For the many who die without wills
-
Peace,
You know what, Fawzia? Our family have had such objection in the past when dealing with the matter (my grandfather from my father), from one woman member in the family. The matter was settled post inheritance process, however, with the more wealthy ones of the family giving some of their share to the less wealthy. That is also Quran, if you are ready to see it from a bigger view.
And i was going into the discussion since i thought--looking from the topic starter--you were going to be objective this time. However this seem contradictory
If Islam is really made by the Creator, it would have such a proviso saying that this discrimination is limited to people not making wills in 7th century Arabia, not to other gender equal societies or to changes in modernity, surely the Creator can see past, present & future?
That fact that Allah has made a law applicable to a particular society, with explicit instructions & not made provisions for modernity shows how men make these laws, not the Creator.
Similar to Allah's ignorance about the pernicious effects of cousin marriages, which unfortunately isn't only limited to South Asian Muslims but to Arab, Iranian, Turkish etc Muslims too-a simple discouragement from Allah, like a simple explanation from Allah about women's inheritance being time bound would have immensely helped matters.
Ah, ignorance, eh? How can you justify your objectivity with such statement?
So much for the discussion, then. I'd discuss it somewhere else, thank you.
Peace.
Oops, sorry Fawzia, i almost forgot your usual smilies... ;D ... done.
-
I know I make you people very, very angry, hence the smileys..., I enjoy myself.
It must be offensive to Muslims, even Quranist Muslims to realise that someone has left their faith! So I have an abdulquran chastising me, a Persian ex Muslim for not learning classical Arabic & others calling me subjective etc.
I point out explicit Quranic provisions & oh the anger & denial! ;D ;D ;D
Peace,
You know what, Fawzia? Our family have had such objection in the past when dealing with the matter (my grandfather from my father), from one woman member in the family. The matter was settled post inheritance process, however, with the more wealthy ones of the family giving some of their share to the less wealthy. That is also Quran, if you are ready to see it from a bigger view.
And i was going into the discussion since i thought--looking from the topic starter--you were going to be objective this time. However this seem contradictory
Ah, ignorance, eh? How can you justify your objectivity with such statement?
So much for the discussion, then. I'd discuss it somewhere else, thank you.
Peace.
Sure, more wealthy can give stuff to the less wealthy,AND, women can be cheated out of their neccessary inheritance via the Quranic provisions, both are there in the Quran. Even if I choose to take a "bigger viewpoint", how can I ensure every Muslim will?
After all, what is there in the Quran regarding explicit provisions also stands.Any Muslim can choose to renounce their share in favor of their relations, OR alternatively choose to grab the bigger share & let poor women suffer.
Modern Constitutions don't have this ambiguity, they explicitly give women equal inheritances, without leaving it to the whims of selfish or selfless relations.
And i was going into the discussion since i thought--looking from the topic starter--you were going to be objective this time. However this seem contradictory
Ah, ignorance, eh? How can you justify your objectivity with such statement?
So much for the discussion, then. I'd discuss it somewhere else, thank you.
Peace.
Oops, sorry Fawzia, i almost forgot your usual smilies... ;D ... done.
Sure, ignorance of Allah or His unwillingness to state everything. Allah forbids marriage to nieces, aunts, even milk sisters, but for some reason doesn't mention repeated cousin marriages.
Allah says that daughters should be given half a son's inheritance & widows half a widower's, but forgets to mention that such stuff would discriminate against women in another time & society.
Sure, no one is forced to marry a cousin, but while a discouragement from Allah would help, without such a discouragement-Muslims routinely marry cousins, leading to aggravated birth defects.
Similarly, while nicer families like yours might willingly renounce their shares, other families would happily use Allah's laws to give daughters & widows paltry shares, this is all possible & condoned according to the Quran.
Interesting that showing how Allah is discriminating & forgetting to mention important stuff is "subjective".
It shows the limitation of Allah.Already science knows the harmful effects of repeated cousin marriages, while in the West & many other nations, women's equal inheritances aren't guaranteed by "nice families" like yours-but laws promising equality.
Also,unlike Allah, modern constitutions have explicit scope for amendments!
Interesting that you & another person is uncomfortable discussing these thorny issues & want to escape! ;D
-
Dear Fawzia,
I know I make you people very, very angry, hence the smileys..., I enjoy myself.
It must be offensive to Muslims, even Quranist Muslims to realise that someone has left their faith!
If people here have attempted to answer your comments, that is because they are sincere and convicted in their faith - and they do not take lightly, as you do, twisting God's system for fun and laughs nope
It is to your own detriment that you have chosen rejection over submission...
