How do we know that the Koran is true?

[muslimapoclyptc]

Take the below verses and tell me that the Qu’ran is clear and unambiguous. . .

Qur'an 2:106: None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that God Hath power over all things?

Qur'an 16:101: When We substitute one revelation for another,- and God knows best what He reveals,- they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.

How is it possible to substitute something with something else without abrogating the former? Is it good enough to say the words ‘None of Our revelations do We abrogate’ when substitution is de facto abrogation.

The Qur'an is not saying revelations aren't abrogated, it's saying that revelations aren't abrogated without being substituted with another one. Hence, whatever revelation is abrogated, another replaces it.

Next question is why does Mohammed need to iterate those verses and in fact do it twice (presuming there was a period of years between them)? In my opinion, because he was reciting a verse and someone who then pointed out to him that it contradicted an earlier verse! Now you say but things changed (albeit in an area and at a time when little changed for hundreds of years). Surely God (being a God) knows the future and knows how things will change and God (being a God) can not make a mistake but Mohammed being a man can!

The first verse is talking about all abrogated verses being substituted with something similar or better. The second verse is obviously refuting the disbelievers who try to say that the Qur'an is a forgery, because it uses abrogation. So, i'm not sure what you mean by iteration. Can you clarify?

muslimapoclyptc thank you for your posts,

I am not sure if I replied to this post

I asked . . . Why did Uthman destroy the original text after he 'codified' it?

You replied . . . To standardize the Qur'an in the Quraishi Arabic dialect. When Uthman got hold of all of the Qurans that were written in different dialects, and in some cases were altered to sound exactly like the other dialects, he ordered for them to get burnt because they did not use the proper Arabic that was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and in some cases their words were different because of this dialect difference. He then compiled all of the Noble Surahs (Chapters) of the Noble Quran that were already written during the time of Prophet Muhammad in the city of Medina and formed what we call today the one true copy of the "Noble Quran".

So why did he destroy the original text? You have Muslims today up in arms if anyone defaces a modern day copy of the Qu’ran and Uthman destroyed the original copy!!

He didn't destroy the original copy, he destroyed the ones in the other Arabic dialects, so as to standardize the Qurayshi dialect for the Qur'an, since it was the one that the Prophet himself spoke.

And, if it was, as you say, written in different dialects how can you claims that the Qu’ran you read today is the same as the original?

Because the dialect that was used the most and the one that the Prophet himself used, was the Qurayshi one. This is also the one that the Qur'an today is written in.

Plus, I can also say that the Qur'an is the same, since it was memorized, and often recited in its entirety.

Inscription + Memorization + Frequent recitation = 100% Preservation

I asked . . . And, where are the original copies that Uthman created and why can they not be examined?

You replied . . . There are many old copies of the Qur'an, that are purported to have been one of the 'Uthmanic copies, such as:

the one in Uzbekistan, the one in Turkey, and the one in Russia. You also have the one in Egypt, which is the perhaps the oldest one, and is either an 'Uthmanic copy, or an exact copy of the original. And obviously, you can see it, and look through it, as is apparent in the images.

None of these copies have been proven to be an original Uthman, some of them have been altered and why are the pages not photographed and published?

Isn’t it all just a little bit suspect?

Not really. Those manuscrips are obviously rare, old, and probably very delicate. But regardless, people can and do still look through them, so them being photographed and published isn't really necessary.

Plus, the one in Egypt is either an 'Uthmanic copy, or an exact copy of one.

Also, what exactly do you mean that they have been altered?

 

[AntiKarateKid]

I think "Thinker" is just latching onto Quran conspiracy theories.

 

[Thinker]

The Qur'an is not saying revelations aren't abrogated, it's saying that revelations aren't abrogated without being substituted with another one. Hence, whatever revelation is abrogated, another replaces it.

OK so if you agree that some verses are abrogated that poses the question why wasn’t it right first time, God knows everything including the future and he can’t make mistakes?

He didn't destroy the original copy, he destroyed the ones in the other Arabic dialects, so as to standardize the Qurayshi dialect for the Qur'an, since it was the one that the Prophet himself spoke.

So if he didn’t destroy the original Bukhari (6:61:510) is not true and the original fraghments are still existence – so where are they?

Also, what exactly do you mean that they have been altered?

I believe I read somewhere that punctuation was added later to those old manuscripts.

 

[Thinker]

I think "Thinker" is just latching onto Quran conspiracy theories.

