Black Turban, Taalibah, Maria al-Qibtiyya, Naqshband66, samah, abu mohammed, the fake shaykh, Muadh_Khan, Jinn, umar123, Seifeddine-M, bint e aisha 2 guests appreciate this topic.
Refuting the so called "contradictions" and "mathematical errors" in Islamic Inheritance Laws
The kuffaar seem to have an act for finding contradictions and mistakes in the Qur'an. The passage about Inheritance Laws seems to be one of their biggest targets. Now that many of the issues regarding the females inheritance are out of the way, we can, insha'Allah, work on tearing apart some of these utterly baseless claims.
All of the claims that will be refuted were taken from anti-Islamic sites. I'll make it a point to say that under no conditions will I be posting a link to any of these filthy sites. I've only gone to them for the purpose of quoting their accusations. Many of these so called "contradictions" and "mathematical errors" where the numbers "just don't add up" are based off of a lack of understanding of the laws in the first place.
The science of Inheritance (Ilm-ul Faraa'id, as it is known amongst the 'ulamaa') is a complex matter. And reading some of the claims these kuffaar came up with was utterly laughable, because it was obvious that they had no idea what they were talking about. One website literally had me laughing because it was clear that they were absolutely clueless about these laws, and were just grabbing onto anything and calling it a "contradiction". This will become clear when I start posting some of the claims.
Claim #1: Verse 4:11 says that if a man has only one daughter, she gets half of the inheritance irrespective of other heirs. But since the same verse says that the portion of the male is twice that of the female, her brother is supposed to get all the inheritance. Isn't this a discrepancy?
Refutation: If there is only one daughter, with NO sons, then the daughter gets half. However, if there are both daughters and sons, then each son will get twice as much as each daughter from whatever is leftover (residue). Clearly not a discrepancy. A child could figure that out. Similarly, if there are two or more daughters only, they share 2/3 of the estate. But if there are son's and daughters, they share the residue in a 2:1 ratio.
Claim #2: There is a contradiction between 2:240 and 4:12. First verse says leave behind a years provision, while the second says she gets 1/8. So which is it, one year's provisions or 1/8? What if the 1/8 didn't include enough for even a fraction of a year? What if you had to take away a portion from somebody else to provide that one year provision? Well, you get a contradiction between verse 2:240 and 4:12.
Refutation: Verse 2:40 has been abrogated.
In the Age of Ignorance, the period of waiting for a widow was one year, and in Islam, it came to be four months and ten days rather than one full year as we already know from "They keep themselves waiting for four months and ten days," in Verse 234, explained earlier. However, women were given a certain advantage in this respect. Those were the days when the injunction of inheritance was not revealed and a wife's share in the inheritance was yet to be determined; in fact, the rights of all others simply revolved around the will of the deceased, as we have already learned from the explanation of the verse 2:180. Therefore, it was made obligatory that a woman should be allowed to live in the premises of her late husband's house for one full year if she so desires. It was also mandatory under this arrangement that she be given her maintenance during this period out of what has been left behind by her husband. This rule is mentioned in this verse. Husbands have been instructed to make wills to this effect.
Since this was the right of the woman and she had the choice to receive or leave it, therefore, it was not permissible for the inheritors to evict her out of the house, but it was permissible for her not to live in that house at her discretion, and leave her due for the inheritors. The condition, however, was that 'iddah or the waiting period of four months and ten days be completed. After the completion of this period she could leave the house of her husband and could enter into a new marriage with another person. This is what is meant by the Qur'anic expression: "Then, if they move out, there is no sin on you in what they have done for themselves of the recognized practice. However, going out during the period of 'iddah and getting married was all counted as sin -- not only for the woman concerned but also for those who could stop her yet did not do so.