152 Ultimately, those who have rejected will wish they had submitted!
153 Leave them to eat and enjoy, and let them be preoccupied with wishful thinking. They will come to know. -
Dear Fawzia,
If people here have attempted to answer your comments, that is because they are sincere and convicted in their faith - and they do not take lightly, as you do, twisting God's system for fun and laughs nope
It is to your own detriment that you have chosen rejection over submission...
152 Ultimately, those who have rejected will wish they had submitted!
153 Leave them to eat and enjoy, and let them be preoccupied with wishful thinking. They will come to know.Hahaha!
The same old story.
First, attempts to make non believers revert via rudeness & claims of lack of objectivity, then threats of Hellfire.
There are threats of Hellfire for non believers in far too many places, along with lurid & macabre descriptions.
Muhammad thought he could scare people into believing, or at least console believers that the rejectors will suffer grievously for no other reason than non belief!
I have news for you too.
The Church of the Flying Sphagetti Monster will burn you in His Hell & sqeeze your bones until they're crushed, He'll burn your skin & every time that skin is burned, you'll get new skin! laugh
Be prepared! Your rejection of Flying Sphagetti Monster(swt) will cost you dear soon! rotfl
-
Oh, so you addressed me directly now. I feel honored.
I know I make you people very, very angry, hence the smileys..., I enjoy myself.
That is to be expected. Please enjoy yourself. We can enjoy you too. Seriously, minus the useless stuff, you gave us triggers for critical thinking. That is how we can enjoy your presence here. So, please.
It must be offensive to Muslims, even Quranist Muslims to realise that someone has left their faith! So I have an abdulquran chastising me, a Persian ex Muslim for not learning classical Arabic & others calling me subjective etc.
To others i don't know. To me personally, no. It is to be expected, actually, if you pay attention to the Book. There are expressions such as, "They disbelieved after they have believed. Thus We seal their heart."
I point out explicit Quranic provisions & oh the anger & denial! ;D ;D ;D
Sure, more wealthy can give stuff to the less wealthy,AND, women can be cheated out of their neccessary inheritance via the Quranic provisions, both are there in the Quran. Even if I choose to take a "bigger viewpoint", how can I ensure every Muslim will?
You don't have to ensure every Muslim will. No one is burdened such thing. If he is grateful to God, he is being grateful for himself. AND as you said, "necessary" (the women)--that makes it--if you would be honest--another case as explained in other verses. Such is the system, one verse on its own could not give you the whole idea. We have big problem in the whole world i think, because such simple subsystem as continuous circulation of wealth is not established. You see, that's already a big sign of people deserting the Quran.
After all, what is there in the Quran regarding explicit provisions also stands.Any Muslim can choose to renounce their share in favor of their relations, OR alternatively choose to grab the bigger share & let poor women suffer.
Yes, you're right. Any one can follow his own wishes. Even using the Quran as a tool to "justify" his own desires. Now, is that called a "just" use of the Quran?
Modern Constitutions don't have this ambiguity, they explicitly give women equal inheritances, without leaving it to the whims of selfish or selfless relations.
By all means, please follow what you believe is best.
Sure, ignorance of Allah or His unwillingness to state everything. Allah forbids marriage to nieces, aunts, even milk sisters, but for some reason doesn't mention repeated cousin marriages.
Allah says that daughters should be given half a son's inheritance & widows half a widower's, but forgets to mention that such stuff would discriminate against women in another time & society.
Sure, no one is forced to marry a cousin, but while a discouragement from Allah would help, without such a discouragement-Muslims routinely marry cousins, leading to aggravated birth defects.
See, i have no answers for those at this moment. Thus, you triggered some critical questions for me, thank God. If you search earnestly, i'm sure you would eventually come to the answers yourself. Otherwise keep on trying under your current style.
Similarly, while nicer families like yours might willingly renounce their shares, other families would happily use Allah's laws to give daughters & widows paltry shares, this is all possible & condoned according to the Quran.
Interesting that showing how Allah is discriminating & forgetting to mention important stuff is "subjective".
It shows the limitation of Allah.Thank you for calling my family nice --that's so very nice of you. Yes, unfortunately, lots of people are transgressing, they are deserting God's message. Compared to them, you are quite useful, you brought us discussion about God's message. And that you enjoy yourself in doing so, makes it even better. No one forced you to do it. Win-win, i should say.
Subjective to us indeed. Feel free to be subjective, as God lets us to be. However certain qualities of objectivity are needed in both discussing parties to ensure positive progress--as opposed to vain talks. And whose limitation is this, ours or God's, that's up to you to decide. Feel free (oh, of course, you already feel "free" now don't you--free from God?).
Already science knows the harmful effects of repeated cousin marriages, while in the West & many other nations, women's equal inheritances aren't guaranteed by "nice families" like yours-but laws promising equality.
