your stupid stuff. Stop spamming/polluting this thread.
Allah the Exalted has covered all, even if there are hundreds of ground situations, in just five sub classifications. You can have hundreds of mathematical equations by just referring to those 5 classifications.
Daughter not Son is the central theme of Inheritance. It is incumbent upon death expecting wealthy person to bequeath for the Mother and Father; and nearer relatives.
Admin attention please! Placing of this thread under sticky by some was a mere reflexive fascination by lengthy table. It should be a cause of concern for the Administrator of the Forum as many visitors will think that this ridiculous thread by a person who does not know ABC of Arabic, even its vowel, has the approval and agreement of Free Minds. Should we give impression to general public how poor is Free Minds in Arabic and yet claims "Qur'aan alone"!!!
-
Admn Pl look into this
Yes this topic should be a sticky; it teaches logic, how to read Qur'an using cross-reference and context to extrapolate certain words and to take the best non-contradicting meaning.
He translates one word at two places in the same Ayah which are identical in all aspects, both in nominative case and absolute state , once masculine son, and then says it is genderless--any gender?
Is this the way we on this widely visited forum interpret Qur'aan making even mockery of word "logic"?
-
Allah the Exalted has covered all, even if there are hundreds of ground situations, in just five sub classifications.
Yes, I've answered all combinations while you write stupid rants, are a coward, and don't answer questions.
Thread is distributing shares according to Qur'an; either provide alternative distributions or stop spamming!
Here are all combinations for reference; obviously sole inheritor gets the whole, no need for arbitration laws.
411 directs you The God in your children to the male like share the two (feminine)...
son/s + daughter/s distribute at 21 ratio male to female = 1
411 ... so if kunna/are nisa above two falahunna/so to them (feminine plural) thulutha (2/3) what left
and if kanat/is (feminine) one so to her the half
and to their parents to each one from them the sixth from what left if kana/is (masculine) to person walad/son (if male child/born)
so if not was to person waladun/offspring/child born and heirs person?s parents (if only parents) so to his mother the third
so if kana/is (masculine singular) to person ikh'wat (if male sibling/brother) so to his mother the sixth
from after a will have made in it or judgment your fathers and your children not you know which of them closer to you benefit obligation from The God indeed The God is Knowing Wise
1 father + 0 sibling/s = 1
1/3 mother + 2/3 father = 1
1/6 mother + 5/6 brother/s = 11/6 mother/father + 5/6 son/s = 1
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 2/3 son/s = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 mother/father = 1
2 daughters + mother/father equally = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 mother/father = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/4 mother + 1/4 father = 1
2 daughters + mother + father all equally = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 father = 11/6 mother/father + 5/6 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
411 kalalah fatherless and spouseless no son (sibling/s variable/unstated)
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 (mother + sister/s) = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/3 brother/s = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/3 (sister/s + brother/s) = 12 daughters + mother + sister/s (all share equally) = 1
2 daughters + brother/s 5/6 share equally + 1/6 mother = 1
2 daughters + brother/s + sister/s 5/6 share equally + 1/6 mother = 13 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 (mother + sister/s) = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 brother/s = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 (sister/s + brother/s) = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 sister/s = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 brother/s = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 (sister/s + brother/s) = 12 daughters + sister/s = 1
2 daughters + brother/s = 1
2 daughters + sister/s + brother/s = 13 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 sister/s = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 brother/s = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 (sister/s + brother/s) = 1412 and to you half what left your spouse?s if not was to them waladun/offspring/child
so if kana is (masculine) to them walad/son (if is male child/born) so to you the fourth
from what they left from after a will they made in it or judgment
and to them the fourth from what you left if not was to you waladun/offspring/child
so if kana is (masculine) to you walad/son (i.e. if to person male child/born) falahunna/so to them the eight
from what you left from after a will you made in it or judgment...
