The Quranic Inheritance Law: The Case for a Gender-

Neutral Understanding
The Quranic Inheritance Law: The Case for a Gender-Neutral Understanding

By Abdur Rab* and Hasan Mahmud**

ABSTRACT.This paper examines afresh the particular Quranic inheritance provision that
the male heir should receive twice as much as the female counterpart. It reviews the
important exceptions the Quran itself makes to this provision, which emphatically suggests
that the stated discrimination against female heirs is not intrinsic to the very spirit of the
Quran. Further, the paper reviews the contributions made in recent years by a number of
Islamic scholars as well as the arguments put forward by the Feminists toward a gender-
neutral reinterpretation of the Quranic Law. It briefly observes modern development trends
where the female members of a mostly nuclear family share responsibilities equally with
their male partners. It concludes that the existing gender discrimination being continued in
inheritance has little justification to be perpetuated. Finally, the paper also briefly looks at
the record of progress (or lack of progress) made in some Muslim countries toward gender-
neutral treatment in inheritance matters.

INTRODUCTION

The Qurans guidance on the inheritance of wealth left by a deceased person begins with a
general direction that all surviving close male and female relatives have definite shares in the
inheritance, whether large or small (4:7). This is followed by a definite prescription that the
decedent should leave a living will or bequest (waeyya)
before death for his or her near
relatives:

2:180 It is prescribed for you that, should death approach any of you, if he leaves any
assets, it is best that he leave a bequest for his parents and near relatives according to
normal usage a truthful obligation (haq) on the part of the righteous. (See also 2:181-
182, 5:106-108)

However, the Quran leaves open the issue of how much one can bequeath to his or her surviving
heirs.[1]Three other verses provide specific guidance on the distribution of the remaining wealth
left by a decedent after accounting for any bequest made, any remaining debt of the decedent,
and other expenses such as funeral-related expenses. The Quran specifies exact shares for a
number of male and female heirs. The shares of other eligible heirs are determined either
residually or by applying the rule that the male heir gets twice as much as the corresponding
female heir. For the time, this prescribed inheritance law was a great advance from earlier times,
when the inheritance was mostly limited to the male agnate relatives of the deceased (aaba)
with preference for the nearest adult male. Women and minors were mostly deprived, and the
surviving parents, and the husband and half-brothers and sisters from the mothers side were also
excluded from the inheritance. The three verses that set out the inheritance rules are as follows:
 4:11 God commands you, with respect to your children, that the male shall inherit
the equivalent of the share of two females. If there are only females two or more,
then they should receive two-thirds of what he leaves; but if there is only one female,
she is entitled to one-half. To each of his parents, one-sixth of what he leaves, if he
has any children; but if he has no children, then his parents will inherit him, the
mother receiving one-third. But if he has any brothers (or sisters), then his mother
receives one-sixth. (The distribution in all cases) after any will he had made or any
debt he had incurred [is taken care of]. Your parents and your childrenyou know
not who of them is nearest to you in terms of benefit. A directive from God; God
surely is All-Aware, Wise.

4:12 In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if
they leave a child, you get a fourth; all after payment of legacies and debts. In what
you leave, their share is a fourth, if you leave no child; but if you leave a child, they
get an eighth; all 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 and or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they
share in a third; all after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to
any one). Thus is it ordained by God; and God is All-Aware, Most Forbearing.

4:176 They ask you for a legal decision. Say: God 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 does God make
clear to you (His law), lest you err. And God has knowledge of all things.