Also,unlike Allah, modern constitutions have explicit scope for amendments!
Well if you would (actually) choose to learn the "bigger view" as you said above, then you might or you might not come into better insight of God's message--totally depends on your approach in doing so. And if you would not, then you definitely will not. So be safe in the West!
Interesting that you & another person is uncomfortable discussing these thorny issues & want to escape! ;D
Right, i want to escape from this thread to another one. Oh, i don't mean to be rude, it's surely comfortable here, but not really useful i think--no news for me. Actually i was going to start or continue discussion on another thread which i hope has a better atmosphere than this one, then i got electrical shutdown for a few hours (and when my FF window reopened, it shows me this thread--oh, lucky me!). Typing from my phone would be cumbersome so i waited. That is just my subjectivity.
-
Oh, so you addressed me directly now. I feel honored.
That is to be expected. Please enjoy yourself. We can enjoy you too. Seriously, minus the useless stuff, you gave us triggers for critical thinking. That is how we can enjoy your presence here. So, please.
Hi san,
Great! So you enjoy yourself, I do too & hopefully so do most others. So whats' the problem? If I like smileys, I want to use them.
This forum has lovely smileys, it'd be a pity not to use those.
To others i don't know. To me personally, no. It is to be expected, actually, if you pay attention to the Book. There are expressions such as, "They disbelieved after they have believed. Thus We seal their heart."
However, that seal thingie doesn't seem to satisfy most, either now or in Muhammad's time.So along with a mention of seal, there are simply plenty of descriptions of how "unbelievers" will burn simply for disbelief.So believers could satisfy themselves with the happy day dreams of their aquaintance non believers burning eternally, while they enjoy away in Paradise. See, from this verse itself we learn, that some left Islam after they joined, exactly like I & many others apostatize.
Its not anyone's fault if Allah has sealed their heart, exactly like its no body's fault if Allah made them be born blind, deaf or with a hole in their heart.
Yet, Allah gives lurid descriptions of how He'll torment them eternally, after having sealed their hearts!
Not fair on Allah's part! How can they stay Muslims after Allah put that seal thing which keeps getting in the way?
All they can do is pretend, coz if they can't really believe(thanks to seal) they can only pretend & surely Allah will see through the pretence if He's all knowing & burn them anyway right?
You don't have to ensure every Muslim will. No one is burdened such thing. If he is grateful to God, he is being grateful for himself. AND as you said, "necessary" (the women)--that makes it--if you would be honest--another case as explained in other verses. Such is the system, one verse on its own could not give you the whole idea. We have big problem in the whole world i think, because such simple subsystem as continuous circulation of wealth is not established. You see, that's already a big sign of people deserting the Quran.
Right, every Muslim won't obey, simply coz Allah didn't ask them to do that. Allah made clear provisions, ie an only child daughter gets half of all property & a widow's share is half that of a widower's. With such clear legal provisions, you really can't expect all Muslims to renounce their claims to property right?
My cousin's relatives didn't. Now had they been living in a nation which doesn't follow Islamic religious laws regarding division of property, but modern man made laws, his widow & daughter would get more.
Unfortunately, Allah made laws stood in the way.
Had people actually "deserted" the Quran, like Ataturk did in Turkey when he formulated laws ignoring the Shariah, my cousin's widow & daughter would get more. Had they lived in a nation wich doesn't follow the Quran at all, like Sweden, they'd get more too.
Those laws don't claim to come from God, they accept they're man made, yet they're more favorable to women, & being man made laws, they can be easily amended, indeed Constitutions of those nations leave open explicit room for amendment.
It wasn't desertion of Islam which created the problem, it was acceptance of Allah's discriminatory laws.
Yes, you're right. Any one can follow his own wishes. Even using the Quran as a tool to "justify" his own desires. Now, is that called a "just" use of the Quran?
By all means, please follow what you believe is best.
See, i have no answers for those at this moment. Thus, you triggered some critical questions for me, thank God. If you search earnestly, i'm sure you would eventually come to the answers yourself. Otherwise keep on trying under your current style.
Yes, unfortunately, its a "just" use of the Quran, as the Quran explicitly allows such an act. Quran says that a widow & daughter are to get half, if people indeed give them half, how's that not a just use? ???
They're following whats written.
In this case, the Quran can allow itself to become a tool to satisfy some folks as it allows iself to be.
Had it said that daughters can inherit the same as sons & widows the same as widowers, like modern laws of many nations say, then the Quran wouldn't be a tool, as people who gave women less would be going against the Quran.
Unfortunately, as the Quran exists, people are following the Quran when they give women less, not going against it.
