Inheritance according to Qur?an
-
Am I that unclear? I am NOT talking about the veracity of mathematics. Every schoolboy knows that.
I asked
"Is this what the Arabic in the Koran says"?
I asked this because you claimed that "Qur'aan is teaching you simple mathematics" and then said "1/6 + 1/6= 2/6-------it is 1/3 one third" along with Arabic script.
Does the Koran really say 1/6 + 1/6 = 2/6 = 1/3?
I can't find this in the Koran. When entering the sentence you quoted it does not mention that, so I was asking for clarification.I do not understand how what you are saying and what I find in the Koran fit together.
Mathematics is represented by digits. And mathematics is verbally partrayed by words. When we do not write 2/6 in mathematics since it is divisible yielding 1/3 which is verbally described by a single word. This was also quoted in the part of Ayah
I just repeated the quote of another member who said 1/6 + 1/6 = 2/6
-
It might help if gone through entirely
No, this does not help at all.
How can explaining numbers and mathematics help when I am asking a question relating to words used in the Koran?
Do you also want to explain how a car wash works in time cycles or the sink rate of a 747 in m/sec? None of these have anything to do with my question. Is it possible to answer a straight question with a straight answer?
If I ask a question about a sentence and the representation, I am not asking about the origins of the representation.
You claimed that "1/6 + 1/6= 2/6-------it is 1/3 one third" along with Arabic script.
I don't care whether this was in reply to anyone.The following expects and answer in the form yes/no
Does the Koran really say 1/6 + 1/6 = 2/6 = 1/3?If you answer yes, I will ask where, please show me.
and if you answer no, then I will ask why do you bring it up then?So, do you care to qualify and rephrase what you actually want to say?
-
The One sixth is for each of those two, thereby if they are more than two, thereat they all are sharers in the one third.
Thank you. You have clarified it for me. This is what I understood. All I need to do now is irrefutably clarify when and under what conditions this applies.
-
Thank you. You have clarified it for me. This is what I understood. All I need to do now is irrefutably clarify when and under what conditions this applies.
Yes, I clarified it for you. Perhaps I bothered you as I gathered from your earlier post. To tell you the truth when I quoted you I had taken it as Bender post, not yours. Thanks.
-
I just repeated the quote of another member who said 1/6 + 1/6 = 2/6
Salaam,
I think you are referring to me.
I didn't say that, and even if I said it, is 1/6 + 1/6 not 2/6?And for the record
The part of the ayaat that you quoted that teaches 1/6 + 1/6 =1/3 for someone simple like me does not teach that.
It says if there are more then 2 then only 1/3 for all of them. Do you understand the difference.If not take al look at 476
"...If a person passes away and has no children but has a sister, then she shall receive half of what he leaves behind. And he will inherit from her if she has no child. However, if he has two sisters, then they will receive two thirds of what he left behind;..."
is 1/2 + 1/2 = 2/3 hmm -
It says if there are more then 2 then only 1/3 for all of them. Do you understand the difference.
This is the part of statement which you have not quoted. First is two getting each 1/6th but if they are more that two they will share 1/3rd. Those two getting each 1/6th are sharing with all, 1/6+1/6=1/3. What could be more simplistic?
-
This is the part of statement which you have not quoted. First is two getting each 1/6th but if they are more that two they will share 1/3rd. Those two getting each 1/6th are sharing with all, 1/6+1/6=1/3. What could be more simplistic?
Salaam,
If it's like what you said then it would not have been but thuluthu-huma or something like that (you are the grammar expert). Also please check the example I gave of 4176
-
If not take al look at 476
"...If a person passes away and has no children but has a sister, then she shall receive half of what he leaves behind. And he will inherit from her if she has no child. However, if he has two sisters, then they will receive two thirds of what he left behind;..."
is 1/2 + 1/2 = 2/3I do not see by what logic you are drawing this sort of inference. What is said therein is that in case there is one sister she will receive half, but if there are two sisters they both will obtain 2/3rd. Only Noon might make you understand about mathematics.
-
I do not see by what logic you are drawing this sort of inference. What is said therein is that in case there is one sister she will receive half, but if there are two sisters they both will obtain 2/3rd. Only Noon might make you understand about mathematics.
Salaam,
InshaAllah one day you will understand pr
Try to read you own messages first. I just used the same logic as you did, to show you your wrong logic.
I am done with you, have a nice day.Salaam,
Bender -
If not take al look at 476
"...If a person passes away and has no children but has a sister, then she shall receive half of what he leaves behind. And he will inherit from her if she has no child. However, if he has two sisters, then they will receive two thirds of what he left behind;..."
is 1/2 + 1/2 = 2/3 hmmSalaam Bender, it's not read like that i.e. two thirds (no such word) read as stated ...
412 so/ELSE IF kn they were greater from that so they partners in the third
4176 .. so/ELSE IF knat/they were (feminine dual) two so to them the third for each2 sisters mother
1 ? (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) = 1/3 mother (variable, no son/brother)Trying to figure out 411 and believe was read incorrectly and should be read like this?
411 so/ELSE IF kunna/are nisa above two so to them third for what left -
Sorry Noon, there is no such word in Ayah "for each". "thereby, two third is for them "
Mazhar I was thinking to both i.e. dual or 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3?
-
Mazhar I was thinking to both i.e. dual or 1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3?
In descriptions having the force of law, no word is allowed to be added in the text for interpreting the intention of law maker. When it is mentioned "for each of the two" only then we can say 1/3+1/3. Here only one pronoun of third person dual referring back to two feminine is mentioned.
-
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.
Thank you Mazhar, that was what makes all the calculations work and rather amazing logic.
Peace
-
Thank you Mazhar, that was what makes all the calculations work and rather amazing logic.
Peace
I see it from another angle also.
Daughter not Son is the central theme of Inheritance
Resembling the share of the two daughters is to be apportioned for the male child.
The Man-dominance notion engulfing the intellect quite often blurs the sight to even watch the words of the text. "Reading" signifies the process of identifying the characters and words and their relationships to understand the meanings in written text. This is the object of reading to reduce the spread text to a "focal-gathered spot" yielding "thought-perception" infolded therein. Arabic is the Mother of Languages and its words are mostly picturesque depicting that which needs to be defined in other languages. The word for reading a written text in Arabic are made from Root which signifies collecting a thing at one place-point, thus changing the spread position of a thing into a collective whole. It is for this reason that we need to understand Arabic first to enable ourselves to "read" its text.
The above sentence is an Inverted Nominal Sentence. It is always the Subject-topic that a speaker or text talks something about it. The last three words comprising a unit as Possessive Phrase + Possessive Phrase with first noun in nominative is the delayed Subject- . The Prepositional Phrase relates to elided Predicate vividly understandable by the Subject, preposition and the nature of discourse.
It is thus self evident that the daughters and not the son is the centre around which the discourse of inheritance revolves. A general principle is laid down that resembling the share accruing to the two daughters shall be apportioned for a male progeny.
-
peace Nun,
Thanks for the example, but can you clarify what it proves? I'm not sure I follow.
Thanks.
Peace Wakas,
923 and Who created the male wal-unth and the female
Example husband, two sons ages 10, 21 and three daughters ages 2, 14, 19
411 to the male like share the two (feminine)
412 so if kna is for them walad/son so for you the fourthObviously husband gets 1/4 and children remainder regardless of age 2, 10, 14 etc.
1 - 1/4 husband (fixed) = 3/4 children (variable) 21 ratio male to femaleWhat if husband and three daughters ages 2, 14, 19 ? why cannot all inherit as before?
411 so if are nisan above two so for them two thirds
1 ? 2/3 (three daughters, 2/9 each) = 1/3 husband (variable) no son and there is child/bornWhat if husband and later the oldest son died brother age 10 and three sisters ages 2, 14, 19
4176 ... and if they were ikh'watun rijalan wanis so to the male like share the two (feminine)21 ratio male to female same as when they were under the children category.
-
Salaam Bender, it's not read like that i.e. two thirds (no such word) read as stated ...
412 so/ELSE IF kn they were greater from that so they partners in the third
4176 .. so/ELSE IF knat/they were (feminine dual) two so to them the third for each2 sisters mother
1 ? (1/3 + 1/3 = 2/3) = 1/3 mother (variable, no son/brother)Trying to figure out 411 and believe was read incorrectly and should be read like this?
411 so/ELSE IF kunna/are nisa above two so to them third for what leftSalaam Noon,
Thank you, at the moment I am only trying to understand the words and design used in those verses in relation to other verses in The Quran.
The math is the simpliest part, it is only difficult when we don't understand the words and the usage of those words.
InshaAllah I will be back to you when I complete my study (it can take some time).ps. notice that in some sentences it says "MAA Taraka" and some not and some have "MIMAA Taraka" have to figure this out. (to what is this ma-taraka and mimaa-tarakaa reffering to? To the whole what is left OR what is left after some get their share?)
pps. I now also believe that thulathaa is 2/3 or maybe (1/3 + 1/3). A brother showed me 2047 where RASULAA is indeed used for 2 people.Salaam,
Bender