When 'the verse of inheritance' was revealed, the woman received her ordained share in the house and in all other items of inheritance on the strength of which she had the choice to live in her section of the house and spend out of her share in the inheritance after the completion of four months and ten days, and this verse was abrogated. [Ma'ariful Qur'an]
The majority of the scholars said that this Ayah (2:240) was abrogated by the Ayah (2:234), what Allah said: (...they (the wives) shall wait (as regards their marriage) for four months and ten days.) (2:234)
For instance, Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn Az-Zubayr said: I said to `Uthman bin `Affan:
(And those of you who die and leave wives behind them) was abrogated by the other Ayah (2:234). Therefore, why did you collect it (meaning, in the Qur'an)'' He said, "O my nephew! I shall not change any part of the Qur'an from its place.''
The question that Ibn Az-Zubayr asked `Uthman means: `If the ruling of the Ayah (2:240) was abrogated to four months (the `Iddah of the widow, and refer to 2:234), then what is the wisdom behind including it in the Qur'an, although its ruling has been abrogated If the Ayah (2:240) remains (in the Qur'an) after the Ayah that abrogated it (2:234), this might imply that its ruling is still valid.' `Uthman, the Leader of the faithful, answered him by stating that this is a matter of the revelation, which mentioned these Ayat in this order. `Therefore, I shall leave the Ayah where I found it in the Qur'an.'
Ibn Abu Hatim reported that Ibn `Abbas said about what Allah said: (And those of you who die and leave behind wives should bequeath for their wives a year's maintenance (and residence) without turning them out, ) "The widow used to reside, and have her provisions provided for her for a year, in her deceased husband's house. Later, the Ayah that specified the inheritance (4:12) abrogated this Ayah (2:240), and thus the widow inherits one-fourth or one-eighth of what her (deceased) husband leaves behind.''
Ibn Abu Hatim also related that `Ali bin Abu Talhah stated that Ibn `Abbas said, "When a man died and left behind a widow, she used to remain in his house for a year for her `Iddah, all the while receiving her provisions during this time. Thereafter, Allah revealed this Ayah: (And those of you who die and leave wives behind them, they (the wives) shall wait (as regards their marriage) for four months and ten days.) (2:234)
So, this is the `Iddah of the widow, unless she was pregnant, for her `Iddah then ends when she gives birth. Allah also said: (In that which you leave, their (your wives') share is a fourth if you leave no child; but if you leave a child, they get an eighth of that which you leave.) (4:12)
So Allah specified the share of the widow in the inheritance and there was no need for the will or the Nafaqah (maintenance) which were mentioned in (2:240).''
Ibn Abu Hatim stated that Mujahid, Al-Hasan, `Ikrimah, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak, Ar-Rabi` and Muqatil bin Hayyan said that the Ayah (2:240) was abrogated by: (four months and ten days.) (2:234)
The above verse instructs dying men to consider the plight of their wives by bequeathing a years provision for them together with the right to reside in his home. The did, however, have the option of going elsewhere. This law was later abrogated by the laws of inheritance, which allotted a specific share for the wives, wherefrom they are able to provide for themselves. During the period of 'iddah, however, she cannot be forced to leave the home even thought it may fall into the estate. [Tafseer Anwaar-ul-Bayaan]
How would you split the inheritance if a woman dies, leaving behind a husband and a brother but no children or parents?
Husband: x%
Brother: y%
Let's go to the verses for an answer:
4:12 "In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child"
Husband: 1/2
4:12 "If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; "
Brother: 1/6
4:176 "Allah directs (thus) about those who leave no descendants or ascendants as heirs. If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the inheritance: If (such a deceased was) a woman, who left no child, Her brother takes her inheritance"
Brother: 1/1 (100%)
So the final numbers are:
Husband: 1/2 or 50%
Brother: 7/6 or 117%, already over 100 because 176 and 12 contradict each other
Refutation: I'll be honest with you. I've never seen a bigger load of garbage and nonsense than the above claim.