The provision for making a will before death provides a special opportunity for the dying person
to correct any possible imbalance that he or she might foresee and perceive in the application of
the specific inheritance rules and to accommodate special considerations for his or her near
relatives who are disadvantaged or for other poor people he or she may have in mind. The law of
inheritance prescribed by the Quran also provides for making a special accommodation for the
needs of the poor, including poor relatives at the time of inheritance distribution:

4:7-8 Men shall have a share in what parents and kinsfolk leave behind, and women
shall have a share in what parents and kinsfolk leave behind, whether it be little or much
a share ordained [by God]. And when at the time of ditribution (of inheritance),
relative, orphan, and the needy are preent, give them (out of the property) and peak
to them kindly.
The newly introduced Quranic rules of inheritance giving shares to wives, daughters, mothers,
and, in some cases, sisters constituted definite reforms of the existing patriarchal system. Yet,
from a modern point of view, the reforms did not go far enough. In this paper we focus
particularly on the stated rule of the Inheritance Law that gives the male heirs twice as much as it
gives to the corresponding female heirs. Since, the rules of this Law were drawn in a specific
socio-historical context, we need to consider whether these rules need to change in a vastly
different modern context.[2]

The traditional Muslim rules of inheritance are derived from the basic structure set out in the
Quran, which was then elaborated and systematised by the various madhhab[s], or schools of
law, through jurisprudential methods and interpretations. Many modern Muslim nation-states
have adapted these rules from one of the major Sunni or Shiite schools of law, have combined
rules from two or more different schools, or have created modern inheritance laws based loosely
on traditional jurisprudence but suited for modern realities. Because human interpretations have
played such a key role in shaping both the traditional inheritance rules and the modern
codifications of inheritance laws, the standard articulation of these rules cannot be considered
divinely revealed Sharia, but rather man-made fiqh.[3]

The first thing to note about the traditional position on the inheritance issue is that it is not a
unified position. There are some perceptible differences between the Sunni and Shia positions on
how the bequests and distribution of inheritance shares are to be made. Both the Sunni and Shia
schools of law limit the bequests to one third of the inheritance. However, for bequests to be
made to any heir, the Sunni schools require consent of all other heirs, while the majority Jaafari
Shia school does not require such consent. With regard to the distribution of inheritance shares
among the heirs, there is an important difference in the Sunni and Jaafari school of Shia laws
when the heir is only a daughter (or when the heirs are daughters). In Sunni schools, the daughter
gets one half of the property, and the other half goes to the brothers of the deceased. In the case
of two or more daughters, they get two thirds of the inheritance and the remaining one third goes
to the brothers of the deceased. In the Jaafari school of Shia laws, the daughter gets (or the
daughters get) the full property. There are other differences between the Sunni and Shia schools
and among even the Sunni schools. But these are outside the purview of this paper.

FEATURES OF THE INHERITANCE LAW THAT REQUIRE SPECIAL ATTENTION

The Quran-prescribed inheritance law provides for, with some exceptions, dividing the property
left behind by a person on death according to the rule that the male heir gets twice as much as the
corresponding female heir. This rule is required to be observed in the following cases:

1. In the case of son(s) and daughter(s), when the deceased leaves behind children of mixed
gender (4:11);

2. In the case of parents, when the deceased has no surviving children but has surviving one
parent or two parents (4:11);

3. In the case of the surviving male or female spouse (4:12); and

4. In the case when the deceased has no descendant or ascendant heirs, but has brothers and
sisters (from the fathers side) (4:176).

Two important exceptions made to the above rule are worth noting:

In the case when only parents (both or one) survive along with the deceaseds children, each
parent gets one sixth of the inheritance; if only one parent survives, he or she gets one sixth. The
rest goes to the children. (4:11)

In the case when the deceased has no descendant or ascendant heirs, but has a uterine brother
or a sister (from the same mother with different fathers), each one equally shares one sixth of the
inheritance; if they are more than two, they share equally in a third (4:12).[4]

Another exceptional, rather anomalous, case arises in a situation where a woman dies leaving
behind her husband and both parents as the only heirs. In this case, the husband gets his one-half
share, and if the mother gets her given share of 1/3rd (4:11), there is only 1/6th left for the father to
share as a residuary. Here a strict literal interpretation of the verse position leads to an anomaly
that, instead of the male getting twice as much as the corresponding female, yields an opposite
result of the male getting half of what the female gets. This vividly illustrates the limitation of a
strict literal interpretation of the inheritance rules in all cases.[5]

The exceptions made in the Inheritance Law suggest that the distinction made in general
between male and female heirs giving the former double the share of the latter is not essentially
inherent in the Quranic Law itself. The provision giving preference to the male over the female
rather responds to the particular socio-economic milieu of the time when the husband took full
socio-economic responsibility to support the wife and the family as a whole. If this situation
changes, then there must be room for changes in the rules of the Inheritance Law. This is what
we discuss below in more detail.

