Wednesday, January 9, 2008

The inheritance mistake in detail - Part 4

Usual responses to Quran inheritance math mistakes

Inheritance math mistakes are very cut and dry. The apologetic responses are, frankly, not very good here, which is why it's a good place to start in a logical discussion on Islam. Let me go further, I have shown just a fraction of the total math mistakes that exist here (go here for some more: and ). Here's a fun one - what do you do for pregnant wife? Anyway, if you have an afternoon free, find some more on your own. I encourage you to do so and comment on this blog post.

Here are the standard responses:

You have not looked at all the verses. This is my favorite response because it actually opens up more issues. The other verses are 2:180-182, 2:233, 2:240, 4:33. None of them go through any math except for 2:240:
YUSUFALI: Those of you who die and leave widows should bequeath for their widows a year's maintenance and residence; but if they leave (The residence), there is no blame on you for what they do with themselves, provided it is reasonable. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
PICKTHAL: (In the case of) those of you who are about to die and leave behind them wives, they should bequeath unto their wives a provision for the year without turning them out, but if they go out (of their own accord) there is no sin for you in that which they do of themselves within their rights. Allah is Mighty, Wise.
SHAKIR: And those of you who die and leave wives behind, (make) a bequest in favor of their wives of maintenance for a year without turning (them) out, then if they themselves go away, there is no blame on you for what they do of lawful deeds by themselves, and Allah is Mighty, Wise.
So, if you include this verse in your calculations. You have to make sure that you leave behind one year's provisions for their wives. And now we have another contradiction! Remember, 4:12 is very detailed;
In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts.
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.

Men should get more than women. This excuse is funny because, you may have noticed already, I don't bring this up as an issue. I just focus on the math mistake. However, I get this one a lot. My theory is that Muslims are just repeating apologetics without even listening to the issue.

Unfortunately for the Muslim, another contradiction pops up when taking this angle. 4:11 states:
as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females:
So the men always get twice as much as the women according to silly Allah. First of all, I believe all readers can see that this makes no sense as a definitive rule for all times (simple example: the son is wealthy and the daughter is an extremely poor widow with 5 kids). Let's follow on, though, and see if there's another contradiction.

In 4:11, it says, "if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half." What happens if there are sons? Do they get 4/3 and 2/2? You can quickly see the problems. What happens if there are sons and daughters? Say 1 son and 3 daughters.

3 daughters: 2/3
1 son: twice that of the female or 2 x ( (2/3)/3) = 4/9

Total = 10/9. Another contradiction!

I think you can see that it's possible to do this all day long. What about if it's the reverse, 3 sons and 1 daughter? It's not even clear because the verse seems to specify the split for just daughters, but we know that sons get twice that of daughters. You can clearly see, though, that the daughter will get nothing close to 1/2. More confusion!

Anything left over goes to the nearest male relative. This excuse is also funny because Muslims have stated this is a counterargument when my two simple cases were for situations where the opposite occurred (more than 100% given away). Anyway, this is the law of "Usbah" from the following Hadith:

Sahih Bukhari 8. 80. 724
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
The Prophet said, "Give the Fara'id (the shares of the inheritance that are prescribed in the Qur'an) to those who are entitled to receive it. Then whatever remains, should be given to the closest male relative of the deceased."

Before we take one step further, let's immediately recognize that the "perfect" Quran is again imperfect and therefore false. We have to go to the Hadith to find the answer because the Quran can't stand on its own.

If we continue, I'm sure the reader can come up with quick examples of unfairness and contradiction. For unfairness, imagine the widow has 5 children to support and will receive only 1/4 of the inheritance while the distant male relative (maybe even wealthy) receives 3 X that amount or 3/4! For a contradiction, imagine the case where there is only a widower - he should receive 1/2, but now has 2/2 because he also receives the remainder. This is a clear contradiction between the Quran and the Hadith.

You need to interpret properly. This one is a fallacy, and has already been discussed. Either the Quran is a word of a God and, therefore, perfect for all time or it's not. Additionally, in these inheritance verses, the Quran even states, "Allah makes clear to you." So we get one more contradiction...if three Muslims give three different answers and all three answers require changing the text of the Quran to make it work, well, then...Allah didn't make it clear.


