Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Inheritance according to Qur?an

Inheritance according to Qur?an

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
1.0k Posts 45 Posters 162.2k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • H Offline
    H Offline
    huruf
    wrote on last edited by
    #248

    Like share THE two females is not = double than the females, That would be a twisted interpetation, an interested interpretation. Because what it indicates is that there are two concrete females who have already been attributed their part on the basis precisely that they are two, the two females, so they have their share on the basis of that proportion. The share of the male, that male that is in proportion to the two females, well he gets a share the same as the share they have got, not double, not twice their share, but the same share.

    For the rest, I admire your mathematical capacity, but I do not hold it sacred. It is not part of the Qur'an.

    And it is very rare that the proportion of males to females in a family be something like 1 to 10, although there are cases, but they are rare, proportions tend to be more equal. The equity is far, far far more guaranteed when the distribution is done quranically than when it is done according to the interested manipulations of those who interpret freely. Because in this case every female in the world gets punished, because every female is somebody's daughter, whereas in the proportions stated by the Qur'an, even in the extreme cases of 1 female to 10 males (?how many of those do you know?), ten males are far more capable of getting ahead and helping each other along, than if you leave one single, lonely, alone female with 1/22nd part of the whole inheritance. If the brothers, as many of them do, do not give a damn about her, she is done.

    ?For God's sake! Next we will want what, to sell what bridge? Everybody, universally, many, many muslims included, say that woman half the male, is not fair not because they hate islam, that is apart, but simply because that is their gut feeling. And the gut feeling usually does not lie.

    Yes we may react piously and since it is holy we look for those little instances where according to the ulemas in fact, ?isn't that great! females get the same, or ?EVEN!?EVEN! more and with that we shut up because we are good girls or boys and accept the pretty status quo... Whom are we cheating?

    No, the Qur'an does not say to the male twice what the female, or double the female. That is a lie. If the Qur'an wanted to say that, it would have said it. As clear as when it says you require four witnesses for something.

    Males in proportion one to two females, get the same as them, not double as them. An only daughter gets half. The discourse in aya 4.11 has not changed, it continuews speaking about the children, it doesn't say if there are only daughters and no males, it doesn't. But if it is too much for us, it is our problem not the Qur'an speaking.

    And I am sorry again, I am not going to distribute anything. I do not think that would be a problem. Mathematics and algebra are a pretty good tool if one knows how to use it. If by one means you cannot get a result, another means should be tried. To say you cannot and therefore you must change the Qur'an dispositions so that you can do your mathematics for me is not acceptable. Rather to have bad mathematics than injustice.

    Also, you yourself recognize that we do not know what to do with ma taraka and min ma taraka, and I suspect that there are things that are still obscure. May be that will throw some light on the whole thing.

    The problem is that along the centuries we have let so many accretions muddle the understanding and the clarity of the Qur'an that many times we do not see its clarity even when it is shining on our nose. We have seen that so many times!

    As far as I am concerned, the "to the male twice as to the female" is a heinous lie, a treacherous act of hipnotism. There is something indeed very hypnotic to the traditional interpretations, as if they were inescapable, like fate, or sacred.

    They are not, and they are escapable.

    Salaam

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • N Offline
      N Offline
      Noon_waalqalami
      wrote on last edited by
      #249

      No, the Qur'an does not say to the male twice what the female, or double the female. That is a lie. If the Qur'an wanted to say that, it would have said it. As clear as when it says you require four witnesses for something.

      These are logically incorrect; two cannot have same result as three...

      to the male like share the two females?
      http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=255236612

      to the male like share the three females?
      http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=833522170

      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)

      Above starts new case "mixed" siblings and logically this is correct...

      to the male like share the female
      http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=1957586161

      to the male like share the two females
      http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=1230912497

      to the male like share the three females
      http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=1029359866

      Peace

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • H Offline
        H Offline
        huruf
        wrote on last edited by
        #250

        I do not get what you are trying to say.

        The boy has the same amount of fingers as the two girls.

        What? He has twenty fingers?

        Salaam

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • N Offline
          N Offline
          Noon_waalqalami
          wrote on last edited by
          #251

          I do not get what you are trying to say.