4:176 refers to Full and consanguine siblings. 4:12 refers to Uterine siblings (i.e. half brother, half sister) and there is a consensus of the ummah on this [see Ma'ariful Qur'an for details]. A Full or consanguine brother will receive 100% of the inheritance (if he is the only inheritor), or the residue (if there is another heir inheriting with him), and a uterine sibling will receive 1/6 (multiple uterine siblings share 1/3).
In other words, to answer your question, if a woman dies leaving behind a husband and a brother, the husband gets 1/2 and the brother (whether full, consanguine, or uterine) will get the other half. This is according to the Hanafi, Shafi'i and Hanbali opinion. According to the Maliki opinion, in the case of the uterine brother, he will get 1/6 and the remaining estate will go to the bayt-ul-maal (the public treasury).
Claim #4: There are cases when the total of the shares assigned to the heirs exceeds the patrimony. Take for example the following.
According to the above verses, if a man dies leaving behind a wife, three daughters and his two parents,
His wife's share of his inheritance is 1/8. (In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth)
His daughters would receive 2/3 (if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance;)
and his parents each will get 1/6 of his inheritance. (For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children;)
When you add all these fractions the sum is more than the total of inheritance.
Wife 1/8 = 3/24
two Daughters 2/3 = 16/24
Father 1/6 = 4/24
Mother1/6 = 4/24
Total = 27/24
Refutation: Yes, in fact, there are many cases where the sum of the shares is more than 1. The funny thing is that the kuffaar act like they have discovered something new. For the past 1400 years 'ulama have been writing about the science of Inheritance, and never have they had a problem with any such scenario, even if it added to more than 100%. This is because we have a way to deal with this, taught to us by the Sahabah (companions of the Prophet ). Its called the principle of 'awl. Its been related that either 'Ali رضي الله عنه or 'Umar رضي الله عنه were the first to apply this principle to an inheritance scenario presented to them. Here's how it would apply to the scenario at hand:
Now if we add the total number of portions, they equal 27, which is more than the base number (24). Now we apply 'awl, by simply making 27 our new base number and keeping the number of portions same. So as the final answer, the estate will be divided into 27 shares with:
Wife getting 3 portions Each daughter getting 8 portions (for a total of 16 portions)
Mother and Father each getting 4 portions
In fact, this is the very same case that Hadhrat 'Ali solved. This is a celebrated case of inheritance called Mimbariyya for the reason that Caliph 'Ali solved it while delivering a sermon on the mimbar (i.e. pulpit) in a Mosque at Kufa, in present day Iraq. He was asked what a wife's share will be if the surviving heirs of a deceased are wife, both parents and 2 daughters. There and then, he answered, "The wife's 1/8 becomes 1/9."
Claim #5: The principle of 'Awl is just a quick fix with no basis in the Qur'an.
Refutation: It is correct to say that the principle of 'Awl has no basis in the Qur'an. But the Qur'an is not the only source of the shari'ah. The Qur'an gives us the general rules, we have to see how they are applied by looking at the sunnah and the practices of the sahaabah. Just as the details of Hajj or Divorce are not fully mentioned in the Qur'an, the details of inheritance are also not fully mentioned in the Qur'an. We must look at the sunnah and the practices of the sahaabah to get a complete understanding of these laws.