I didn't know (for this questions) there was a conspiracy theory to latch onto, I believed I'd thought of it myself, please point me to where I might find those perpetrating this idea so that I might compare notes.

 

[Mukafi7]

It is not our place to question the Qur'an. Maybe that is why it is called Belief/Faith. Some things you have to accept without question and you cannot be selective about it.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Some things you have to accept without question

Why?


Peace

 

[Mukafi7]

Don't take this as jugment, but If you are still wondering/asking "Why" you may no be ready then.

 

[Thinker]

It is not our place to question the Qur'an. Maybe that is why it is called Belief/Faith. Some things you have to accept without question and you cannot be selective about it.

I was raised as a Catholic and attended a Catholic school. I was told the same thing, don't question; have faith. And I was told about hell for people who didn't follow the scriptures. And I believe that many years earlier there were people killed for questioning being labled as heratics and blasphemers. I beleive it is inherent in human beings to question things, God made us that way.

 

[Mukafi7]

I agree that it is in our nature to quesitons certain things to make sense out of them. However, some things we need to accept, it is part of the faith.

for example, a kid growing up learns that the color red is actually red simply because his mom and dad tell him that this is red. The kid grows-up knowing that a certain color is red without questioning it. Eventually, we all agree that red is "red" although we larned it from many different source (our parents). Now I know this is not the same, but I am trying to convey that some things in life you have to accept and they have a way of woking themselves out in time.

 

[alcurad]

abrogation/substitution of verses occurs since Islam wa and continues to be a gradual process, you don't just get the entire spectrum of beliefs, prohibitions and commands in one go, rather as situations change, so did revelation.

in the case of the gradual restriction of wine consumption leading to it's forbidding, no verse was omitted since the earlier ones still applied, such as "do not 'come close' to prayer while you are drunk",i.e do not drink if the time of prayer is imminent, this was the first restriction.
while it seems quite obvious, still it was needed for that society, etc. such commands needed the authority of God himself behind them, since the issues being dealt with were deeply rooted in society and so on.

other verses were somewhat altered, so they weren't really omitted, rather a few words changed, since there was no need for a new verse. such as the verse for stoning for adulterers, which was changed afterwords.

not many verses were abrogated/substituted,this was the exception. all of these as far as I know were concerned with punishments, rules and so on, nothing to do with creed.

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings Thinker,

Many of the points you raise have been addressed at length in other parts of the forum. I hope you will take the time to read such material.

Why does the Qur'an need to be explained:
http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/134279079-simple-book-easy-understand.html

Abrogation:

The issue of naskh [abrogation] has been explained by brother Saheed bin Waheed in an article. This saves me so allow me to cite him:

The English word “abrogation” literally signifies annulment, nullification or cancellation. However, in Islaamic terminology that is used in Glorious Qur’aan, it means expiration of the period of the validity of a practical injunction”. Following are the root letters and words derived from them, with their use in Glorious Qur’aan at four occasion

Readers must know that in Arabic, commonly a noun or a verb has three radical letters. But some nouns and verbs have four or five radical letters. However, many additional letters are added to them in usage.


A radical letter is that which remains intact through all the changes and derivations of the word. An additional letter is that which is subjected to changes in different forms and derivations, as is the case above.



The words, which have three radical letters, are called ath-thulathi (trilateral). Therefore, the occurrence of Naskh نسخ (abrogation) is related only to injunctions that are not eternal and are equal with regard to the possibility of their existence or non-existence.

Abrogation can never be taken to mean that Allaah commanded or prohibited something and then thought better of it and decided to cancel His former command. This is impossible because it involves attributing ignorance to Allaah (Allaah forbid). Also it is not possible for Allaah to command or prohibit something and then without any change in time, subject or conditions to abrogate His injunction since that would lead to attributing imperfection to Allaah. Allaah is FREE of any imperfection whatsoever.


What the Naskh نسخ/Mansookh منسوق signified is that Allaah knows that a certain injunction will remain valid for people up to certain time and then cease to be applicable. When that specific time is reached, a new command is sent which seems to either abrogate or change the former injunction but which, in fact, does nothing but mark the expiration of its validity. Since the former command did not have a specific period of validity attached to it, we take the new injunction as a cancellation of the former.