          The boy has the same amount of fingers as the two girls.

          What? He has twenty fingers?

          Salaam

          No, it's not about him having twenty fingers and toes. That analogy is true regardless of the number of girls.

          The boy has the same amount of fingers as the one girl
          The boy has the same amount of fingers as the two girls
          The boy has the same amount of fingers as the three girls

          It's an illogical analogy when applied to sharing inheritance. Two females is used for a reason; not one, three, etc.

          The boy has the same amount of money as the one girl (11 ratio)
          The boy has the same amount of money as the two girls (21 ratio)
          The boy has the same amount of money as the three girls (31 ratio)

          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)

          http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=1230912497

          Peace

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • H Offline
            H Offline
            huruf
            wrote on last edited by
            #252

            No, it's not about him having twenty fingers and toes. That analogy is true regardless of the number of girls.

            The boy has the same amount of fingers as the one girl
            The boy has the same amount of fingers as the two girls
            The boy has the same amount of fingers as the three girls

            It's an illogical analogy when applied to sharing inheritance. Two females is used for a reason; not one, three, etc.

            The boy has the same amount of money as the one girl (11 ratio)
            The boy has the same amount of money as the two girls (21 ratio)
            The boy has the same amount of money as the three girls (31 ratio)

            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)

            http//easycalculation.com/charts/imagedisplay.php?rand=1230912497

            Peace

            Of course, it is used for a reason, but the reason is to fix the part of the inheritance as a function of the number of girls, Therefore it alots first to the girls it is not, again, a male the same amount as the amount given to two girls together, it is if there are two girls he gets the same amount as them. There is a determinate article and it is the number of girls that maters. And then it continues with the case of more than two girls and then with the case of one girl and at no time in all that it suggests or hints or says that in the first case it is speaking about mixed gender and then only about one gender, it is still speaking about mixed gender.

            The amount of twisting of the arabic in order to uphold "the male double the female" is fantastic. And the maths is not going to change what the Arabic says.

            And the Qur'an if it wasn't a question of the shares as a function of the number of females, could have said with no trouble and no esoteric idioms that the male takes double as the female, which it doesn't say.

            No matter how many cakes to cut you put in the messages, the fact that it does not say to the male double the female, but that it says the share of the male is the same as the share of the two females, it is the same as if you say the salary of that employee is the same as the salary of those two employees, it is not saying it is double, but that those emplooyees get a salary which the same as the salary of the first. not the summ of both salaries amount to the salary of the one.

            But I suppose it is very hard to rennounce privilege and arabic and Qur'an will be twisted and pressed in every way so as to get what one wants to get out of it, no matter how preposterous.

            It is preposterous that somebody is shocked and reject such possibility because in some very rare cases some males might get less than some female, but that the fact that all the females in existence will be skimmed of half their inheritance is taken for granted with no qualms or exclamations of it being unfair.

            The problem is not in the Arabic or the maths or anything, the problem is somewhere else.

            Salaam

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • N Offline
              N Offline
              Noon_waalqalami
              wrote on last edited by
              #253

              Of course, it is used for a reason, but the reason is to fix the part of the inheritance as a function of the number of girls, Therefore it alots first to the girls it is not, again, a male the same amount as the amount given to two girls together, it is if there are two girls he gets the same amount as them.

              Peace huruf, with that reasoning you cannot ever distribute

              411 directs you The God in your children
              to the male like share the two (feminine)

              2 daughters 2 sons
              2 daughters 3 sons

              Nor can you distribute when parents or spouse are included above.
              That is mathematical/logical proof that your reading is contradicting.

              4176 ? and if they were ikh'watun brethren/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

              Peace

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • H Offline
                H Offline
                huruf
                wrote on last edited by
                #254

                If the distribution is as a function of the number of female daughters,
                It says the male like the share of the two females, and the number of males does not matter, wht is fixed is what is alotted to the females, then what is left is alotted to the males, in whatever number.

                The females are the ones that are numbered, one, two, over two. So the the effects one, the male is any number of males. So the male (any number of males) is one third between them.

