Inheritance according to Qur?an

Noon_waalqalami

أَنَّـىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُۥ وَلَـدٚ وَلَمْ تَكُنْ لَّهُۥ صَٟحِبَةٚۖ

How could a son take existence for Him the Exalted while no consort has yet been alleged associated for Him the Exalted?

again, contradicts the verse prior! "read in context" or post 6100?
6100-101 clear contradiction; does not rule out having daughters!

again, topic is on inheritance distributions in all cases can only have one unknown/variable.
again, apply erroneous meaning if no "son" to all cases you cannot solve simple stuff like

father + daughter - now have two unknowns/variables which you cannot solve!

basic logic IF "no son" THEN doesn't rule out having daughter/s! Try to solve it!

Mazhar

again, contradicts the verse prior! "read in context" or post 6100?
6100-101 clear contradiction; does not rule out having daughters!

again, topic is on inheritance distributions in all cases can only have one unknown/variable.
again, apply erroneous meaning if no "son" to all cases you cannot solve simple stuff like

father + daughter - now have two unknowns/variables which you cannot solve!

basic logic IF "no son" THEN doesn't rule out having daughter/s! Try to solve it!

Context can never convert a masculine noun into feminine and a feminine into masculine.

Check all the dictionaries of the world you will find it singular masculine.

However, you invent a new dictionary, that cant be checked.

Noon_waalqalami

Context can never convert a masculine noun into feminine and a feminine into masculine.

Check all the dictionaries of the world you will find it singular masculine.

However, you invent a new dictionary, that cant be checked.

my dear Mazhar that's pointless! again, distribute shares with daughter/s which you cannot!

father + daughter/s
mother + daughter/s
wife + daughter/s
husband + daughter/s

any and all combinations above which you cannot!

likewise translate 6100-101 "in context" and you refused!
likewise translate 2233 to see it means "child" NOT "son!"

ib'na/son!
waladun/offspring/child!

2233
and the mothers breastfeed they اولدهن awlādahunna/children theirs

بولدها biwaladihā/in (due to) child hers
بولده biwaladihi/in (due to) child his

that another breastfeed they of اولدكم awlādakum/children yours

peace!

Mazhar

my dear Mazhar that's pointless! again, distribute shares with daughter/s which you cannot!

father + daughter/s
mother + daughter/s
wife + daughter/s
husband + daughter/s

any and all combinations above which you cannot!

likewise translate 6100-101 "in context" and you refused!
likewise translate 2233 to see it means "child" NOT "son!"

ib'na/son!
waladun/offspring/child!

2233
and the mothers breastfeed they اولدهن awlādahunna/children theirs

بولدها biwaladihā/in (due to) child hers
بولده biwaladihi/in (due to) child his

that another breastfeed they of اولدكم awlādakum/children yours

peace!

Brother, you are not interested into looking the scheme given by Allah the Exalted.

Allah the Exalted has specifically covered such situations which are pregnant for abuse of man-dominance and injustice. In such situations, Allah the Exalted has exercised the Authority and Will to demarcate certain parts of the Inheritance, and permanently allocating it to specific relatives in preference to others. The old simple method of dividing into equal shares is adopted like equal parts into which a company's capital is divided these days. The unique feature of law of inheritance promulgated in Grand Qur?n is that Mankind's ever cherished notion of absolute preference to male offspring is inverted by declaring daughter/s, not son/s, the focus and theme of Inheritance.

Allah the Exalted has allocated inalienable shares for the bereaved relatives in the most simple method by categorizing the deceased in three mutually exclusive types

(i) Parents (Biological father and mother) leaving behind one daughter, or two daughters and son, or many daughters, daughter and son/sons, or more than one son. Parents leaving behind only one son are not in this category.

(ii) Deceased leaving behind alive parents, both mother and father; one son and spouse (wife/wives or husband). Or deceased leaving behind only parents (father and mother) and spouse, but without one son to grieve.

(iii) Deceased (man or woman) leaving behind only single alive parent or no parent, and no spouse, but leaving one son to grieve him. Or deceased leaving behind only single alive parent or no parent, no spouse, no son but leaving behind to grieve him one sister, or two sisters, or sister/s and brothers.

All the three deceased are distinct and exclude one and another. We will not find any other type of deceased in the world.

http//haqeeqat.pk/Economics-Inheritance.htm

Noon_waalqalami

^^^ until you figure out simple difference between ib'na/son and walad/offspring
likewise, to allocate parents and daughters should really stay away from this topic

want to bump summary for benefit of others perusing thread ...

Cairo, National Library qāf 47 one of oldest manuscripts 606-652 CE (95.4%)
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/4/vers/12/handschrift/73

https//i.postimg.cc/Ssmjg41C/ch4v11-15.jpg

Berlin, State Library ms.or.fol. 4313 (i.e. same manuscript) 606-652 CE (95.4%)
https//corpuscoranicum.de/handschriften/index/sure/4/vers/176/handschrift/73

https//i.postimg.cc/qMtznSPs/ch4v172-ch5v2.jpg

https//i.postimg.cc/dQZ0cvL2/inheritance-4-11-and-4-176.jpg

http//oi64.tinypic.com/2rc38mg.jpg

Mazhar

^^^ until you figure out simple difference between ib'na/son and walad/offspring

Know it, the ruling elite-clergy of Jews told people "Uzair is the son of Allah";

And the Nisara Christians said "Al Mesiho-Jesus is the son of Allah."

...

Be aware that they had said; "Allah has purposely adopted Uzair/Al Mesiho-Jesus as a son".

Please forget not that the verb is doubly transitive. One object is elided since already known in earlier quote.