Subjective to us indeed. Feel free to be subjective, as God lets us to be. However certain qualities of objectivity are needed in both discussing parties to ensure positive progress--as opposed to vain talks. And whose limitation is this, ours or God's, that's up to you to decide. Feel free (oh, of course, you already feel "free" now don't you--free from God?).
Well if you would (actually) choose to learn the "bigger view" as you said above, then you might or you might not come into better insight of God's message--totally depends on your approach in doing so. And if you would not, then you definitely will not. So be safe in the West!
san, when you speak of "God's" laws, you need to remember two things
1)Whether any God actually exists
- Whether the God Muhammad said in the Quran is that God. There were thousands of gods in the world, there're still hundreds of religions, many New Age beliefs, all claiming that they come from God & speak about the right God.
And there are & were hundreds of Prophets, many after Muhammad, who claimed to come from God or Gods.
Muhammad wasn't the first person who claimed that God spoke to him, nor was he the last.
Even if you assume that the God you have chosen is speaking God's words, that God may not be the true one & Muhammad might be another imposter.
So while saying "God's laws" you're finally losing all objectivity & becoming totally subjective, or I can even say its pure guesswork that this is the right God & not the hundreds of others.
After this, you can't call anyone else subjective anymore.Yes, I love being in the west & its intellectual freedom, freedom not to believe in God at all, to accept that laws are made by humans, are flawed & continuously questioning accepted values & principles-without always suppressing doubts & believing in some or the other "God" & His laws & running the risk of being duped by a bronze age wannabe prophet & his limited & discriminatory beliefs! peace
-
Peace
Forget late forties, what about newlyweds?
Newly weds are not restricted to any age. Did you think newly weds were 15-17 year olds? Wait....your newly wed is "youngly wed", but youngly can also have many meanings as well because to me young can be less than 1 to 50 and then there can be an old 25.
If husband suddenly dies, wife inherits half of what husband would have inherited had she pre deceased him. Or young men-daddies of little girls in their twenties?
I see the problem here. It's like saying a fruit is an apple, which is true, but it's like the horse with the peripheral vision blocked. Here is also a tomato, an orange, et cetera.
These people might die too
Might? Death arrives any time and any place for man is sure to die . This meat suit is surely going to expire for us all at some point. You were aware of this? One can die in the womb, or surely in the short hours in one's deliverance, or after one has walked the world for a century?
wealth constantly increases,
....or decreases for you or I.
Life has a lot of work except will making
The quran holds that maintaing the family's expenses is important.
Was he hopelessly incompetent for not leaving a will
Yes he was. I could get up from my console right now and die by falling, my body chemistry may be in flux, or any other reason. I know not to expect certain ways to die, but I am open to any way of dying. You act as if looking out for your family in this manner is not only unnecessary, ?Life has a lot of work except will making?, but a bother. You have a family, be a responsible person. Just like when you get a car, get your insurance. Be responsible. You don?t have to do these things mind you. There is no compulsion on anyone to follow the quran .
whatever he had earned would have helped his family immensely
So he was not a responsible caregiver?
if a documet comes from God Himself, it would kow that time & societies would change
I?d think so. Whether you die by a cinder block, or on a mission to mars to point is if you?re not responsible enough to make sure your family is in as good a position as possible if you should pass than your living family member such as yourself should not be defending your ineptitude.
Joe
-
Peace
in cases like explicit & clear instructions of giving half to daughters & widows, an amendment is needed.
Or, you simply don't have to heed it. Why do you feel compelled that you have to follow these instructions if you do not want to? You're crying bloody murder for something that you do not have to follow at all.
its strange that the Creator didn't make room for amendment
It's strange that someone would call for the ability to amend someone else's creation where the power of amendment is not given. I'd suggest you make your own constitution, create your own morals, and heed your own ethics if things which you are not under compulsion to follow bother you so.
Joe
-
I think the key to understanding this issue lies with the clear understanding of these words ..
But understanding of course has to follow the desire to seek understanding. If someone is specifically searching for fault, or a reason to verify their own belief, or a reason to simply discredit the belief of another, then they are not looking for truth. And no amount of sense, logic or proof will suffice.
Personally, when I come across parts of the Quran that seem morally ambiguous depending on how the understanding of the verses are rendered, I refer to this
The Hue/tone of Allah. And what Hue/tone is there that is better than Allah. And He is the one whom we serve.
We all have an a priori understanding of the way things should be. The very reason many challenge the current translations and accepted interpretations is because it doesn't feel right. One who is truly Almighty and All-Aware and All-merciful ... etc, would not subjugate any of his creation to injustice at any level.
So if the accepted interpretation and dogma go against what you innately know is fair and just, then it is simply not correct.