                Or you can use proportion if they are one to two they will get the same as the two females, or if they are three, the three get the same amount as one of the females, which is what goes on when there are over two females and they get two thirds. The third that is left is for the males.

                Now, please, please, please don't cringe that that would be unfair, because you are pushing all along the principle with no qualms and no trouble that to disinherit the whole feminine population is quite acceptable and no big deal, in spite of the Qur'an itself considering women generally as more vulnerable than men.

                How would you find that the first care of those who are supposedly qawwamun (carers) dor the women would be to snatch as dilligently as possible any parte that might fall on the women as inheritance?

                Some jokes are funny, others are not.

                Salaam

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • N Offline
                  N Offline
                  Noon_waalqalami
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #255

                  If the distribution is as a function of the number of female daughters,
                  It says the male like the share of the two females, and the number of males does not matter, wht is fixed is what is alotted to the females, then what is left is alotted to the males, in whatever number.

                  The females are the ones that are numbered, one, two, over two. So the the effects one, the male is any number of males. So the male (any number of males) is one third between them.

                  What I'm trying to explain is that it contradicts 4176 which does not revolve around the number of females.
                  It leads to unsolvable combinations. Examples

                  2 daughters 2 sons
                  2 daughters 3 sons
                  The above with siblings (two unknowns; hence unsolvable)

                  3 sisters 2 brothers
                  3 sisters 3 brothers

                  Even with your interpretation revolving around females you still end up with male getting twice. Example

                  3 daughters 1 son
                  girls get 2/3 (2/9 each) 1 son gets 1/3 (3/9) or 1.5 times.

                  4 daughters 1 son
                  girls get 2/3 (1/6 each) 1 son gets 1/3 or twice as much

                  You really have to study all cases and correct interpretation cannot contradict give unsolvable results. It is the same proof for example we know the spouse or father cannot share together with siblings.

                  Proof
                  1 = father (variable) + siblings mixed 21 ratio male to female (undefined in your interpretation)
                  1 = y + 2x + x
                  1 = y + 3x (no solution without involving negative numbers (-2=y, 1=x))

                  In conclusion to the male like share the two (feminine) is a simple 21 ratio.

                  Peace

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • H Offline
                    H Offline
                    huruf
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #256

                    So with the children nothing to complain about. The gretaer the number of the same sex, individually they may have less, but also they are more to help and share along. It goes the same for the males as for the females. It is fair and I think wise that precisely those who might be in a minority are better protected. That s single daughter among many males should inherit more is sensible, she is more protected. the other way around are less fvoured but still with lesser number reltively more favoured. For a measure that is general I think it is very thoughtful.

                    Of course, there is for all cases the possibility to make wills based on the individual needs. A general dispositions cannot fullfill individual need nor it is its purpose.

                    The distribution for the children I already answered that. And for the restin another forum in Spansih we hve been dealing with it, and now, as far as I can judge, I have may be a good idea of what the

                    ma taraka
                    and the
                    min ma taraka entails.

                    Ma taraka is the first distribution which is stated, and min ma taraka comes after as a "correction" in the sense that what it refers to should be charged to that same first inheritance. So that from the inheritance you take out at the same time the two sixths for the parents as the parts for the twos of sisters, or the two thirds for the more than two or the half for the one girl child.

                    If there is left an amount without being ditributed, if the inheritors are poor it me be attributed to them in the same proportion as the same attribution, if they are well off, it can go for social purposes. That I am not inventing the Qur'an commands to do that, so either to the needy inheritors, or to the needy non natural inheritors.

                    I think all combinations following that pattern can be had.

                    If not there may be an error in interpretation of the dispositions of the Qur'an or no the right proceedure has been applied.

                    I uote form the spanish site

                    "

                    • Se considera que hay un solo legado inicial, que consta de la suma de la parte correspondiente a los progenitores y a la viuda.
                    • Sobre los 1.000? se aplica una sola cantidad de 333,33? (2 sextos) + 125? (1 octavo)
                    • La cantidad restante de esta operaci?n es 541,67?
                    • Sobre la cantidad de 541,67? se aplican 2 tercios para las f?minas y 1 tercio para los varones
                      "

                    Salaam

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Offline
                      R Offline
                      Released
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #257

                      Peace )

                      Interesting discussion guys!! I'm going to read this thread from the beginning and see what I can deduce.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • N Offline
                        N Offline
                        Noon_waalqalami
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #258

                        Of course, there is for all cases the possibility to make wills based on the individual needs. A general dispositions cannot fullfill individual need nor it is its purpose.