For evidence - cross check

And he who had bought him (child-Yu'suf) from the market in the City Misr said to his wife imperatively

"You make his permanent stay dignified; may be he becomes profitable for us or we might affectionately adopt him as son."

Noon_waalqalami

عُزَيْرٌ ٱبْنُ ٱللَّهِ

Know it, the ruling elite-clergy of Jews told people "Uzair is the son of Allah";

أَكْرِمِى مَثْوَىٰهُ عَسَىٰٓ أَن يَنفَعَنَآ أَوْ نَتَّخِذَهُۥ وَلَـدٙاۚ

"You make his permanent stay dignified; may be he becomes profitable for us or we might affectionately adopt him as son."

you're getting more absurd with each post; how many different words are you translating as son!
now be sincere don't run away from questions asked of you -- translate 2233 consistently as son?

2233
biwaladihā/in (due to) offspring/child (masculine noun) hers
biwaladihi/in (due to) offspring/child (masculine noun) his

likewise it was asked of you to simply allocate to parent and daughters -- you ran!

likewise it was asked of you to translate 6100-101 "in context" and you ran away!
stop polluting the thread with absurdities ascribing to the almighty having daughters.

peace!

Mazhar

you're getting more absurd with each post; how many different words are you translating as son!
now be sincere don't run away from questions asked of you -- translate 2233 consistently as son?

2233
biwaladihā/in (due to) offspring/child (masculine noun) hers
biwaladihi/in (due to) offspring/child (masculine noun) his

likewise it was asked of you to simply allocate to parent and daughters -- you ran!

likewise it was asked of you to translate 6100-101 "in context" and you ran away!
stop polluting the thread with absurdities ascribing to the almighty having daughters.

peace!

Strange to blame me is getting absurd.

There are 29 instances where http//haqeeqat.pk/roots/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.083/14.gif is used as son and with masculine verbs. And you are quoting one instance where a prepositional phrase with possessive phrase is used along with a feminine active participle for mother and Passive participle for the man who is made begetter by her wife who is in the process of divorce.

Noon_waalqalami

Strange to blame me is getting absurd.

There are 29 instances where http//haqeeqat.pk/roots/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.083/14.gif is used as son and with masculine verbs. And you are quoting one instance where a prepositional phrase with possessive phrase is used along with a feminine active participle for mother and Passive participle for the man who is made begetter by her wife who is in the process of divorce.

Again, offspring! Consistent all occurrences not flip ignorantly!
http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=wld#(41133)

Why so difficult for you to translate write the word offspring/child?

2233 and the mothers breastfeed they awladahunna/children theirs
not made to suffer parent (maternal) biwaladiha/in (due to) child hers
and not parent (paternal) to him biwaladihi/in (due to) child his
and if intends you that another breastfeed they of awladakum/children yours

411 instructed you the god in awladikum/children yours to the male (i.e. gender) similitude apportion the two females

6100-101 and make they of to god associates of the jinn and creation them and attribute they of to him banina/sons wabanatin/and daughters in other than knowledge glorified be he and exalted he of what attributing originator the skies and the land how being to him waladun/offspring and not it be to him companion his and creation each thing and he in each thing knower

3133 O you the humankind heeds ye of lord yours and fears ye of day of not availed parent about waladihi/offspring his

That is the reason all translations are horrid (including yours), inconsistent, parroting mistakes by ignorant who cannot comprehend nor add simple distributions (e.g. spouse, parent/s, and daughter/s) and main reason the missionaries are trouncing you/them all over the place and internet especially on inheritance verses and causing much doubt. Hence reason for this thread which you are spamming every post with absurdness adding no value and ignorantly attributing the unforgivable to the almighty having daughters e.g. l-lata wal-uza and manat!

Again, to translate numerous occurrences erroneously as son does not rule out having daughters!

Peace!

huruf

The "difficulty" arises from ignoring the rethorice gender as explained and named by our corum fellow UQ in an aticle qhich he shared with us and ignoring the grammatical fact the same form is used for the rethoric gender as the masculine gender, but they are distinct. To be masculine gender it would have exclude the possibility of the presence of any thing or creature of feminine grammatical gender, because if there is the possiblity of just one, then it is not masculine but rethoric. That happens in many languages.

Obvioulsy, even those who insist on "masculine", "masculine", to death, know that, it is too common and to obvious to ignore, but they choose for their own "reasons" to insist on masculine. If they did not they might loose some masculinity, it seems.

That is the ptitiful state of some self called muslims, more interested in this childish posturing than in real deep and honest knowledge.

Salaam

The_Sardar

Sister Huruf is referring to this https//1drv.ms/b/s!AkotlTY_voT4qgKZ70i1zHEjGxxS

Mazhar

The "difficulty" arises from ignoring the rethorice gender as explained and named by our corum fellow UQ in an aticle qhich he shared with us and ignoring the grammatical fact the same form is used for the rethoric gender as the masculine gender, but they are distinct. To be masculine gender it would have exclude the possibility of the presence of any thing or creature of feminine grammatical gender, because if there is the possiblity of just one, then it is not masculine but rethoric. That happens in many languages.

Obvioulsy, even those who insist on "masculine", "masculine", to death, know that, it is too common and to obvious to ignore, but they choose for their own "reasons" to insist on masculine. If they did not they might loose some masculinity, it seems.

That is the ptitiful state of some self called muslims, more interested in this childish posturing than in real deep and honest knowledge.

Salaam

Does the rhetoric gender has any relevance to specific noun http//haqeeqat.pk/roots/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.083/14.gif. http//haqeeqat.pk/roots/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.083/2.gif.

Yusuf, Musa, Easa as Waladun does not mean rhetorical gender.

Mazhar