There is no Hadeeth reported from the Prophet , that indicates that he , applied 'Awl (which means that the shares of inheritors exceed the whole of the inheritance) regarding the issues of inheritance. However, he , urged us to act according to the Sunnah (way) of the rightly-guided caliphs and stated that that Sunnah and the consensus of scholars are sources of legislation, saying: "You must follow my Sunnah and that of the rightly-guided caliphs. Abide by it and hold on tight to it [as if] with your molar teeth..." [Abu Daawood, At-Tirmithi, Al-Haakim who graded it Saheeh (sound), and Ath-Thahabi and Al-Albaani agreed with him]
He , also said: "Allaah will not cause my Ummah (or he said: the Ummah of Muhammad) to agree on misguidance; and the Hand of Allaah is with the Jamaa'ah (the group which follows the Quran and authentic Sunnah); and whoever deviates from that will be in Hell." [At-Tirmithi]
The Prophet , also said: "I asked my Lord for four things and He gave me three and refused to give me the fourth. I asked my Lord not to let my nation agree on misguidance and He gave me that......" [Ahmad narrated it as Marfoo', i.e. traceable to the Prophet sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam ( may Allaah exalt his mention )]
'Awl was applied by the rightly-guided caliph 'Umar may Allaah be pleased with him and the Companions during his time agreed with that. However, Ibn 'Abbaas may Allaah be pleased with him held another opinion after the death of 'Umar, an opinion that has become nearly obsolete. Ibn Qudaamah said in Al-Mughni: "The opinion of applying 'Awl has been adopted by all Muslim scholars except Ibn 'Abbaas and a small group that held another opinion... We do not know at the present time anyone who adopts the opinion of Ibn 'Abbaas. We do not know of any disagreement among the jurists of the Islamic states regarding applying 'Awl. All perfect praise be to Allaah."
The cause of 'Awl presented itself during the time of the rightly-guided caliph 'Umar ibn Al-Khattaab may Allaah be pleased with him. It was stated in the Al-Mawsoo'ah Al-Fiqhiyyah:
"The first case of 'Awl was for a woman who died and left behind a husband and two sisters. This occurred during the beginning of the caliphate of 'Umar. He consulted the Companions and said: "By Allaah, I do not know which of you comes first and which comes next. If I start with the husband and give him his right in full, the two sisters will not take their right in full; and if I start with the two sisters and give them their right in full, the husband will not take his right in full." According to the most recognized accounts, Al-'Abbaas ibn 'Abdul Muttalib may Allaah be pleased with him suggested that he could apply 'Awl. Other accounts have it that it was 'Ali ibn Abi Taalib or Zayd ibn Thaabit. It was narrated that Al-'Abbaas said: "O Leader of the Believers, tell me: If a man passed away and left six dirhams, and he owed three dirhams to one man and four to another, what would you do? Would you not make the wealth into seven parts?" He said, "Yes." Upon this, Al-'Abbaas said: "It is the same thing." Thus, 'Umar applied the principle of 'Awl."
This is indeed justice because if the deceased is in debt to some persons and leaves wealth that cannot pay off his debt, it will not be fair to give some of them while depriving the others. Rather, what justice dictates is to decrease the share of each. Thus, someone who is entitled to one third of the total debt should take one-third of the existing assets, and someone who is entitled to one-sixth should take one-sixth of the existing assets, and so on.
Ibn Al-Qayyim may Allaah have mercy upon him said in I'laam Al-Muwaqqi'een: "The Companions applied 'Awl in inheritance and applied decrease to all heirs by drawing analogy from the decrease applied to the shares of creditors in case where the total assets of a bankrupt person cannot pay off all entitlements. Moreover, the Prophet , said to creditors: 'Take what you find and that is all that you are entitled to.' This is pure justice, while exclusively depriving some creditors and giving some of them their full share is not just."
Indeed, the principle of 'Awl reflects the beauty of Islam in terms of its justice in matters and its suitability for dealing with new developments.
Claim #6: Suppose I was already a widower and have only one daughter. When I die my one daughter gets half according to verse 11. What happens to the rest?
Similar is the situation in which I have one daughter and one or more wives: My daughter gets 1/2 (S. 4:11), my wives share 1/8 (S. 4:12), i.e. 5/8 are distributed. What happens to the other 3/8 of the estate? This example does not raise a new question, but it is very important because that is the situation at Muhammad's [] own death, leaving one daughter (Fatimah) and several wives. Amazingly, Muhammad's [] wealth is not distributed according to the Qur'an!
Refutation: I don't see a problem with any of the two cases mentioned. The kaafir see's a problem since he has no clue how inheritance laws work.
1) In the first case, the daughter gets all of the inheritance, as per the principle of Radd.
2) In the second case, the wives share 1/8, and the daughter gets the remaining 7/8, as per the principle of Radd.