                        Of course!

                        The distribution for the children I already answered that. And for the restin another forum in Spansih we hve been dealing with it, and now, as far as I can judge, I have may be a good idea of what the

                        ma taraka
                        and the
                        min ma taraka entails.

                        Ma taraka is the first distribution which is stated, and min ma taraka comes after as a "correction" in the sense that what it refers to should be charged to that same first inheritance. So that from the inheritance you take out at the same time the two sixths for the parents as the parts for the twos of sisters, or the two thirds for the more than two or the half for the one girl child.

                        If there is left an amount without being ditributed, if the inheritors are poor it me be attributed to them in the same proportion as the same attribution, if they are well off, it can go for social purposes. That I am not inventing the Qur'an commands to do that, so either to the needy inheritors, or to the needy non natural inheritors.

                        I think all combinations following that pattern can be had.

                        If not there may be an error in interpretation of the dispositions of the Qur'an or no the right proceedure has been applied.

                        I uote form the spanish site

                        "

                        • Se considera que hay un solo legado inicial, que consta de la suma de la parte correspondiente a los progenitores y a la viuda.
                        • Sobre los 1.000? se aplica una sola cantidad de 333,33? (2 sextos) + 125? (1 octavo)
                        • La cantidad restante de esta operaci?n es 541,67?
                        • Sobre la cantidad de 541,67? se aplican 2 tercios para las f?minas y 1 tercio para los varones
                          "

                        Salaam

                        OK to translate, case is parents, wife, 3+ daughters, 2+ sons

                        1 - 1/3 parents (2/6 x 1000 = 333.33) - 1/8 wife (?1000 x 1/8 = 125) = 13/24 to children (1000 x 13/24 = 541.67)

                        children 541.67

                        541.67 x 2/3 = 361.113 to girls
                        541.67 x 1/3 = 180.557 to boys

                        Problema/contradiccion numero uno -- take out the sons try distributing...

                        3 daughters, parents, wife?
                        3 daughters, mother?
                        3 daughters, sister?

                        Problema/contradiccion numero dos -- be consistent with 4176 where 1/2 and 2/3 is not applicable nor are ma/what taraka/left or mimma/from what tarakna/left mentioned; it's clearly about mixed siblings and we are only given this function...

                        4176... so to the male like share the two (feminine)

                        How for example using only the above to distribute 3 sisters and 2 brothers?

                        Interesting discussion guys!! I'm going to read this thread from the beginning and see what I can deduce.

                        Gracias!

                        Paz!

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • H Offline
                          H Offline
                          herbman
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #259

                          Salam, Peace, Nun, Huruf, all,

                          just a question that come to me, I don't know if you already looked at it or maybe discussed it before

                          In the verses regarding inheritence, in the scenario where the husband die, and leave behind wife and children, the usual scenario is having one wife and children. Do we have any case where verses speak about 2, 3, 4 wives, is it 1/8 each etc...
                          Does the verse say 3-"To the wife...1/8" or "To wives ...1/8"

                          This can help to conclude if "polygamy" was the default or not.

                          Thanks

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • N Offline
                            N Offline
                            Noon_waalqalami
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #260

                            Salam, Peace, Nun, Huruf, all,

                            just a question that come to me, I don't know if you already looked at it or maybe discussed it before

                            In the verses regarding inheritence, in the scenario where the husband die, and leave behind wife and children, the usual scenario is having one wife and children. Do we have any case where verses speak about 2, 3, 4 wives, is it 1/8 each etc...
                            Does the verse say 3-"To the wife...1/8" or "To wives ...1/8"

                            This can help to conclude if "polygamy" was the default or not.

                            Thanks

                            Peace herbman,

                            It cannot be confirmed since verses addresses the community as a whole (plural).