THE CASE FOR A GENDER-NEUTRAL UNDERSTANDING IN THE MODERN

CONTEXT

On a close reading of the Qurans provisions about the inheritance rights of the surviving
relatives of a deceased person, one important conclusion that emerges is that the overall intention
or direction of the Quran was to ameliorate the financial conditions of the decedents relatively
weaker and more disadvantaged relatives, according them greater shares of his or her inheritable
property. The direction is definitely egalitarian. The Inheritance Law, even in its existing textual
content, provides ample scope for carrying out any desired reform by appropriately using the
existing provisions of the directive for a living will and for distributing part of the property left
by the decedent to the poor relatives and other deserving people. The Qurans overall egalitarian
approach or direction is worth more attention than the actual extent of such reforms indicated in
the shares of the Inheritance Law, which were nonetheless quite remarkable in a seventh century
context. What is important to note is that these reforms were grafted onto an existing
predominantly patriarchal legal system.
Another point to note, one that has been well emphasized by noted modernist scholar late Fazlur
Rahman (1919-1988), is that Muslims need to pay attention to the major sociomoral objecives of
the Quran, which are the moral conduct of man and the establishment of an order of
socioeconomic justice and essential human egalitarianism.[6]With changing time and context,
human perceptions of what constitute justice also change. Even though the Quran did not declare
an outright ban on human slavery, no sane person would say today that we should have slavery in
our modern society.

Also, since the inheritance rules are not an isolated aspect of family laws, possible further
reforms of these rules need to be addressed as part of, and in conjunction with, overall family
law reforms. While reforms on other fronts such as marriage, divorce, social and political rights,
etc., have made appreciable progress in a number of Muslim countries in recent years, there is
not much discernible progress in inheritance reform in these countries.

Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (1292-1350), a thirteenth century jurist and a great reformer of his time
was much ahead of his time when he said, Any rule that departs from justice to injustice, from
kindness to harshness, from the common good to harm, or from rationality to absurdity cannot be
part of [true] Sharia.[7]The modern family law reform agenda has progressed along two lines
one is the feminist movement within the Islamic tradition itself and the other is a logical
extension of the progress in secular liberal ideas leading to widespread recognition and
acceptance of human freedom, human rights, and gender equality. As a book edited by
contemporary feminist scholar Ziba Mir-Hosseini et. al. aptly puts it, Gender equality is a
modern ideal, which has only recently, with the expansion of human rights and feminist
discourses, become inherent to the generally accepted conceptions of justice.[8]Mir-Hosseini
continues, Contemporary notions of justice informed by the ideals of human rights, equality and
personal freedom depart substantially from those that underpin rulings in classical fiqh (Islamic
jurisprudence) and established understandings of the Sharia. This disjunction is a central
problem that permeates debates and struggles for an egalitarian family law in Muslim
countries.[9]

Two recent reform pieces one a book Women in the Sharia and Our Society (1930) by
Tunisian religious reform thinker al-Tahir al-Haddad (1899-1935) and the other an article The
Status of Women in Islam: A Modernist Interpretation (1982) by Pakistani-American scholar
Fazlur Rahman, both declared heretical by conservative clerics, lay the groundwork for an
egalitarian family law. [A]l-Haddad argues for legal equality for women in all areas, including
in inheritance. According to him, the Qurans assignment of a lesser share for women was due
to the conditions of the time; it was a concession to the social order. But here again equality is
the principle and when we look closely, we find that,[10]