Anonymous said...

What's your religion idiot?? seems like you have too much time to sit down and write all these anti islamic stuff here. You seem to be someone who is against Islam otherwise i dont think anyone has time to sit down and make all that against some other religion. Anyways its poor attempt to confuse people about islam and twist its message.

Silly Allah said...

Hilarious. You clearly have not read enough of my blog. You're opening was a typical Muslim debating fallacy. If you click on the link, you will find both the answer to your question and the explanation as to why your opening ("What's your religion idiot??") is pure fallacy.

Let me go further. The fallacy is so common among Muslims that I called it out on that page, and you proved my point exactly! Here's is what I wrote:

Ad hominem and tu quoque
This is the most common fallacy used by Muslims. It is basically throwing away someone's argument because of some issue with the person or person's group. Usually, they switch the attack to Christianity or Judaism, comparing the Bible to the Koran, because they think I'm Christian or Jewish. Since I am an atheist, it doesn't work.

Finally, your factless assertion that I am confusing and twisting Islam is especially funny on a page that is simply pointing out the mistakes made in the Quran. I back up my blog with facts - why can't you?

Atif said...

LOL ... this article is utter rubbish! you've 'cut and pasted' at will and tried to justify your point as such. The actual verse

4:11 is:
Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then the half. And to of his parents a sixth of the inheritance, if he have a son; and if he have no son and his parents are his heirs, then to his mother appertaineth the third; and if he have brethren, then to his mother appertaineth the sixth, after any legacy he may have bequeathed, or debt (hath been paid). Your parents or your children: Ye know not which of them is nearer unto you in usefulness. It is an injunction from Allah. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise. (11)This refutes every claim you've made in your article because of 'mis-quotation' from Al-Quran. Each category covered in the verse is mutually exclusive (ie a wife (refers to where it says women) cannot be a daughter etc).

Do all the different combinations you want everything adds up if you assign the correct rule to each category.

May Allah show you the right path.

(p.s. you got 0wn3d, so stop mis-informing people ... I also find it hard to believe your an atheist, I've come across more intelligent Christians--> which says alot)

Silly Allah said...

Wonderful Atif - you lie, boast and insult. You've completed the Muslim hat trick in one post.

Let's just go to the lie because that is easy.

You stated that I misquoted. Now go to Part 1 of Allah's math mistake. You will see all three translations there. I did not hide any translation.

Now, let's see who is trying to misquote. Look at Yusufali's translation:

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents,...

So you see, you forgot to bold one major part in your misquotation...Children's: The word, plus the colon, make it clear that the next set of sentences refer to the children's inheritance up until For parents,.. as Yusufali made clear. If you check, "children:" are in all three translations. Sure, only Yusufali uses the word daughters - are you saying he is wrong? Unfortunately for you, though, he has very good company. Islamic scholars in the Sunni and Shia schools of jurisprudence interpret the wording the same way I did. In fact, they both recognize the math problem, and come up with two different methods to solve it. Do some fact-checking first Atif before you boast and make ad hominem attacks.

Now, just for fun, why don't you explain how it all works out?

Solve the problem:

Calculate how to split the inheritance for a man how dies and leaves behind: 3 daughters, 2 parents and two wives.

3 daughters: x%
2 parents: y%
2 wives: z%

You know you can't, which is why you didn't try. The mistake stands.

What I don't understand is how Muslims know the mistake well enough to try and obfuscate the issue, yet they still cling to the notion that the Quran is divine and Allah exists.

There is no Allah. Just deal with it.

Atif said...

okay I'll paste a quote I got to begin with, hopefully that will solve any problems you have with proportions as such:

With regard to your question, Dr. Monzer Kahf, a prominent Muslim economist and counselor, answers:

“Allah, Exalted and Glorified be He, mentions in the Qur’an the general cases only, and the details are drawn by us. This is the rule always in the Qur’an and can’t be attributed to a mistake. It is rather the right thing because our religion is founded on trusting human intelligence. It always leaves a great deal of the rulings of Shari’ah to be drawn by human intelligence.

In inheritance, there are two groups of heirs. A share group (called As-hab Al-Fara’id) and a residual group (called As-hab Al-‘Asabah). The shares are given in their general forms as 1/8, 1/6, 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, and 2/3 and the distribution of residual is given as a formula of “a male having twice as much as a female.”