Example:

An employer might command one of his employees to do certain task with the intention of asking him to do some other task after one year, without, however, disclosing his intention to the employee. After the completion of the year, when employer ask the employee to do the other job, the employee might think that employer have changed or amended his orders, even though it is not the case, in fact, employer has not made any changes or amended his plans. Like all other changing phenomena around us, these apparent changes or amendments in the divine injunction are part of Divine Wisdom, whether we know its significance or not.


Therefore, the literal meaning of Naskh نسخ is replacement of one thing by another thing. Technical meaning from Islaamic point of view is “Lifting the Law of Shariah by reasons of Shariah.”


That is why Allaah (SWT) says in Glorious Qur’aan 16:101:

وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَا آيَةً مَكَانَ آيَةٍ وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مُفْتَرٍ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ

And when We change a Verse (of the Qur’ân,) in place of another - and Allâh knows best what He sends down - they (the disbelievers) say: "You (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سل&#1605 are but a Muftari! (Forger, liar)." Nay, but most of them know not.
​

http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...ple-book-jews-christians-muslims-alike-2.html

​

Also see this thread:
http://www.islamicboard.com/quran/13064-quran-abrogation.html

I am talking about later verses in the Qu'ran abrogating earlier verses. And, no it's not just those on inheritance which not only changed during Muhammads lifetime but are still being changed today; why is that - did someone make a mistake!!

Your post here demonstrates that you do not understand the concept of abrogation in the Qur'an at all. One of the conditions of abrogation is that only Allaah (swt) has the right to abrogate any command that originated from Him, either in the Qur'an or through the tongue of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Therefore nothing can be "changed" today as this religion was completed and perfected during the life of the Final Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

And then there's the verse saying nothing that comes later abrogates anything said earlier!!

Please quote me this verse.

This is all I have time for right now.

Peace.

 

[جوري]

Ah . . . most revered Skye,

I’ve also had posts deleted because they are topics which have already been discussed so I will fight back the urge to start a debate on which way is east and the location of heaven etc.!! And you know I would not take you on in debate because I will lose :smile: That said. . . .

First point I would like to make is that the reason your list is so long and the reason these questions keep coming up is because the text is ambiguous and contradictory.

The text is neither ambiguous nor contradictory.. it is a matter on whether or not you understand the bare minimum. You shouldn't sign up for calculus if you haven't taken remedial math, or worst yet if you don't believe in math as a subject that can govern our life all together?

Next, I did take a quick peak at Inheritance, I looked at the answer given and my notes.

The verse (4:11) in question says:

4:11. God (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, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children;
if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third;
if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth.

Dieing leaving two daughters, two parents and a wife adds up to an impossible one and one sixth i.e. one sixth more than exists.

for starters I don't know what 'dieing' means, there is no such word

The scholars answer to this in your post is . . . . .
The first major point to note is that there are two types of inheritors. The first category are those who have received a fixed inheritance, which includes the spouse and the parents. The second category includes those who take their share AFTER the shares of the first category are distributed. This includes siblings and children.
So if we understand this, we know that the parents and the wife would receive their amount, and the daughters would get a share of what remains.

He is saying that the daughters, two or more, their share is (NOT) two-thirds of the inheritance it is two thirds of what remains after the other get theirs. That is NOT what the verse says! Again, is this another example of the Qu’ran’s ambiguity or did someone make a mistake?

The Quran is giving you the formula, from which you are to derive the correct answers.
No different than you having a continuity equation

from which you are to derive the conservative transport of some kind of quantity. The Quran repeatedly tells you as early as chapter II, that if something is over your head that you seek knowledge from the people of knowledge. Given that the subject deals with math, I am justified in using it as an analogy!

Next (my notes made some time back) show me that the Qur’an mentions nine persons entitled to a share but ‘scholars’ have since added a further three making a total of 12!! Again, is this another example of the Qu’ran’s ambiguity or did someone make a mistake?

Perhaps indeed, and I believe it is you =)

see all the previous replies given you on the matter, I don't want to repeat the same thing over and over, though indeed this does call to mind another member who couldn't understand the concept of lunar calendar being longer than the solar one, quoting me articles and articles, until finally one explained to him that having less days per week makes for more weeks per month.. I still have my doubts he actually walked away understanding the matter..

so in truth I am not sure where you are finding problems with the given explanation?


The Inheritance Law
By : Ansar Al-'Adl
The allegation is as follows: And it just doesn't add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur'anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property.
The verses mentioned are the following:

4:11-12 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, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left a child; if no child, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. The distribution in all cases (is) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. 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. 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; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah. and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.