Islam did not allocate a lesser share to a woman compared to that of man as a principle
applicable to all cases. It gave the same share to her in the case of parents inheriting from
their dead son when there is a male child and if it involves blood siblings[11]
Al-Haddads ideas helped shape a reformed Tunisian family law, codified in 1956. Fazlur
Rahmans ideas helped shape the feminist scholarship in Islam. As mentioned before, he based
his argument on the Qurans direction for immutable moral principles, which show us how to
establish a society on earth where all humans can be treated as equals as they are all equal in the
eyes of God. This is at once the challenge and the purpose of human existence, the trust
amana that humanity accepted at creation.[12]Rahman contends that the specific legal rules
of the Quran are conditioned by the socio-historical background of their enactment and what is
eternal therein is the social objectives or moral principles explicitly stated or strongly implied in
that legislation. This would, then, clear the way for further legislation in the light of those social
objectives or moral principles.[13]He further notes that legal reform can only be effective in
changing the status of women in Muslim contexts when there is an adequate basis for social
change; otherwise its success will be limited, transitory or confined to certain social groups.[14]

Building on the work of these and other earlier Muslim thinkers such as Muhammad Abduh and
Muhammad Iqbal, a whole new generation of progressive Muslim scholars such as Mohammad
Arkoun, Khaled Abou El Fadl, Muhammad Shahrur, Nasr Abu Zayd, Amina Wadud, Mohammad
Mojtahed Shabestari, Abdolkarim Soroush, Ziba Mir-Hosseini, and the former leader of the
Sisters in IslamZainah Anwar reengages the Quran from a perspective that was sorely lacking in
the classical Islamic scholarship. Their contributions inform, and lead to, a gender-neutral,
feminist movement in Islam. They think that the moral teachings of the Quran do not really
discriminate against women and that the verses that assign greater rights to men [] reflect a
patriarchal context in which men were dominant and solely responsible for supporting
women.[15]It is, therefore, imperative that the rules we apply serve the basic objectives of the
law.

The traditional position on the inheritance rules makes a first major violation of the Quranic
direction on bequests. While the Quran urges us to bequeath from the inheritance to parents and
next of kin, the Sunni and Shia scholars limit such bequests to a maximum of one third of the
inheritance and the Sunni scholars require consent of all heirs for such bequests to any heir. Also,
as noted contemporary Syrian Muslim scholar Muhammad Shahrur, a strong critic of the
traditional scholarship, questions the widespread belief that no testament shall invalidate an
heirs right, which, he points out, basically disrespects a proper bequest and unfairly prioritizes
strict inheritance rules. He continues, the Quran, on the other hand, mandates and prioritizes
such bequeathing before death, taking necessary testimony (2:180-182, 240; 5:106-108). He
further points out that the Qurans mandate for bequeathing before death is shown as imperative
as performing other religious activities such as alat, fasting and pilgrimage.[16]

As Khaled Abou El Fadl aptly points out, the ultimate objective of the law is to ensure justice,
mercy and compassion in society.[17]He rightly puts it, men and women equally qualify for
Gods grace and reward. The authority given to men over women is not because they are men but
because, in a particular historical context, men financially provided for women. But if the
circumstances change, and women share financial responsibility with men, authority must be
equally shared between the two as well.[18][T]he rules of law that apply to women, as Abou
El Fadl aptly notes, should not be regarded as static and unchanging. The Islamic law has to
keep changing forward to achieve the moral objectives expressed in the Quran. To achieve
justice, there has to be a constant effort to achieve a more authentic proportionality between the
duties and rights of Muslim women. So, for instance, if within the social dynamics of time,
women carry a financial responsibility equal to [that of] men, it is more consistent with Sharia
to allow women an equal share to men in inheritance.[19]