The application of these principles is left to the human intelligence as it always depends on the number of heirs and their relationship to the deceased. In most actual cases there are heirs of the two groups. There are also several cases where the total of shares adds to more (or less) than one. These cases cannot be considered as mistakes because the distribution remains in the same proportion of the shares as given in the Qur’an. The cases that add to more than one are known in Fiqh as cases of “`Awl” which means “reverting to”. In other words, these cases revert to a distribution that maintains the same internal proportions of the given shares although they add up to more than one. It works as in the following examples:

Husband + 2 daughters + one parent: 1/4+2/3+1/6=13/12, shares are distributed out of 13;

Husband + 2 daughters + two parents: 1/4+2/3+1/6+1/6=15/12, shares are distributed out of 15;

Husband + 2 sisters + mother: 1/2+2/3+1/6=8/6, shares are distributed out of 8;

Husband + 2 sisters: 1/2+2/3=7/6, shares are distributed out of 7;

Wife + 2 daughters + two parents: 1/8+2/3+1/6+1/6=9/8, shares are distributed out of 9.

By the same token, human intelligence also works in cases that add up to less than one. This is known in our Fiqh as cases of “Radd” which literally means “rendering” as in the following examples:

One daughter (or one sister) only, alone with no other heirs: 1/2. Remaining 1/2 is rendered back to her;

Two daughters (or sisters) only: 2/3. Remaining 1/3 is rendered back to them;

Wife + 2 sisters + mother: 1/8+2/3+1/6=23/24, the remainder is distributed to sisters and mother in the same proportion, no rendering to either husband or wife;

Mother alone, and mother with daughter(s) (or sisters) only, there is always a remainder of two third, one third or one sixth, it is rendered to them proportionally.

These examples indicate that the issue is not a matter of mistakes, but of giving the principles and leaving the numerous details to human intelligence. Only those who are not satisfied by getting principles only and do not want to use human intelligence may think of errors or mistakes!
Next lets check the validity of my source,here is some information on him :
so clearly he exists.

It is similar to a person who wants to solve a mathematical equation but does not know the basic rule of mathematics, i.e. BODMAS which says that in a mathematical equation, irrespective of which mathematical sign appears first, you will first solve BODMAS: 1st Brackets Off, 2nd Division, 3rd Multiplication, 4th Addition and 5th Subtraction. If the owner of this blog does not know mathematics and first does multiplication then subtraction, then brackets off, then division and finally addition, the answer that he will obtain is bound to be wrong.

Similarly, when the Quran mentions the law of inheritance in Surah Nisa chapter 4 verses 11 and 12, even though the children’s share is mentioned first and then that of the parents and spouses, according to the law of inheritance in Islam after paying off the debts and liabilities first, the share is given to the spouses and the parents depending on whether the deceased has left children or not, and whatever portion of wealth is remaining is divided between the sons and the daughters according to their respective shares.

So where does the question arise of the total coming to more than one? So it is not Allah who does not know mathematics but it is the owner of this blog.

Your a funny guy, I would waste some more time here if you didn't babble all the time. (A poor argumentative technique). I'm not the one spreading lies buddy you are. This debate is on religion so im going to hold back on any ad hominem fallacies. The Quran is a perfect book, poor transliteration doesn't prove anything.

What I find so funny about you athiests is that you've existed on earth for 30 years ? 40 years? well lets just assume your really old and your age is less than equal to 90. In proportion, the Qu'rans age is over 1400 years old, and you really think people haven't tried to find contradictions in it before? You really think your the first one? I'm sorry man, there are no contradictions and will never be.

I'll give you a little crash course on the Quran if you dont know much. The Quran is God's Final Testament to the world, and He has pledged to protect it from the slightest distortion (15:9). Thus, the Quran is surrounded by invisible forces that guard it and serve it (13:39, 41:42, 42:24).

Unlike any other book, the Quran is taught by God (55:1-2); He teaches us what we need at the time we need it. This is why we read the Quran hundreds of times without getting bored. We can read a novel, forexample, only once. But the Quran can be read an infinite number of times, and we derive new and valuable information from it every time.