1 spouse + 0 sibling/s = 1
1/4 husband + 3/4 son/s = 1
1/8 wife + 7/8 son/s = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 spouse = 1
2 daughters + spouse equally = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 spouse = 11/2 husband + 1/2 mother/father = 1
1/4 wife + 3/4 mother/father = 11/2 husband + 1/4 mother + 1/4 father = 1
1/4 wife + 3/8 mother + 3/8 father = 11/6 mother/father + 1/4 husband + 7/12 son/s = 1
1/6 mother/father + 1/8 wife + 17/24 son/s = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/4 mother/father + 1/4 spouse = 1
2 daughters + mother/father + spouse all equally = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother/father + 1/6 spouse = 11/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/4 husband + 5/12 son/s = 1
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/8 wife + 13/24 son/s = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/6 spouse = 1
2 daughters + mother + father + spouse (share equally) = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/9 mother + 1/9 father + 1/9 spouse = 11/4 husband + 3/4 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/6 mother/father + 1/4 husband + 7/12 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/6 mother/father + 1/8 wife + 17/24 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 11/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/4 husband + 5/12 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 2/3 children mixed (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1412 kalalah fatherless and spouseless has son; sibling/s fixed at 1/6 or 1/3
412 .. and if is a man inherited kalalah (no crown/head of household; fatherless and spouseless) or womanand has brother or sister so to each one from them the sixth
so if they were greater from that so they partners in the third
from after a will is recommended in it or judgment not harmful a will from The God and The God Knowing Forbearing
1/6 sister/brother + 5/6 son/s = 1
1/3 sisters/brothers/(sister/s + brother/s) + 2/3 son/s = 11/6 sister/brother + 5/6 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/3 sisters/brothers/(sister/s + brother/s) + 2/3 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 11/6 mother + 1/6 sister/brother + 2/3 son/s = 1
1/6 mother + 1/3 sisters/brothers/(sister/s + brother/s) + 1/2 son/s = 11/6 mother + 1/6 sister/brother + 2/3 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/6 mother + 1/3 sisters/brothers/(sister/s + brother/s) + 1/2 (daughter/s + son/s) 21 ratio male to female = 14176 al-kalalah the fatherless and spouseless no offspring/child born
4176 they seek your ruling say The God gives you a ruling in al-kalalah (the fatherless and spouseless; deceased left no crown/head of household)if person died is not to person waladun/offspring/child and has sister so to her half what left and he inherits it if not was to her waladun/offspring/child
so if they were two (feminine) so to them the third twice (2/3) from what left
and if they were ikh'watun/siblings rijal wanisa so to the male like share the two (feminine)
clarifies The God to you lest you stray and The God in every a thing Knowing
1 sister 1/2 + 1/2 mother = 1
2 sisters 2/3 (1/3 each) + 1/3 mother = 1
3 sisters (1/4 each x 3) + 1/4 mother = 1sister/s + brother/s distribute at 21 ratio male to female = 1
1/6 mother + 5/6 (sister/s + brother/s) distribute at 21 ratio male to female = 1Admin attention please!
Admin this clueless person is hijacking/spamming this thread to promote his stupid article -- can we do something?
-
Admin this clueless person is hijacking/spamming this thread to promote his stupid article -- can we do something?
You are a dumb OX devoid of simple logic and you wrote stupid article. Noon
Learned Noon writes in his Post 127
Peace brother Mazhar,
Well written with slight miss-reading of solitary son and applying "to the male like share the two females" and the females in 411 are alone, otherwise numerous cases math does not add.
The most interesting part of the story is that after having read his premises and responses to few others, I wanted to get him out of his trap and self styled trick with the word which he now called "slight mis-reading of solitary son" in my article. I suggested him that it can be child. He scholarly corrected me earning my thanks.
Post 86. Sorry Noon, I forgot to acknowledge your point regarding Waladun as singular son for reason of Kana. Yes, there it means only son because of masculine deficient verb and it being its Ism-Noun subject.
Noon naively reponded in Post 87
Thank you Mazhar, that was what makes all the calculations work and rather amazing logic.
I got worried. He was behaving like late Rashad Khalifa. I kept confronting him to take him out of that state with simple and evident facts about the Ayaat. But it did not work since he starts reproducing his first lenghty page.
-
Learned Noon writes in his Post 127
Well written with slight miss-reading of solitary son and applying "to the male like share the two females" and the females in 411 are alone, otherwise numerous cases math does not add.
Yeah it was fine until you got to the actual verses. I asked you to distribute/apply then you went on a STUPID rant!