Muhammad Shahrur also rejects the rigidly defined inheritance rules given by the traditional
scholars. He has come out with a groundbreaking interpretation of the Quranic laws, which also
provides accommodation for treating males and females equally in respect of inheritance. He
maintains that the Quran should be read and understood in relation to ever changing socio-
cultural realities. He wants us to understand the Quranic laws in terms of what he calls the
theory of limits (hudud), which means that the Quranic laws set limits within which societies
with sociocultural diversity can set their own rules or laws. The theory of limits, according to
Shahrur, allows flexibility in regulating various Quranic laws, including inheritance, according to
sociocultural diversity. Thus the inheritance share of a male heir could vary within the upper
limit of twice the female share and the female share could be higher than the lower limit of one
half of the male share, this depending on the particular sociocultural context.[20]

In the modern age, women often need to work side by side with men to either support herself or
to contribute to supporting the family. And it is also important to consider the fact that in many
cases, even if women are qualified, they are unable to take any paying jobs on top of taking
proper care of their children and of the family as a whole. In such cases, it will only be in the
fitness of things that we appropriately impute the nonmonetary contribution of the wife to the
overall service for the family in monetary terms. If we do this, it might well be the case that the
wife shoulders a larger share of the overall family responsibility than the husband. Thus whether
wives work or not may not be the dominant issue. The dominant issue is how both husband and
wife share the overall responsibility of maintaining and supporting the family as a whole. From
this point of view, it is imperative that no distinction be made in the shares of inheritance
between male and female heirs.

We also need to take into account the progress modern civilization has made toward recognition
of genuine womens rights and gender equality in all spheres of life. The modern idea of gender
equality has become inherent to the global conceptions of justice and has gained recognition
through the adoption by the United Nations of two historic instruments The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted in 1948 and The Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) adopted in 1979. Most Muslim-
majority countries, including Egypt, Iran and Pakistan, signed the UDHR. Saudi Arabia did not
sign, objecting that it was not Sharia-compliant. Since it came into force in 1981, [the] CEDAW
has been ratified by all Muslim states except Iran, Qatar, Somalia and Sudan, though, in most
cases, ratification has been subject to Islamic reservationsa notion that speaks of unresolved
tensions between [the] CEDAW and Islamic legal theory.[21]

Muslim countries now accord equal political rights, including equal voting rights, to men and
women. Saudi Arabia is the only Muslim country where women had no political rights until just
recently, even though womens literacy rate is high at or above 70 percent. Women today do not
lag much behind men in education[22]and their participation rates in the public workplace are
quite respectable in many Muslim countries[23]. There are variations among Muslim countries.
Egyptian women are well educated and hold responsible professional positions in virtually every
sector. Algerian women comprise sixty percent of university students, seventy percent of lawyers
and sixty percent of judges, and dominate the medical profession.[24]In other Muslim countries,
women not only enjoy the voting right, but they can also run for political offices and become
members of parliament. Several Muslim countries such as Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, and
Bangladesh have or had women as heads or deputy heads of government. Today, women in many
Muslim countries work as engineers, doctors, scientists, teachers, and lawyers alongside their
male colleagues.[25]As Reda Zaireg (translator Pascale el-Khouri) puts it, while discussing the
Moroccan case, Islamic law governing inheritance has been drawn taking into consideration the
extended family model, which has now disappeared and been replaced with the nuclear family
model. Moreover, men before had to meet the needs of the women of their clan, but nowadays
they no longer have a monopoly over family finances.[26]In such scenarios, the current
discrimination between males and females in sharing inheritance would clearly appear out of
date.