On the other hand, the insincere readers - those who read the Quran to find fault with it - are diverted from the Quran (7:146, 17:45, 18:57, 41:44).In fact, God's invisible forces help them find the faults they seek. Since the Quran is perfect, such "faults" serve only to reveal the stupidity of God's enemies.

Read the Quran properly with a open heart, understand it, then come back and let me know if you find anything wrong with it. This post is getting a little too long, but I was going to explain why the Quran was sent down in Arabic. If you want to know let me know.

I better get back to study, got an exam in 2 days >.<

Peace man.

Silly Allah said...

This is why I love public, written debates. Now, everyone can see you change your story. Also, as you read my response, you will also realize that you contradicted yourself within your last post. This was fun :)

OK, in your first message, you wrote,"This refutes every claim you've made in your article because of 'mis-quotation' from Al-Quran. Each category covered in the verse is mutually exclusive (ie a wife (refers to where it says women) cannot be a daughter etc)."

You claimed I misquoted, yet were clearly wrong because I had all three translations on Part 1 of the inheritance mistake. Also, you implied that by categorizing women into different groups (wife, daughter,...) the mistake would go away because they were mutually exclusive. This comment alone gave you enough excitement to say "0wn3d." Finally, you claimed that I " 'cut and pasted' at will." now let's see what you did...

You cut and pasted at will from Monzer Kahf. You are so proud of it, in fact, that you bolded his name. All you did was post the Sunni work around to Allah's math mistake. However, it's still a math mistake, whether or not "human intelligence," as Dr. Kahf puts it, can provide a practical work around. A supposed supreme being shouldn't have made the mistake in the first place. Please go to this page where I discuss Al-Awl . For the readers who don't want to go through Muslim obfuscation in Khaf's words, that fix simply renormalizes the result when when the Allah tries to give away more inheritance than exists. The simple question - why does the Quran tell its followers to give away more than exists? Or, put another way, shouldn't Allah have said to renormalize the result so that more intelligent humans wouldn't have to come up with a work around?

What is hilarious, though, is that you posted contradictory fixes and didn't even know it! LOL You see, you went on to talk about the BODMAS crap, which is really a non-sequitur devised by Dr. Naik to divert attention away from the mistake. What Naik is trying to say (and you as well rather explicitly) is that you need to order the inheritance pieces to the parents first, spouses second and children last (I call it Residues and Remainders). Now, none of that ordering is in the Quran! It's purely made up by Shias to get around Allah's math mistake. It also has the added problem of a leftover balance. Furthermore, the math contradicts the Quran and the Sunni work around. Here are the different results:

Quran's literal words give away a total of 9/8:

3 daughters: 2/3
2 parents: 1/3
2 wives: 1/8

Using Al-Awl rules to normalize, you get:
(The numbers above were just multiplied by 8/9 so that the total could be normalized at 100% or 9/9. )
3 daughters: 16/27
2 parents: 8/27
2 wives: 1/9

Using Residues and Remainders (BODMAS), you get:
3 daughters: 13/36
2 parents: 1/3
2 wives: 1/8
Leftover: 13/72 -- "shall be given to the person bequeathed by the deceased; in the absence of such a person, it shall be given to the closest male relative of the deceased; in the absence of such a relative, the balance shall be distributed as per the regulations of the state of residence of the deceased."

What I love about your last post Atif is that you proved my point without even knowing it. You demonstrated that there is a real mistake by showing the readers that both Sunnis and Shias created their own, contradictory work arounds. Which brings me to Allah's last mistake. You see Allah claims in these very verses that he makes it clear - the fact that Allah made a math mistake and that there are two different sects with two contradictory fixes to that math mistake essentially proves that it is not clear. That's two strikes against silly Allah.

Noman said...

I can bet if someone offers Mr. silly 10 million dollar to resolve all these contradictions, he will be able to resolve all these readily. He is intelligent enough to make anything a mistake. Intelligent enough to solve these so called problems too. Problem with him is in somewhere else..........

Noman said...

hah ha, you will not approve. You do not approve the strong comments and replies. Mr. Silly Coward.

Silly Allah said...

I was traveling Norman. Your posts have been approved for all to see. They are the usual ad hominem fallacy that I've come to expect, and not worth responding.