                            412
                            and for you (masculine plural) half what left your spouses
                            and for them (feminine plural) the fourth from what you left (plural)

                            Having multiple wives is clear since prohibition of marrying sisters is stated.

                            423
                            prohibited onto you ...
                            and that you gathered between the two sisters only what hence passed

                            This is basic logic...

                            IF marrying multiple sisters = FALSE
                            THEN marrying non-sisters = TRUE

                            Distribution same any like category inheritors (e.g. sons) they all share evenly.

                            2 wives, 2 sons

                            1 - 1/8 wives (1/16 each) = 7/8 sons (7/16 each)

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • N Offline
                              N Offline
                              Noon_waalqalami
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #261

                              Peace herbman,

                              Notice the switch " to them" with " to you" otherwise the math would not work.
                              Example 4 wives, no child, each wife would get 1/4, leaves nothing for the parents.

                              412
                              and to you half what left your spouses if not was to them waladun/offspring/child
                              so if kana/is (masculine) to them walad (if to deceased/wife a male child/born) so to you the fourth

                              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 (if to deceased/husband a male child/born) so to them (feminine plural) the eight

                              Few more examples...

                              wife-1 (son)
                              wife-2 (son)
                              wife-3 (no child)
                              wife-4 (no child)
                              if son = true
                              if no child = false
                              wives share = 1/8 fixed
                              parent share = 1/6 fixed
                              1 - 1/3 parents - 1/8 wives = 13/24 sons

                              wife-1 (daughter)
                              wife-2 (no child)
                              wife-3 (no child)
                              wife-4 (no child)
                              if son = false
                              if no child = false
                              wives share = variable
                              1 - 1/2 daughter = 1/2 wives (1/8 each)

                              wife-1 (son)
                              wife-2 (daughter)
                              wife-3 (no child)
                              wife-4 (no child)
                              if son = true
                              if no child = false
                              wives share = 1/8 fixed
                              1 - 1/8 wives = 7/8 children (7/24 daughter + 7/12 son) 21 ratio male to female

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • H Offline
                                H Offline
                                herbman
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #262

                                Thanks a lot Noon.

                                It is very helpfull and instructive.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • N Offline
                                  N Offline
                                  Notexceling
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #263

                                  Hi guys,

                                  I think I finally worked out inheritance.

                                  https//drive.google.com/file/d/0B6KVs7S_G7YEQkN5Y3RlZmJzOFE/edit?usp=sharing

                                  Here is a simple questionnaire that highlights the respective ayat related to your situation.

                                  Answer the 5 questions, Get your answer.

                                  Let me know if there are any problems....Been testing it seems to work fine.

                                  Go to File and press download (doesnt work on the google drive, requires conditional formatting)

                                  I need all the feedback I can get. Test it and tell me if you find errors.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • N Offline
                                    N Offline
                                    Noon_waalqalami
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #264

                                    Hi guys,

                                    I think I finally worked out inheritance.

                                    https//drive.google.com/file/d/0B6KVs7S_G7YEQkN5Y3RlZmJzOFE/edit?usp=sharing

                                    Here is a simple questionnaire that highlights the respective ayat related to your situation.

                                    Answer the 5 questions, Get your answer.

                                    Let me know if there are any problems....Been testing it seems to work fine.

                                    Go to File and press download (doesnt work on the google drive, requires conditional formatting)

                                    I need all the feedback I can get. Test it and tell me if you find errors.

                                    Peace Notexceling,

                                    Incomplete, erroneous translation e.g. kalala, walad, etc., nor does it cover all combinations or give distributions.

                                    Perhaps as an exercise distribute parents die leave property jointly owned.
                                    3 children heirs; 2 sisters and 1 half-brother from father's first marriage

                                    CASE 1 father dies then later that same day the mother
                                    CASE 2 mother dies then later that same day the father
                                    CASE 3 parents perish simultaneously as in an accident

                                    Here are all the combinations that the calculator needs to consider ?