It is striking that the conservative segments of society still cling to the old ideas even when their
well respected patron Abul Ala Mawdudi strongly favors, and calls for, updating the Sharia Law
through the interpretation of the principle of Islamic theology and law in the light of the
changed conditions (ijtihad).[27]As feminist leader Zainah Anwar aptly puts it:

For too long, Muslim women who demanded reform to discriminatory laws and practices
have been told, this is Gods law and therefore not open to negotiation and change. []
Evidently, the problem is not with Islam. It is the position that men in authority take in
order to preserve their privilege. [] To conflate patriarchal laws and practices is nothing
more than tactical power play.[28]

THE CONSERVATIVE CLERICS DEFENSE OF THE STATUS QUO

IS UNTENABLE

The conservative religious scholars have their own arguments to fiercely oppose any change in
the Qurans inheritance rules. They resist any change in inheritance rules on the ground that
Gods word prevails for all times and all places. However, as we have seen above, many
modernist Muslim scholars, including even their mentor Abul Ala Mawdudi, have refuted this
argument saying that the Quran needs reinterpretation in the context of changing reality. Also,
their argument is seriously flawed since they fail to recognize the vital difference between the
moral objectives and principles of the Quran that should not change and those aspects that
require constant updating to keep up with the moral intent of the Quran.

A second argument the traditional ulama use is that a woman inherits a half-share only in four
cases, compared with more than thirty cases in which she inherits a more share. However, the
irony of this argument is that it has virtually no teeth, since it is precisely these four cases that
make up the most frequent cases in reality.
Also, there had been historical precedents of updating many Islamic laws during the times of the
Prophet himself and Caliph Umar, which the ulama cannot deny.

PROGRESS OF INHERITANCE REFORM IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES:

SOME EXAMPLES

Whatever little information is available suggests that[29]there has been very limited progress
made in inheritance reform in Muslim countries, even though notable progress has been made in
recent years in a number of countries in other aspects of family laws that address existing
discrimination against women in marriage and divorce.[30]Progress on the inheritance front has
been either blocked or stalled in most Muslim countries due to the official use of the Sharia Law
in many countries, use of a dual legal system of both secular and Sharia laws, with the Sharia
Law applied to deal with family matters, and stiff resistance from traditional Muslim clerics.
Many majority Muslim countries have a dual [legal] system in which the government is secular
but Muslims can choose to bring familial and financial disputes to sharia courts. The exact
jurisdiction of these courts varies from country to country, but usually includes marriage,
divorce, inheritance, and guardianship.[31]Sharia courts operating in the United Kingdom are
allowed to settle cases brought to them by resident Muslims. The limited progress in inheritance
reform seems due also, in part, to a lack of clarity in United Nations human rights agreements of
the UDHR and the CEDAW with respect to addressing gender disparity in the Muslim
inheritance law and shortcomings in their follow-up of implementation in different signatory-
countries. Spotty progress in inheritance law reform in some countries is noted as follows.

Turkey.Turkey remains a model for other Muslim countries. In 1926, Kemal Ataturk introduced
sweeping reforms, replacing the Sharia Law with the Swiss civil code, and gave a status and
rights to women equivalent to those of men. Legal equality between the genders was instituted
between 1926-1934 with changes in a multitude of rules and regulations. [] The equal rights
provided by the Swiss Code covered the areas of [] marriage, divorce, custody, and
inheritance.[32]Remarkably, the Turkish revolutionary reforms in family reforms came well in
advance of the UN-adopted human rights agreements. There was a relative decline in the status
of women after 2002 when a moderately religion-friendly government came into power. Some
reforms in the family laws such as those relating to monogamy and child marriage got reversed
in their implementation, especially in the rural areas. However, the Ataturk-time inheritance
reforms remain intact.