4:176 They ask thee for a legal decision. Say: 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: If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance (between them): if there are brothers and sisters, (they share), the male having twice the share of the female. Thus doth Allah make clear to you (His law), lest ye go astray. And Allah hath knowledge of all things.
​

1. The first major point to note is that there are two types of inheritors. The first category are those who have recieved a fixed inheritance, which includes the spouse and the parents. The second category includes those who take their share AFTER the shares of the first category are distributed. This includes siblings and children.

So if we understand this, we know that the parents and the wife would recive their amount, and the daughters would get a share of what remains. This explanation on its own solves the problem, because:
-1/3 for the parents together
-1/8 for the wife
-And for the daughters 2/3 of what remains = 2/3 of 13/24=13/36 of the total amount

So what remains after is 13/72 of the original amount. This remaining portion is to be given to whoever the deceased person appointed as their heir. The deceased can choose to have it given in charity or to the local masjid etc. If they have not specified any destination for the remaining wealth then it is given to the closest male relative.

After understanding this, it become clear that the allegation is based on ignorance of the fact that siblings and children get the remaining wealth after the parents and spouse have taken their share. Islamic rulings come from both the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

2. Let us now address the specific claims. The first claim is that 2/3 (daughters) +1/3 (parents) +1/8 (wife) will add up to more than available. But the truth is that the Qur'an does not specify what the parents and the wife will recieve if there are three daughters. The Qur'an states that the parents get 1/6 each if the deceased left a child. And the wife gets 1/8 if the deceased left a child. Both times it is singular, but in the proposed scenario, there are three daughters, not one.
Some confusion may have caused this misunderstanding because in some translations, the word walad (child) is mistranslated as children. But in most translations like Pickthall, Asad, Shakir, Daryabadi, Irving, etc. the word has been correctly translated in the singular form.

3. The second claim is that 1/3 (mother) + 1/4 (wife) + 2/3 (two sisters) also adds up to more than available. Again, one of the shares being used is not mentioned in the Qur'an. The number 2/3 is derived from verse 4:176, which speaks of a Kalalah, a man who leaves no descendants nor ascendants. In other words, the mother's share is not mentioned in this scenario. Verse 4:176 is for the deceased who does not have any children nor parents. So the problem is once again, confusing values from different scenarios.

4. One may also object that in the case of a deceased with no descendants nor ascendants, verse 4:12 appears to allocate 1/6 of the wealth to the brother and sister each (or 1/3 together), while verse 4:176 gives 2/3 to the same group in the same scenario. The first point that may be mentioned in response to this is that verse 4:12 speaks of a brother and a sister, while verse 4:176 speaks of two sisters and no brothers. So again, this is a confusion of two different cases. Secondly, there is a prevalent interpretation mentioned in the tafsir that verse 4:12 speaks of a brother and sister from the mother, while verse 4:176 speaks of full siblings. It is mentioned by Ibn Kathir commenting on verse 4:12:

Allah says,
(But has left a brother or a sister), meaning, from his mother's side, as some of the Salaf stated, including Sa`d bin Abi Waqqas. Qatadah reported that this is the view of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq.​

Hence, this was how it was explained by Prophet Muhammad to his companions, and his Sunnah is a source of rulings in Islam. Some commentators take the view that verse 4:12 gives instructions on the inheritance for others that the deceased may nominate.

5. The last point that needs to be mentioned here is in regards to the inheritance of women in comparison to men. Many may wonder why the womna recives half of that given to the man. The answer has been provided by muslim scholars. Ibn Kathir explains in his tafsir:

The people of Jahiliyyah used to give the males, but not the females, a share in the inheritance. Therefore, Allah commands that both males and females take a share in the inheritance, although the portion of the males is twice as much as that of the females. There is a distinction because men need money to spend on their dependants, commercial transactions, work and fulfillling their obligations. Consequently, men get twice the portion of the inheritance that females get.​

Dr. Zakir Naik further elaborates:

In Islam a woman has no financial obligation and the economical responsibility lies on the shoulders of the man. Before a woman is married it is the duty of the father or brother to look after the lodging, boarding, clothing and other financial requirements of the woman. After she is married it is the duty of the husband or the son. Islam holds the man financially responsible for fulfilling the needs of his family. In order to do be able to fulfill the responsibility the men get double the share of the inheritance. For example, if a man dies and after giving the shares of other relatives, if the children (i.e one son and one daughter) inherit Rs. One Hundred and Fifty Thousand, the son will inherit One Hundred Thousand rupees and the daughter only Fifty Thousand rupees. Out of the one hundred thousand which the son inherits, as his duty towards his family, he may have to spend on them almost the entire amount or say about eighty thousand and thus he has a small percentage of inheritance, say about twenty thousand, left for himself. On the other hand, the daughter, who inherits fifty thousand, is not bound to spend a single penny on anybody. She can keep the entire amount for herself. Would you prefer inheriting one hundred thousand rupees and spending eighty thousand from it, or inheriting fifty thousand rupees and having the entire amount to yourself?​

And an additional explanation is provided by Moiz Amjad:

The Qur'an says:
You know not who among your children and your parents are nearest to you in benefit. This is the law of Allah. Indeed Allah is wise, all knowing.

Obviously, the extent of help and co-operation which a person receives from his parents, children and other close relatives cannot, normally, be paralleled by any other association. Undoubtedly, the world has always considered the kins of a deceased as the rightful beneficiaries of the wealth that he leaves behind. But certain issues, in this regard, have always remained unresolved. For instance, who among the relatives is nearest with respect to the benefits he holds for the deceased, and how should the shares of inheritance be calculated on this basis. It is not that the human endeavour in this regard has fallen prey to lack of application, rather it is due to certain inherrent limitations of the human mind which have made this task beyond its reach. Love, hatred, prejudice and other emotions have made it very difficult for the human intellect to come to grips with this challenge. Consequently, the wise and the all knowing has Himself guided mankind in this regard to relieve them from the disorders which have originated and can originate on this account.

Thus, the basic principle on which the shares of the various relatives of the deceased have been assigned is the benefit that accrues or can accrue from these relations to the deceased.​

After having examined the claims, we find that they are built on misunderstandings. The Qur'an does not address the cases mentioned, and the reason is because the Qur'an gives the general details, while the Prophet Muhammad's teachings go in more detail in explaining the Qur'anic concepts. If the reader requires further clarification, they may examine the articles provided at the start.

cheers

 

[جوري]

Addendum.

Islam - The Quran's Inheritance (f)Law

Expert: Dr. Hussein Labib - 11/21/2005

Question
Quran 4:11 (Yusufali)

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, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.

Quran 4:12 (Yusufali)

In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. 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. 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; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.


Let us suppose that a man dies and leaves behind:

3 daughters
2 parents
1 wife
0 debts and legacies

According to the verses stated above these people would get the following shares:

3 daughters ---> 2/3 of the share
2 parents ---> 1/3 of the share (or 1/6 each)
1 wife ---> 1/8 of the share


Do the math: 2/3 + 1/3 + 1/8 = 9/8 = 1.125. The distribution of the property adds up to more than the available property

Answer
my dear imran,a primary school kid can calculate it very simply,also the example mentioned is partially wrong regarding the parents, the mother will inherit 1/6 and the father will take the rest.let us go to your example,assume that the money left is 48000$,the calculation will be as follow :
3 daughters 16/24{2/3} + the mother 4/24{1/6} + wife 3/24{1/8} + the father will take the rest of 24 shares = 1/24.
now each of the 24 shares equals 2000$,accordingly the daughters will inherit 32000${2/3 of 48000 $},the mother will inherit 8000${1/6 of 48000$},the wife will inherit 6000${1/8 of 48000$} and the father will inherit 2000${the rest of inheritance}.
best wishes.

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

OK so if you agree that some verses are abrogated that poses the question why wasn’t it right first time, God knows everything including the future and he can’t make mistakes?

This is of course assuming that abrogation means that a mistake was made, which isn't necessarily true. It isn't about it being "right" or "wrong". As I said before, as circumstances change, the revelations regarding them get abrogated with better-suited ones. Even though the revelations come from God, they are meant for people.

So if he didn’t destroy the original Bukhari (6:61:510) is not true and the original fraghments are still existence – so where are they?

Actually, in Bukhari 61:510, it says that the original copies were returned to Hafsa after they were copied, and then all the other copies were ordered to be burnt.

Where they are now is anyone's guess.

I believe I read somewhere that punctuation was added later to those old manuscripts.

What was added later (the diatrical marks for example), was to help those unfamilliar with the arabic text, to read it more correctly.