-
Lildhakar mithlu haz el unthayain, (to the male like the portion of the two females)
I do not understand that as meaning he gets double of each of them, but that he gets the same as each of them. His portion is like the portion of the two females, who have already been aportionned their portion so as to aportion after for the others. It is not stating that when you calculate the shares you automatically aportion double to males. In fact if it was so, the Qur'an could have said stright out for the males double than for the females. But it doesn't say so nor proceeds that way. So first a portion is assigned for the females when they are two. So two females one male they would there would be three equal portions. Then after considering the case when there are two females, comes the case when it is one female, and finally the case when it is more than two females. So the first thing is to set the share of the females when they are two to one, which would be the same share for all the offspring.
As has already been stated, inheritance es calculated or fixed taking it as a function of the number of female offspring.
If two, then the male takes the part like the two females
If there is only one daughter she takes half regardless of the number of males
If there are more than two they take two thirds, regardless equally of the number of males.
On the other hand, there is a curious thing and I do not know whether anybody has commented on it
There are two expressions which occur in succession in the three ayas 4.11 4.12 and 3.176
First we read in 4.11
thuluthaa ma taraka
later in the same aya speakign about the parents it says li kulli wahid minhuma as-sudus min ma taraka
The same phenomenon we observe in the ayas I have mentioned the use first of ma taraka and then the use of min ma taraka
So ?Any idea as to what is the difference between them "ma taraka" and "min ma taraka"?
I think it must necessarily mean something. Looks systematic.
Salaam
-
Lildhakar mithlu haz el unthayain, (to the male like the portion of the two females)
I do not understand that as meaning he gets double of each of them, but that he gets the same as each of them. His portion is like the portion of the two females, who have already been aportionned their portion so as to aportion after for the others. It is not stating that when you calculate the shares you automatically aportion double to males. In fact if it was so, the Qur'an could have said stright out for the males double than for the females. But it doesn't say so nor proceeds that way. So first a portion is assigned for the females when they are two. So two females one male they would there would be three equal portions. Then after considering the case when there are two females, comes the case when it is one female, and finally the case when it is more than two females. So the first thing is to set the share of the females when they are two to one, which would be the same share for all the offspring.
As has already been stated, inheritance es calculated or fixed taking it as a function of the number of female offspring.
If two, then the male takes the part like the two females
If there is only one daughter she takes half regardless of the number of males
If there are more than two they take two thirds, regardless equally of the number of males.
Salaam huruf,
There is a problem using that train of thought not only with 1 daughter for example $200,000 inheritance gets 1/2 or $100,000 while 10 sons would get $10,000 each or 1/10 that of the girl. It's precisely stated for any mixed siblings 4176 and same wording is used ? ?to the male like share the two females.?
Therefore cannot solve for example unless using 21 male to female ratio 3 sisters, 2 brothers?
411 directs you The God in your children?
to the male like share the two (feminine)4176 and if they were ikh'watun brethren/siblings rijal wanisa
so to the male like share the two (feminine)On the other hand, there is a curious thing and I do not know whether anybody has commented on it
There are two expressions which occur in succession in the three ayas 4.11 4.12 and 3.176
First we read in 4.11
thuluthaa ma taraka
later in the same aya speakign about the parents it says li kulli wahid minhuma as-sudus min ma taraka
The same phenomenon we observe in the ayas I have mentioned the use first of ma taraka and then the use of min ma taraka
So ?Any idea as to what is the difference between them "ma taraka" and "min ma taraka"?
I think it must necessarily mean something. Looks systematic.
I've looked into both these and need to examine further; my first thought was it has to do with priority of who gets paid first. Mathematically in all languages ma/what/of left is multiplication like in English we say 1/2 "of" Y (1/2 x Y) whereas from what left implies subtraction first or Y - 1/2 although ran into an issue with consistency with distributions to husband and wife likewise other fractions are given without ma or mimma...
411 so to his mother the third
412
and to you half what left your spouses (if no child)
so to you the fourth from what they left (if son)and to them the fourth from what you left (if no child)
so to them the eight from what you left (if son) -
On the first part of your answer I do not agree. I have been a long time turning that in my mind, and logically it makes sense the way I said, to me at least, whereas textually the the male like twice the female is exotic o estraneous. I also had taken notice of 4.176, which is different, but in that particular expression may be the same.