More on Radd later.
Rasulullah 's wealth was not distributed because Prophets do not leave any materialistic wealth behind as inheritance. This is clear from several ahadith, such as the following:
Nabi [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] said, 'We, i.e. the Anbiyaa, do not leave any inheritance. We leave Sadaqah (charity).' (Bukhari Hadith 6728)
In another Hadith, Nabi [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] said that the 'Ulama are inheritors of the Anbiyaa and the inheritance of the Prophets is not wealth but it is ilm (knowledge).' (Mishkaat pg.34; Qadeemi)
I mentioned the law of Radd in my last post, so I thought I'd give a brief explanation of it, so its clear what role this principle plays in Inheritance laws.
The law of Radd is basically the opposite of 'awl. While 'awl is applied when the shares add up to more than the total estate, Radd is applied when the shares add up to less than the total estate. In other words, if even after shares have been distributed to eligible heirs there is still something left over, then radd will be applied. The way it is applied is that the leftover estate will be distributed back to the original heirs in proportion to their original shares. So if the original share of A is 1/3, and B is 1/6, then the leftover wealth (if there is any), will be distributed back to A and B as a ratio of 2:1. Meaning, A will get twice as much as B. This will exhaust the entire state.
A few things about the law of Radd:
1) Hanafi's, Hanbali's and contemporary Shafi'i scholars accept it.
2) The daleel for it comes from the verse 33:6. "And those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of Allah than the [other] believers..." 3) It will only be applied if all of the eligible heirs are from the Ashaabul Furud. If their is even one heir who is not from that group, radd will not be applied and that heir will get all of the leftover estate.
There are certain exceptions to the above rules, such as:
(a) The husband and wife. If there is any estate leftover (and radd is applied), either spouse will not be entitled to it (according to the Hanafi Madhab, at least), since they are not considered blood relatives.
(b) The father: Radd will not be applied at all if a father is one of the inheritors. Rather, he gets all of the remaining estate. No one else will be entitled to it in his presence.
So these two principles - 'awl and radd - are basically the crux of inheritance. The shares mentioned in the Qur'an are the general principles, but the sahaabah and fuqahaa have expounded upon them by codifying these two rules, just as it was necessary to codify and expound upon the laws of Talaaq and Hajj, even though both are mentioned in relative detail in the Qur'an.
In fact, many of the "contradictions" and "mathematical errors" that the kuffaar bring up can be debunked by a simple application of either 'awl or radd. The rest is just misreading and a lack of intelligence/sincerity on their part. 'Ulama have been solving inheritance scenario's for the pat 1400 years, and not once did they ever have any problems or get stuck on any scenario. Nor did anyone question the inerrant nature of these laws until the kuffaar started bringing up these so called "mathematical inconsistencies".
Claim #7: 4:12 says that in case there are no direct heirs [parents or children] then "brother or a sister, to each of the two a sixth" while 4:176 says in the same situation that "they shall receive two-thirds of what he leaves" [double of what 4:12 says]. Contradiction.
Refutation: As has been stated before, the Qur'an gives the general principles, but there application and understanding has to be taken form the Sahaabah and fuqahaa.
4:12 is talking about uterine siblings 4:176 is talking about consanguine and full siblings.
This was already mentioned in the refutation of claim #3.
Let it be clear that this verse refers to the share of Akhyafi brothers and sisters (i.e. from the same mother and different fathers; also referred to as half-brothers and half-sisters). Though, this restriction has not been mentioned in the present verse, but consensus holds it as creditable. The Qira'ah or rendition of Sayyidna Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas رضي الله عنه in this verse is "and he has a brother or sister from his mother" as has been reported by al-Qurtubi, al-Alusi, al-Jassas and others. [Ma'ariful Qur'an]
Claim #8: There are yet cases when the shares of the inheritors do not sum to a whole 100% and there is a surplus left.
Take for example a man who dies and leaves his wife and his parents.