 

[جوري]

more on the matter as taught in basic mathematics in some U.S colleges

Islamic

Inheritance Mathematics

Description:

This lesson describes how a woman’s estate is divided among her beneficiaries according to Islamic inheritance law. The method involves adding and subtracting fractions which represent the parts of the woman’s estate, keeping in mind that sons receive twice as much as daughters, and a stranger’s share must be paid first.
Curriculum Objectives:

To reinforce the skills of fraction addition, subtraction and multiplication.
To introduce students to complex problem solving.
To expose students to a mathematical process from a non-European culture.
Key Words:

algebra
inheritance
fractions
problem solving
representations
Suggested Use:

Islamic Inheritance Mathematics could be used in a basic skills mathematics, prealgebra or algebra course to use complex problem solving to reinforce the concepts and skills of fraction addition, subtraction and multiplication.

ISLAMIC INHERITANCE

MATHEMATICS

A major Arab mathematician named Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi wrote an influential textbook in about 820 called Hisab al-jabr w’al-muqabala (Calculation by Restoration and Reduction) that is known today as the Algebra. This book was the starting point for Arab work in algebra, and it is credited for giving the subject its name. Al-Khwarizmi was probably born in Soviet Central Asia but he did most of his work in algebra in Baghdad, where he was an astronomer and head of the library at the House of Wisdom.
Al-Kwarizmi was a Muslim and the second half of his book Algebra contains problems about the Islamic law of inheritance. According to the law, when a woman dies her husband receives one-quarter of her estate, and the rest is divided among her children so that a son receives twice as much as a daughter. If the woman chooses to leave money to a stranger, the stranger cannot receive more than one-third of the estate without the approval of the heirs. If only some of the heirs approve, the approving heirs must pay the stranger out of their own shares the amount that exceeds one-third of the estate. Whether approved by all heirs or not, the stranger’s share must be paid before the rest is shared out among the heirs.
Here is an example problem from Al-Kwarizmi’s Algebra:
A woman dies leaving a husband, a son, and three daughters. She also leaves a bequest consisting of 1/8 + 1/7 of her estate to a stranger. She leaves $224,000. Calculate the shares of her estate that go to each of her beneficiaries.
Solution: The stranger receives 1/8 + 1/7 = 15/56 of the estate, leaving 41/56 to be shared out among the family.
The husband receives one-quarter of what remains, or 1/4 of 41/56 = 41/224.
The son and the three daughters receive their shares in the ratio 2:1:1:1 so the son’s share is two fifths of the estate after the stranger and husband have been given their bequests and each daughter’s share is one fifth. (2+1+1+1=5).
If the total estate is $224,000, the shares received by each beneficiary will be:
Stranger: 15/56 of $224,000 = $60,000.
Husband: 41/224 of $224,000 = $41,000.
Son: 2/5 of ($224,000 - 101,000) = $49,200.
Each daughter: 1/5 of ($224,000 - 101,000) = $24,600.
TOTAL = $224,000.

YOUR PROJECT:

1. Solve the following Islamic law inheritance problem.
A woman’s estate totals $72,000. She dies leaving a husband, two sons and two daughters. In her will, she leaves a bequest of 1/9 + 1/6 of her estate to a stranger. Calculate how much of her estate each of her beneficiaries will receive.
2. Write out all of your calculations.
3. Check to make sure your beneficiary sums equal the total estate.
References: Islamic Inheritance Mathematics

Gullberg, Jan. (1997). Mathematics: From the Birth of Numbers. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Joseph, George Gheverghese. (1991). The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics. London: Penguin Books.
Nelson, D., Joseph, G. and Williams, J. (1993). Multicultural Mathematics: Teaching Mathematics from a Global Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.



http://www.deltacollege.edu/dept/basicmath/Islamic.htm

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Don't take this as jugment, but If you are still wondering/asking "Why" you may no be ready then.

I expect you are quite right.

Peace

 

[Thinker]

Greetings Thinker,

Many of the points you raise have been addressed at length in other parts of the forum. I hope you will take the time to read such material.

Why does the Qur'an need to be explained:
http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/134279079-simple-book-easy-understand.html

.

Greetings respected adminstrator,

Thank you for your post I will take some time to read through the links.

And, thank you for not deleting my posts in this thread and on that subject I have noticed, over recent weeks, a sharp decline in the number of my posts being deleted I'd like to think that's because you and your colleagues have become to know and accept me as a genuine person and I'd like to thank you for that also.