Somalia.Somalia is another example where the inheritance rules are completely gender-neutral.
Male or female children, or grandchildren in the event of no surviving children, get equal shares.
In the event of no surviving children and no surviving spouse, the surviving one parent inherits
the whole estate and it is divided equally between both living parents. With a surviving spouse
and both parents, the spouse gets one half and each parent gets one fourth. With children or
grandchildren, each parent gets one sixth of the inheritance. With no children or grandchildren,
the widow or the widower gets one half of the inheritance; with children or grandchildren, he or
she gets one fourth. Similar equality is maintained also in the case of only surviving siblings,
whether full or half.[33]
Tunisia.Thanks to the ideas of the Tunisian reformist scholar al-Tahir al-Haddad, Tunisia became
a frontliner in the Arab world in carrying out family law reforms. The reforms came through the
promulgation of a Tunisian Code of Personal Status in 1956, which formed the basis for
addressing gender discrimination in a wide array of areas such as access to justice, laws ensuring
gender equality in marriage and divorce, freedom of movement, freedom from gender-based
violence, and social, political and economic rights. However, even though a second wave of
reforms was carried out in the 1990s under the influence of women activists, strikingly, the issue
of unequal inheritance among male and female heirs still remains unaddressed.[34]Even though
a new state constitution adopted in January last year enshrines gender equality, inheritance rules
have remained as patriarchal as before under the Sharia-following Ennahda government. A new
government defeating the Ennahda party has come into power in October last year, which paves
the way for new legislation in the direction of ensuring equal inheritance rights for male and
female heirs.

Morocco.Morocco started late in reforming family laws. A family code (Mudawana Morocco
Personal Status Code) adopted in 2004, though less ambitious than in the Tunisian case, was
hailed by womens rights groups as a big step forward. In 2011, the country passed a new
constitution guaranteeing gender equality. Even so, Moroccan women say that equality is still a
long way off, and much of the old order remains untouched, including the inheritance law section
of the family code.[35]But there is a growing pressure for change. In the current situation of
Morocco, men are no longer the head of the households; women provide for the family or at
least contribute in a significant manner.

Indonesia.A country with the largest Muslim population, Indonesia presents a fascinating case
where efforts to push women-friendly reforms are having little impact due to the opposition from
conservative forces. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Indonesia brought out a Kompilasi
Hukum Islam (Compilation of Islamic Laws). During this compilation, the Governments
Religion Minister proposed to equalize inheritance between men and women to bring it into line
with Indonesian adat, or customary law, and Southeast Asian social realities, and the progressive
ideas of some Indonesian scholars. However, this proposal was nipped in the bud before it could
be actually outlined in a formal draft due to resistance from the conservative clerics. One
important piece of gender-neutral inheritance reform introduced by an Indonesian Supreme Court
decision in 1994 was that a male or a female child of the decedent could exclude collaterals. The
court made this landmark decision by interpreting walad in Qurans verse 4:176 to mean both
male and female children.[36]This was an important theological interpretation that can support
future gender-neutral reform in Indonesia and also in other countries.

Even though Indonesian law code marginalizes women, it nevertheless embraces some women-
friendly reforms in marriage and divorce areas. In 2003, the Religious Affairs Ministry
formulated a document The Counter Legal Draft of the Islamic Code of Law based on a
critical analysis of the existing law code. This document offers a promising future for gender-
neutral reforms, putting emphasis on human rights, advocating gender equality, and voicing
humanistic, pluralistic, and democratic views of Islam.[37]
Egypt. In a landmark development in 2000 and in a sharp break with the past, Egypt introduced
some reforms in family laws, granting certain rights to women to divorce unilaterally.[38]A
legislation in 2007 outlawed also female genital mutilation. Insofar as the inheritance issue is
concerned, two noticeable changes were made in the Sharia Law. First, grandchildren, both male
and female, are included as legitimate heirs up to one third of the inheritance. Second, the
bequest has been made mandatory up to one third of the inheritance.[39]

Pakistan. An ordinance promulgated in 1961 by President Ayub Khan made some noticeable
reforms in family laws relating to marriage and divorce such as banning child marriage, setting
minimum marriageable ages for boys and girls, requiring marriage registration, and subjecting
polygyny to certain conditions, including requiring first wifes consent and authorization by an
arbitration council. The only visible reform in the inheritance area was to recognize the
inheritance rights of orphaned grandchildren. Gender-neutral reforms look a remote possibility in
the current situation where politically powerful conservative forces are wielding a major
influence, even though the government is a signatory to the CEDAW.