                                    Daughter/s
                                    Son/s
                                    Father
                                    Mother
                                    Wife/Husband
                                    Sister/s
                                    Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father
                                    Daughter/s, Mother
                                    Daughter/s, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father
                                    Son/s, Mother
                                    Son/s, Wife/Husband
                                    Son/s, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Brother/s
                                    Father, Mother
                                    Father, Wife/Husband
                                    Father, Sister/s
                                    Father, Brother/s
                                    Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Mother, Sister/s
                                    Mother, Brother/s
                                    Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother
                                    Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband
                                    Son/s, Father, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Son/s, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Father, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Father, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Father, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Father, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Father, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Father, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Daughter/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s
                                    Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    Daughter/s, Son/s, Father, Mother, Wife/Husband, Sister/s, Brother/s

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • N Offline
                                      N Offline
                                      Noon_waalqalami
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #265

                                      Perhaps as an exercise distribute parents die leave property jointly owned.
                                      3 children heirs; 2 sisters and 1 half-brother from father's first marriage

                                      CASE 1 father dies then later that same day the mother
                                      CASE 2 mother dies then later that same day the father
                                      CASE 3 parents perish simultaneously as in an accident

                                      Peace, here are distributions for reference.

                                      CASE 1 fathers? half property
                                      1/8 wife
                                      7/8 children (7/32 each daughter + 7/16 half-brother from fathers first marriage)
                                      Then mothers 1/2 property + 1/8 to daughters (half-brother zero, not his mother)

                                      CASE 2 mothers? half property
                                      1/4 husband
                                      3/4 daughters (half-brother zero, not his mother)
                                      Then fathers 1/2 property + 1/4 to 3 children (3/16 each daughter and 3/8 to son)

                                      CASE 3 parents perish simultaneously as in an accident
                                      ? mother?s half property to daughters (half-brother zero, not his mother)
                                      ? father?s half property to 3 children (1/8 to each daughter and 1/4 to son)

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • N Offline
                                        N Offline
                                        Noon_waalqalami
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #266

                                        Wanted to link threads; two ways to resolved the contradictions

                                        1. using 1, 2, or 3+ female to male ratios for children and siblings
                                        2. toggle meaning of walad as exampled in this thread and below

                                        Peace NielsJacob

                                        It has to do with definition of walad and we know from 411 that either sex is included.
                                        411 directs you the god in awldikum/children yours

                                        Likewise with cross-reference we know yakun can refer to either sex.
                                        2196 ... to whom not yakun/that be family his present

                                        Likewise with cross-reference we know that ? family his? includes females
                                        2932 and family his except lady his be she (f/s) from the remain behind

                                        Whereas kana/be he (m/s) always refers to masculine

                                        Example Case 3 daughters, husband

                                        411 so if kunna/be they (f/p) nisan/womenfolk above two (f)
                                        so for them (f/p) third dual (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3)

                                        412 and for you half what left spouses yours
                                        if not yakun/that be for them walad (if no child 1/2)
                                        so if kana/be (m/s) for them walad so for you the fourth

                                        Therefore husband share is left variable/undefined this particular case and gets 1/3 remainder.
                                        1/2 if no child = false
                                        1/4 if son = false

                                        That?s only non-contradicting reading far as I know for all combinations without surplus/deficit.

                                        Contradiction excess 2/3 + 1/4 = 0.9167
                                        1/2 if no child = false
                                        1/4 if child = true

                                        Contradiction deficit 2/3 + 1/2 = 1.1667
                                        1/2 if no son = true
                                        1/4 if son = false

                                        4176 ... shows the god for you lest stray yeh and the god in every thing knower

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • N Offline
                                          N Offline
                                          Noon_waalqalami
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #267

                                          Peace ? needed to update definition of Kalala as also a person who leaves no daughters as heirs else there is a contradiction in 412 and key difference whether to apply 412 presence of son or 4176 no son.

                                          Thus siblings only inherit together with mother and/or son/s and never with daughter/s, spouse, or father.