Allah's mistakes stand on their own. I don't need to do anything.

Silly Allah said...

Apologies, I should have addressed that as Noman not Norman...still a bit sleepy after traveling.

Atif said...

A very interesting discussion might I add, and for some reason I always seem to come across this during my examination period.

Well this is a direct question and answer to the moderator of the thread. I'm not here to spam but I think I have found a satisfactory solution to the problems posed in your blog about Al-Quran.

Please read through this link I found:

The author brings about an important point (Which I really should of picked up on before) about literal and non-literal meanings in the Quran. You must understand Al-Quran is the book of 'signs' and is full of metaphors as such, and as you stated before given the initial hypothesis it is the word of God it must be perfect for God to exist (especially if God claims its perfection within the book). So literally speaking, everything said is exactly how it is, down to each arabic letter (I know this posses a problem during transliteration).

I really hope that helps, if you are still unsatisfied let me know.
Hope you had some good travels =)

Silly Allah said...

Atif, you're back again! This time you've linked to another Muslim scholar who claims to solve it all as you did in comments above. This one is funny because he never actually solves anything. Let's look at his answer to the first problem, "The details of this case is left to the comprehensive nature of the Islamic Shariah which does not depend on the Quran alone. " That's it. No solution. Plus, he actually contradicts the same Shariah scholars he claims to support. BTW, somebody else posted this same silly link once before, so, if you don't mind, I'll just cut and paste from what I wrote him (check my second response to Khalid):

" in the link misleads his audience to solve the 1st math mistake. It claims the Arabic use of the word "walad" instead of "awalad" means that the [1/6 + 1/6] distribution to parents should only happen if there is "only one child." This is clearly false because, if you check the Arabic, the word "only" is not there, it is only (!) in the author's head. The grammar is "has a child" and the corresponding negative...and, as in English, this could easily be interchanged with "has children" and the corresponding negative as Yusuf Ali did in his translation. As further proof, the author's understanding contradicts the Sunni and Shia solutions to the problem, which are Al-Awl and ordering of reminders as discussed in my original post on the Islamic inheritance mistake. Somehow, though, the author has a new solution which he mysteriously refers to with the following, "The details of this case is left to the comprehensive nature of the Islamic Shariah which does not depend on the Quran alone. " My guess is that the author knows he is being misleading, and thus refuses to solve the actual math in his article :). If you don't believe me, check every other pro-Islam site for the solution to the problem. Simply put, the Quran makes an error."

Atif, you've already contradicted yourself a couple of times in postings within this page by cut and pasting from different "scholars." When are you going to give up and just look at the problem yourself? Think for yourself. That is the only time any of this will make any sense to you. Only then will you realize the Quran is just a load of 7th century junk. It makes no sense. It is full of contradictions and math mistakes. It relies on centuries old (and disproved) beliefs about the universe.

Noman said...

You have been fallen in a trap that Allah has created to bring the
stupids to hell who deserves hell. The only way for you to get rid of
this trap, is crying and repenting in front of Allah, and praying to
Him that He make you understand Quran. You will probably not do that
if you are really stupid. I bet. The veil on your eyes will not be
uplifted then, and you tiny creature will wait for hardest times
forever. There is no life hereafter for non-believers, so better do
research on biology to stop death, leave Quran, this life is so short. Alas why are you taking this stupid risk friend. Be clever. Yes, but I know no one can uplift the veil from your eye except Allah. So we should not do it anymore. Let Allah give you right path.

Noman said...

Another thing, it seems your brain has been washed with different philosophical logics agram bagram fellacy mellacy etc. Get out of these things and think independently. Get the truth. And if you are a real truth seeker Allah will show you himself, there is biasness in your seeking.

Silly Allah said...

Hilarious Noman. Thanks for the morning laugh.

சிவதேஜஸ  சுகந்த ப்ரஹ்மபுத்ரன் said...

Typical muslims,when they can't reply,they insult or go along with their "Allah will punish you for your ingnorance" jokes.Wake up Mozzies,Allah is a desert god,an illusion.He is not even real.You Mozzies got nothing to prove the existance of this false allah.All you got were few bunches of crappy arabic writings on pigs,goats and other animals to prove the existance of your allah god.