Bangladesh.Relative to its South Asian peers, Bangladeshs achievement in recent about two
decades in some social development indicators such as education and health has been
spectacular, which, importantly, includes elimination of gender disparity in primary and
secondary school enrollments and near achievement of basic universal education.[40]The
governments stance since the time of the countrys liberation from Pakistan in 1971 has been
essentially secular. Article 28 (2)of its constitution professes gender equality in all spheres of
the State and of public life. The secular stance has been somewhat undermined, during the rules
of two dictators in 1977 and 1988, when it embodies the declaration that the State is Islamic.
Such a provision has given scope for the conservative ulama to weigh in on matters especially
relating to family laws and inheritance.

The 1961 ordinance promulgated during the time when Bangladesh was part of undivided
Pakistan, embraces certain family law reforms as mentioned above in the Pakistan case.
However, in a stark contrast to Bangladeshs advance on the social development front, the
implementation of family law reforms has been rather very limited, due primarily to the
influence of the conservative clerics, except in the case of the ban on child marriage. In the
inheritance case, the only improvement is the inclusion of orphaned grandchildren as heirs.
However, as a signatory to the CEDAW, the government is committed to establishing gender
equality by removing all forms of existing discrimination against women. Recently the
government proceeded to take some cautious steps towards gender-neutral inheritance, but
stepped back in the face of strong resistance from the religious clerics. However, given the
growing public opinion toward reform amid general socioeconomic development, the future
seems to be on the side of reform.

CONCLUSION
Though the Quran generally provides for division of inherited property among surviving children
and near relatives according to the rule that the male heir should get twice the share of the
corresponding female heir, many modern scholars have convincingly demonstrated that this rule
is now out of date. This rule is rooted in a socio-cultural environment where man is the only
caretaker of the family. In todays context, when women are equally sharing with men the burden
of supporting a family both monetarily and non-monetarily, this unequal gender treatment is
clearly untenable. The nonmonetary contribution of women to a family has long been
overlooked. The spirit of the Quran was never meant to promote gender inequality. Its text
contains important exceptions that accord equal treatment to the male and female heirs. The
stated discrimination against female heirs was predicated solely on the premise that man is the
sole breadwinner and supporter of the family. That premise is no longer applicable in the modern
context. The adoption of the human rights instruments such as the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR, 1948) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979) also underpins the case for establishing equal
gender treatment in the inheritance case.

A number of Muslim countries have made noticeable progress in removing discrimination

against women in family laws that relate mainly to marriage and divorce issues. However,
progress in reform in the inheritance area remains muted and confined to only a very few
countries. Addressing this issue of inheritance is still considered taboo and presents a formidable
challenge in many Muslim countries due to continuation of the Sharia Law and in the face of
fierce opposition from the conservative Muslim clerics. Yet, change is possible and change is
taking place in some countries toward gender nondiscrimination, especially since many Muslim
countries are signatories to the United Nations agreements and since the state constitutions of
many of these countries have provisions that envisage gender-neutral treatment in all matters.

__________________________________________

*Abdur Rab is the author of Redicovering Genuine Ilam: The Cae for a Quran-Only
Undertanding, the third succeeding two earlier editions, which were highly endorsedby eminent
Muslim scholars. His articles on select Islamic topics have appeared on World Religion News,
Aslan Media, and Oped News, and include one presentedto a conference at Princeton University.
Follow Abdur Rab at https://twitter.com/AbdurRAB11.

**Hasan Mahmud is Member of Advisory Body, World Muslim Congress, General Secretary,
Muslims Facing Tomorrow, Canada, and the author of Sharia Ki Bole, Amra Ki Kori (in Bangla)
being translated into English as How Sharia Hijacked Ilam (tentative title) forthcoming and
three movie-dramas (the making of a fourth one is in progress, all in Bangla with English
subtitles) that highlight the problems with the Sharia Law

References and end notes can be seen at www.hasanmahmud.com