Respect

 

[Thinker]

Answer
my dear imran,a primary school kid can calculate it very simply,also the example mentioned is partially wrong regarding the parents, the mother will inherit 1/6 and the father will take the rest.let us go to your example,assume that the money left is 48000$,the calculation will be as follow :
3 daughters 16/24{2/3} + the mother 4/24{1/6} + wife 3/24{1/8} + the father will take the rest of 24 shares = 1/24.
now each of the 24 shares equals 2000$,accordingly the daughters will inherit 32000${2/3 of 48000 $},the mother will inherit 8000${1/6 of 48000$},the wife will inherit 6000${1/8 of 48000$} and the father will inherit 2000${the rest of inheritance}.
best wishes.

Thank you Skye that's a much better answer than the earlier one which (forgive be but) I thought displayed a little anger.

The above answer appears to be coming from a scholar (not that I don't regard you as a scholar)? If so is it your opinion that this answer is or is not at odds with the answer given by the scholar in your post yesterday (the one with the list).

That scholar says the anomaly is answered as follows

The first major point to note is that there are two types of inheritors. The first category are those who have recieved a fixed inheritance, which includes the spouse and the parents. The second category includes those who take their share AFTER the shares of the first category are distributed. This includes siblings and children.

So if we understand this, we know that the parents and the wife would recive their amount, and the daughters would get a share of what remains. This explanation on its own solves the problem, because:
-1/3 for the parents together
-1/8 for the wife
-And for the daughters 2/3 of what remains = 2/3 of 13/24=13/36 of the total amount

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=473&section=indepth&subsection=Glorious Quran

 

[جوري]

Thank you Skye that's a much better answer than the earlier one which (forgive be but) I thought displayed a little anger.

The above answer appears to be coming from a scholar (not that I don't regard you as a scholar)? If so is it your opinion that this answer is or is not at odds with the answer given by the scholar in your post yesterday (the one with the list).

That scholar says the anomaly is answered as follows

The first major point to note is that there are two types of inheritors. The first category are those who have recieved a fixed inheritance, which includes the spouse and the parents. The second category includes those who take their share AFTER the shares of the first category are distributed. This includes siblings and children.

So if we understand this, we know that the parents and the wife would recive their amount, and the daughters would get a share of what remains. This explanation on its own solves the problem, because:
-1/3 for the parents together
-1/8 for the wife
-And for the daughters 2/3 of what remains = 2/3 of 13/24=13/36 of the total amount

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=473&section=indepth&subsection=Glorious Quran

Greetings.. Thanks for reading

I am not a scholar, one has to go to school to become a scholar in such matters. I might be a scholar in a different field but certainly not religion, that is why I am here so I can learn along with everyone else.

I had to consult with two people about the verse. But the above as explained by Br. Ansar and as you now understand is correct. There was a whole book of mathematics by
Abu Abdullah Muhammed ibn Musa al Khwarizmi - Mathematics and the ...

that deals in great depth with the topic of inheritance according to Islamic Jurisprudence and as you can you see from the previous link that it is also taught in American universities..

Not to be rude or anything but the hateful websites allegation that this isn't proper mathematics are hosted by Hindus and Christians whose only justification to man or cow worship is to find error in Islam where none exists!

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

Bs'd

How do we know that the Koran is true, and not the Jewish or Christian Bible, or the book of Mormon, or whatever other holy book of any religion?

this is a question i put to christians all the time when doing the da'wah stall (da'wah means invitation to islam) because they qoute the bible, we qoute the Quran.

how do we know which book is true when they differ on so many different matters?

many books claim to be the book of God, but how can we independently varify which is a true book of God and which not?

the book itself saying it is true is not in itself a proof, that is totally circular in reasoning. so we have to have something other than this.

so could we just see if we agree, the creator does not lie, the creator does not make mistakes. do we agree with these two ideas?

if we do then it becomes easier to varify which is the true book of God as it should therefore have no contradictions or mistakes in it.

If you accept that God writes books that would be one strategy. The problem with this is that many people do not accept that premise.

if a book claims to be the true book of God then it would therefore be without flaw or contradiction, as only God is perfect, only God is capable of writing a book without flaws.

This assumes that God is also not desiring to deceive people. What if God did desire to deceive people, then might he not write a book filled with errors or half truths? Or do you contend that God would never try to deceive people into believing something was true that was not in fact true?