As to the unfairness, no. What is absolutely unfair is that women get punished with half for the heck of it on the asumption, not made int he Qur'an that in all cases the men will be angels and they will look after them better than themselves. The money given to women is consistently better spent that the money gone to males. Women spend on their family.I am old enough to have seen with my own eyes what happens with inheritance when women are desregarded. There are very good men around, but God knows as I know and many people know that to trample on women does not take a lot of trouble or effort and that it is better that the power over themselves (the women) in in their own hands (of the women) rather and in other hands.
I think inheritance has also been coloniazed by the boys hypnotic club.
Thanks for your efforts with the ma and min ma. I also thought it might be something to do with whether you take out first whatever legacies and liabilities, but same I am lost. Let us hope we well get some light on that, because it might also help on other aspects.
Salaam
-
On the first part of your answer I do not agree. I have been a long time turning that in my mind, and logically it makes sense the way I said, to me at least, whereas textually the the male like twice the female is exotic o estraneous. I also had taken notice of 4.176, which is different, but in that particular expression may be the same.
Then distribute 3 sisters and 2 brothers using your understanding apply it consistently?
4176 and if they were ikh'watun brethren/siblings rijal wanisa
so to the male like share the two (feminine)As to the unfairness, no. What is absolutely unfair is that women get punished with half
They don't always get half; depends on the situation; here are a few examples they get more or share equally...
so if they were greater from that so they partners in the third
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 2/3 son/s = 1
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/8 wife + 13/24 son/s = 1
1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/4 husband + 5/12 son/s = 11 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 husband = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 brother/s = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/4 mother + 1/4 father = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/2 (sister/s + brother/s) = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/3 brother/s = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/4 mother/father + 1/4 husband = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 father + 1/6 husband = 1
1 daughter 1/2 + 1/6 mother + 1/3 (sister/s + brother/s) = 13 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 father = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/3 (sister/s + brother/s) = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 brother/s = 1
3 daughters 2/3 + 1/6 mother + 1/6 (sister/s + brother/s) = 1
3 daughters 2/3 (2/9 each) + 1/9 mother + 1/9 father + 1/9 husband = 1Peace
-
I am not going to distribute anything. I leave that to specialists, but that is not an argument. You cannot mix justice and mathematics. You first find out what is just and then find the mathematics to apply it.
To say that not always is less for the female really must be a joke, it is almost always. So the "almost" should compensate for the bulk of the injustice? Whom are we kidding?
In inheritance the bulk of it is from ascendants to descendants, from parents to children, so you trample there, the rest is peanuts.
So no, fundamentally the male twice as the female is not fair and it is not what the Qur'an says.
I acknowledge that there are holes in the whole set up of inheritance in my view, in your view, in evrybody's view that I know off, but I do not believe that cutting justice corners helps en solving them. We need patience and the intelligence and vision of persons like you and others and all of us who try to find as much of the truth that we can. The Qur'an, when I have got through to the end of some question has never disappointed me. It has surprised me many times, but not disappointed.
I keep hoping we get some light in the ma taraka and min ma taraka.
Salaam
-
I am not going to distribute anything. I leave that to specialists,
Then you should not have posted below unless you are ready to distribute 4176 mixed siblings...
If two, then the male takes the part like the two females
If there is only one daughter she takes half regardless of the number of males
If there are more than two they take two thirds, regardless equally of the number of males.
Therefore be consistent apply what you wrote above to all combinations of mixed siblings...
4176 AND IF (i.e. begin new case) they were ikh'watun brethren/siblings rijal wanisa
so to the male like share the two (feminine)You cannot mix justice and mathematics. You first find out what is just and then find the mathematics to apply it.
No, you cannot write your own book according what you think is just.
Math is oblivious to any justice and the distributions explicitly stated.
411 and 4176 does not say "to the male like share the female."To say that not always is less for the female really must be a joke, it is almost always. So the "almost" should compensate for the bulk of the injustice? Whom are we kidding?
Check for yourself how many are equal, favor male, favor female, and circumstances.
Here are all combinations again for reference; obviously sole inheritor gets the whole, no need for arbitration laws.
So no, fundamentally the male twice as the female is not fair and it is not what the Qur'an says.
Inheritance verses are clear and precise. People are free to make a will if they disagree.
411 from after a will have made in it or judgment
Peace