Parents 1/3 = 4/12
Wife 1/4 = 3/12
Total = 7/12
Who will receive the balance 5/12 of the inheritance?
Refutation: Its interesting that the kaafir would bring up such a case, because this is a special case known as 'Umariyyataini (as it arose during the caliphate of 'Umar رضي الله عنه). Its a special case because it does not follow the normal rules of inheritance (for reasons which can't be explained now). Specifically, an 'Umariyyataini case comes about when both parents inherit with a spouse (i.e. a wife or a husband) and there are no descendents (i.e. son, daughter, granddaughter etc..) or 2 or more siblings of any kind (whether full, consanguine, or uterine). If there is one sibling (of any kind), the 'Umariyyataini case stands. If there is more than one sibling, or if there is even one descendent, then it is no longer an 'Umariyyataini case and the normal rules of inheritance apply.
Another important thing to note about an 'Umariyyataini case is that it will NEVER leave any residue. So the notion of having a 'surplus' left over is out of the question. This is because in an 'Umariyyataini case, the father and mother act like a brother and sister, respectively. In other words, they share the residue in a 2:1 ratio.
There is no 'balance' or 'surplus' or any residue. The kaafir has, once again, shown his ignorance of Inheritance Laws.
Claim #9: The following are other cases that after the distribution, there is a surplus of Inheritance::
Only a wife: = 1/4 ----> Surplus = 3/4
Only a mother: = 1/3 ----> Surplus = 2/3
Only a daughter = 1/2 ----> Surplus = 1/2
Two daughters = 2/3 ----> Surplus = 1/3
Only a Sister = 1/2 ----> Surplus = 1/2
A mother and a sister = 1/3 + 1/2 = 5/6 ----> Surplus = 1/6
A wife and a mother = 1/4 + 1/3 = 5/12 ----> Surplus = 7/12
A sister and a wife = 1/2 + 1/4 = 3/4 ----> Surplus = 1/4
In all these cases and many other combinations there is a surplus. What will happen to this surplus? Who will inherit it?
Refutation: Easy.
In the first five cases, the inheritors will get all of the inheritance (i.e. the surplus will be returned back to them), as per the principle of Radd.
In the sixth case (mother and sister), the residue of 1/6th will be split up into 5 equal shares. 3 of these shares will be given to the sister, and 2 will be given to the mother. Again, the principle of Radd.
In the seventh case, the mother will get all of the surplus. In the eighth case the sister will get all of the surplus. This is because Radd cannot be applied to a spouse (wife/husband).
Not a problem at all, Alhamdulillah.
Note: In the first case (wife only), in an Islamic State the surplus would go to the bayt-ul-maal (public treasury). But since there is no Islamic state (and hence no Islamic bayt-ul-maal), the fuqahaa have said that the surplus will just be given to the spouse.
Claim #10: Consider the case of a man with only one daughter and 10 sons. According to the Quran, the daughter receives half while all the sons must share among themselves the other half. So each will receive not more than 1/20 of the inheritance. But this would contradict the other ruling that a male is to receive twice the share of the female.
Refutation: Again, you have failed to understand the Inheritance laws. Let me break this down. With regards to sons and daughters, there can be four cases:
1) One daughter, no sons - In which case the daughter gets 1/2
2) Two or more daughters, no sons - In which case the daughters share 2/3
3) A combination of sons and daughters - In which case they share the residue with each son getting twice the share of each daughter i.e. Son:Daughter = 2:1
4) Any number of sons, no daughters - In which case the sons share the residue equally amongst themselves.
The scenario described in the above claim falls under case #3. Hence, each son will get twice as much as the daughter. In other words, the estate will be split into 21 equal shares. The daughter will get 1 portion, while each son gets 2 portions. No contradiction.
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah
). Its called the principle of 'awl. Its been related that either 'Ali رضي الله عنه or 'Umar رضي الله عنه were the first to apply this principle to an inheritance scenario presented to them. Here's how it would apply to the scenario at hand:
