Inheritance according to Qur?an

Mazhar

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

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.

Bender

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

Noon_waalqalami

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

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 each

2 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

Mazhar

4176 .. so/ELSE IF knat/they were (feminine dual) two so to them the third for each

Sorry Noon, there is no such word in Ayah "for each". "thereby, two third is for them "

Noon_waalqalami

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

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.

Mazhar

Sorry Noon, I forgot to acknowledge your point regarding Waladun as singular son for reason of Kana. Yes, there it means only son because of masculine deficient verb and it being its Ism-Noun subject.

Noon_waalqalami

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

Mazhar

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.

Wakas

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 fourth

Obviously 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 female

What 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/born

What 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.

Bender

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 each

2 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

Salaam 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

Noon_waalqalami

peace Nun,

Thanks for the example, but can you clarify what it proves? I'm not sure I follow.

Thanks.

Peace Wakas, try these examples and restrict nisa to only adult women...

1 son age 10; wife
1 ? 1/8 wife (fixed 412) = 7/8 son (variable/unstated)
1 son age 10; wife; 3 daughters ages 2, 14, 19
1 ? 1/8 wife (fixed 412) = 7/8 children (variable 411) 21 ratio male to female

1 brother age 10; mother
1 ? 1/6 mother (fixed 411) = 5/6 brother (variable)
1 sister age 2; mother
1 ? 1/2 sister (fixed 4176) = 1/2 mother (variable) no son/brother

Why not all inherit as with only son/s or mixed or sibling/s above?
3 daughters ages 2, 14, 19; wife -- need 411 cannot restrict based on age/nisa.
1 ? 2/3 (3 daughters, 2/9 each) = 1/3 wife

Above are orphan cases and we know their shares are allocated kept safe until maturity (46).

Thus need to use context in translating ri-j--l-a and ni-s--a not always auto insert "men and women? ?

4176 ... and if they were a-kh-wa-t brothers/siblings (at least one male present any age) ri-j--l-a wa-ni-s--a so to the masculine/male gender like share the two (feminine)

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, use context carefully read every word and best avoid translations do your own.

411 ... fa-la-hu-n so to them third for m-a not/what/who (use context) ta-ra-ka left
411 ... the sixth mim-m- of/from what ta-ra-ka left

412 half m- what ta-ra-ka left spouses yours
412 the fourth mi-m- of what ta-ra-k-na they left

412 the fourth mi-m- of what ta-ra-k-tu-m you left
412 the eight mim-m- of what ta-ra-k-tu-m you left

4176 and to person sister so to her half m-a what ta-ra-ka left
4176 so if were two (feminine) fa-la-hu-m- (dual pronoun) so to them the third for (dual noun; 1/3 + 1/3) mim-m- of what ta-ra-ka left

Mazhar

Quote from mirjamnur on July 06, 2012, 025842 AM
when she leaves husband and 2 daughters and 1 son
husband 1/4
parents 1/6
daughters and son 7/12 =28/48
daugther 1= 7/48
daughter 2=7/48
son 14/48

411 directs you The God in your children to the male like share the two (feminine)
411 and for their parents to each one from them the sixth from what left if is to person walad/son
412 so if is for them walad/son so for you the fourth

1/4 or 3/12 husband
1/3 or 4/12 parents = 1/6 mother + 1/6 father
......... 5/12 children = 5/24 son + 5/24 daughters (5/48 x 2 daughters); if children mixed 21 ratio male to female

Noon
Are the priorities or sequence not changed in this case?

It begins directs you The God in your children.

The share allocated to is not alterable.

Noon_waalqalami

Noon
Are the priorities or sequence not changed in this case?

It begins directs you The God in your children.

The share allocated to is not alterable.

Peace Mazhar,

When ratio is given (21 male to female) it?s not solvable unless amount is first known.
Unless they are alone i.e. they get the whole or 1, priority is allocate fixed shares first.

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

1 daughter, 1 son, father
1 ? 1/6 father (fixed) = 5/6 children 21 ratio (10/18 son + 5/18 daughter)

This is one proof father cannot inherit with siblings; kalalah is fatherless

1 sister, 1 brother, father (unsolvable)
1 = father (variable) + siblings 21 ratio male to female
1 = y + 2x + x
1 = y + 3x (no solution without negative numbers (-2=y, 1=x))

Some suggest kalalah from Iklil ?crown that surrounds head? ? no head of household?

Mazhar

1 daughter, 1 son, father
1 ? 1/6 father (fixed) = 5/6 children 21 ratio (10/18 son + 5/18 daughter)

Noon, please do consider this

1 daughter, 1 son will get 2/3, their share cannot be reduced or left to be settled by remainder.

It is not meaningless that the like of share of two daugthers be apportioned for a male. The division is based beginning with daughters not a son or sons. Two third will be share of progenies. Rest is to be divided to the secondary relatives after progenies which is either solely daughters or includes a daughter. This cannot be compromised otherwise everything else would be against Qur'aan and priorities settled by Allah the Exalted.

Please note that when Progeny comprises only of daughters, they are prioritized about the share in the inheritance and other relatives are at secondary place to receive what is left over.
But in the case of single son, it is not the son who is prioritized but other near-ones. The son will get the left over.

When there is solitary son, it is he who is to be given the remainder after the share of others. Please make calculations in that way also. Perhaps you made it 7/12 and 5/12. When they have to receive the remainder left afther 2/3 going to progenies, their percentages will proportionately be reduced.
Please note that equivalence between two females and male need NOT be decimal correct. "Mislo" does not mean hundred percent alike, it also shows that things are to taken in a very broader sense. Therefore, we need not act like Diophantus, Hero of Alexandria, or al-Khw?rizm? to understand the injunctions given in the Qur'aan about division and distribution of inheritance.

Noon_waalqalami

Noon, please do consider this

1 daughter, 1 son will get 2/3, their share cannot be reduced or left to be settled by remainder.

Mazhar,

Please distribute according to Qur'an and which part of verse 411 is being used?

1 daughter 1 son = ?
3 daughters 1 son = ?

parents 1/3 fixed (1/6 each 411)
husband 1/4 fixed 412

Total = 7/12 (parents + husband) + remainder 5/12 = 1

Mazhar

parents 1/3 fixed (1/6 each 411)
husband 1/4 fixed 412

Total = 7/12 (parents + husband) + remainder 5/12 = 1

Yes this is the case when the deceased has only one son. Here the son is not prioritized but parents. Similarly in 412 the share for husband/wife is prioritized when there is only one son.

Man died 1/6 + 1/6 +1/8=11/24-1=13/24 for son
Woman died 1/6+1/6+1/4=7/12-1=5/12 for son.

Since equation of gender is share of two daughters shall be given to one son, whenever there is a daughter the distribution will be started with daughter not parents. Since the share of two or more daughters is two third, this will not be disturbed and shall be the first to be set aside for the entire progeny which may comprise daugther son, daughters son, daughter sons. Initially it is told that the injunction is for the progenies not parents or husband/wife. They are secondary beneficiaries.
All situations are conditional with apodosis clauses.

Noon_waalqalami

Yes this is the case when the deceased has only one son. Here the son is not prioritized but parents. Similarly in 412 the share for husband/wife is prioritized when there is only one son.

Man died 1/6 + 1/6 +1/8=11/24-1=13/24 for son
Woman died 1/6+1/6+1/4=7/12-1=5/12 for son.

This leaves nothing for daughters and we know they inherit?

Now try example 3 daughters, 2 sons, parents, husband?

whenever there is a daughter the distribution will be started with daughter not parents.

Obviously without son/s only daughter/s 1 - daughter/s = parent/s and/or spouse (variable)

It can never be fixed amounts on all entities which lead to contradiction -- shortfall/surplus.

This whole priority business one has to start first with the known then allocated remainder to unknown.

1 son, mother 1 - 1/6 mother (fixed/known) = 5/6 son (variable/unknown)
1 son, husband 1 - 1/4 husband (fixed/known) = 3/4 son (variable/unknown)
1 son, 1 daughter, mother, father, husband 1 - 1/6 m - 1/6 f - 1/4 h = 5/12 children (variable/unknown) 21 ratio male to female

1 daughter, mother 1 - 1/2 daughter (fixed/known) = 1/2 mother (variable/unknown)
1 daughter, wife 1 - 1/2 daughter (fixed/known) = 1/2 wife (variable/unknown)

Mazhar

Yes this is the case when the deceased has only one son. Here the son is not prioritized but parents. Similarly in 412 the share for husband/wife is prioritized when there is only one son.

Man died 1/6 + 1/6 +1/8=11/24-1=13/24 for son
Woman died 1/6+1/6+1/4=7/12-1=5/12 for son.

This leaves nothing for daughters and we know they inherit?

Yes, because there is no daugter in this situation. The inheritance divisions is described by ground realities not hypothetical propositions.

Noon_waalqalami

Yes, because there is no daugter in this situation. The inheritance divisions is described by ground realities not hypothetical propositions.

OK rewind, I want to understand; please distribute

3 daughters, 1 son, parents, husband?
3 daughters, 2 sons, parents, husband?