                                          411 directs you the god in children yours to the male similitude apportion the two (feminine) so if be/are (f/p) nisan/womenfolk fawqa/above two (feminine) so for them (f/p) third dual (1/3*2=2/3) what left and if be she (f/s) one (f/s) so for her the half and to parents dual his to each one from them dual the sixth from what left if be (s/m) for him waladun/born (son) so if not that be for him waladun/born (child) and heirs parents dual his so to mother his the third so if be (s/m) for him ikh'watun/brother so to mother his the sixth from after will have made in it or judgment fathers yours and sons yours not thou knowing which of them closer to you benefit of obligation from the god surely the god be knowledge of wisdom of

                                          412 and for you half what left spouses yours if not that be for them waladun/born (child) so if be (m/s) for them waladun/born (son) so for you the fourth from what left they from after will made they in it or judgment and for them the fourth from what left thou you if not that be for you waladun/born (child) so if be (s/m) for you waladun/born (son) so to them the eight from what left thou you from after will thou making in it or judgment and if be (m/s) rajulun/man inherited kallatan/fatherless spouse-less daughter-less (i.e. mother, son/s, and/or siblings are only heirs) or im'ra-atun/lady and to him brother or sister so to each one from them dual the sixth so if be they of (2+) more from such so they partners in the third from after will is recommended in it or judgment other than harmful will from the god and the god know-er forbear-er

                                          4176 they seek ruling your say the god gives a ruling you in al-kallati/the fatherless spouse-less daughter-less (i.e. mother, son/s, and/or siblings are only heirs) if person perished not for him waladun/born (son) and for him sister so for her half what left and he inherits it if not that be for her waladun/born (son) so if be dual (f/d) two (f/d) so to them dual (f/d) the third dual (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) from what left and if be they of (2+) ikh'watan/siblings rijlan/menfolk of wanisan/and womenfolk so to the male similitude apportion the two (feminine) shows the god for you lest stray yeh of and the god in every thing know-er

                                          Examples

                                          If children mixed 21 male to female (411)

                                          3 daughters 2/3 (no son/s), 1/3 (parent/s and/or spouse) share equally
                                          2 daughters (no son/s, unstated), parent/s, spouse; they share equally
                                          1 daughter 1/2 (no son/s), 1/2 (parent/s and/or spouse); share equally

                                          1/3 parents, 2/3 son/s or children mixed 21 male to female
                                          1/3 mother, 2/3 father

                                          1/2 husband, 1/2 parent/s (412 if no child)
                                          1/4 husband, 1/3 parents (1/6 each), 5/12 children mixed 21 male to female (412 if son)

                                          1/4 wife, 3/4 parent/s (412 if no child)
                                          1/8 wife, 1/3 parents (1/6 each), 13/24 son/s or children mixed 21 male to female (412 if son)

                                          412 ... and if be (m/s) rajulun/man inherited kallatan/fatherless spouse-less daughter-less (i.e. mother, son/s, and/or siblings are only heirs) or im'ra-atun/lady and to him brother or sister so to each one from them dual the sixth

                                          1/6 mother, 1/6 sibling, 2/3 son/s

                                          412 ... so if be they of (2+) more from such so they partners in the third

                                          1/6 mother, 1/3 siblings (share equally), 1/2 son/s

                                          4176 they seek ruling your say the god gives a ruling you in al-kallati/the fatherless spouse-less daughter-less (i.e. mother, son/s, and/or siblings are only heirs) if person perished not for him waladun/born (son) and for him sister so for her half what left and he inherits it if not that be for her waladun/born (son)

                                          1+ brothers 5/6, mother 1/6 (411)
                                          1 sister 1/2, mother 1/2

                                          4176 ... so if be dual (f/d) two (f/d) so to them dual (f/d) the third dual (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) from what left

                                          2 sisters 2/3 (1/3 each), mother 1/3
                                          3+ sisters unstated share equally
                                          3 sisters (1/4 each), mother 1/4
                                          4 sisters (1/5 each), mother 1/5
                                          5 sisters (1/6 each), mother 1/6

                                          4176 ... and if be they of (2+) ikh'watan/siblings rijlan/menfolk of wanisan/and womenfolk so to the male similitude apportion the two (feminine) shows the god for you lest stray yeh of and the god in every thing know-er

                                          21 male to female ratio siblings mixed
                                          1/6 mother (411), 5/6 siblings mixed 21 male to female

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users