MİRAS HUKUKU SİSTEMLERİNDE BİR İFLAS PROBLEMİ UYARLAMASI: İSLAM MİRAS HUKUKU ÖRNEĞİ

Öz

Bu makalede, İslam tarihinde yerleşik ve yaygın olarak kabul edilen kurallara başvurularak çözülemeyen bazı ünlü miras hukuku uyuşmazlıkları incelenmektedir. Bu uyuşmazlıklardaki miras problemleri, iflas problemleri olarak modellenmek üzere ele alınmıştır. Bahsi geçen problemleri çözen zamanın hukukçularının iyi bilinen uygulamaları toplanarak tahsis kuralları olarak tanımlanmış ve iflas problemi literatüründen ilgili problemlere uygulanabilir kurallarla karşılaştırması yapılmıştır. Son olarak, İslam tarihinde yaygın olarak kullanılan iki tane miras paylaşımının, iflas probleminde orantılı ve sıralı öncelik kurallarına denk olduğu gösterilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İflas problemi
• İslam miras hukuku
• tahsis kuralları
• aksiyomatik yaklaşım

AN APPLICATION OF BANKRUPTCY PROBLEM TO INHERITANCE LAW SYSTEMS: THE CASE OF ISLAMIC INHERITANCE

Öz

This article examines some famous inheritance law disputes that cannot be resolved by invoking preestablished and commonly accepted rules in Islamic history. Inheritance problems in these disputes are handled to be modeled as bankruptcy problems. The well-known practices of the early jurists that solved the aforementioned problems were collected and defined as allocation rules and compared with the rules applicable to the relevant problems from the bankruptcy problem literature. Finally, it has been shown that the two inheritance divisions commonly used in Islamic history are equivalent to proportional and sequential priority rules in the bankruptcy problem.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bankruptcy problem
• Islamic inheritance law
• allocation rules
• axiomatic approach

Kaynakça

1. Abdel-Wahab, S. E. (1962). Meaning and Structure of Law in Islam. Vand. L. Rev., 16, 115.
2. Ajetunmob, M. A. (1988). Collection and Review of Cases of Al-’awl (Pro-Rata Reduction) in Shari’ah Law of Succession. Islamic Studies, 27(3), 209–219.
3. Anderson, J. N. D. (1965). Recent reforms in the Islamic law of inheritance. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 14(2), 349–365. https://doi.org/10.1093/iclqaj/14.2.349
4. Aumann, R. J., & Maschler, M. (1985). Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud. Journal of Economic Theory, 36(2), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0531(85)90102-4
5. Ayres, I. (2002). Valuing modern contract scholarship. Yale LJ, 112, 881.
6. Bergantinos, G., & Moreno-Ternero, J. D. (2020). Sharing the revenues from broadcasting sport events. Management Science, 66(6), 2417-2431. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3313
7. Coulson, N. J. (1971). Succession in the Muslim Family. Cambridge University Press.
8. Dagan, N. (1996). New characterizations of old bankruptcy rules. Social Choice and Welfare, 13(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00179098

9. De Frutos, M. (1999). Coalitional manipulations in a bankruptcy problem. Review of Economic Design, 4(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100580050037
10. Englard, I. (2009). Corrective and Distributive Justice: from Aristotle to modern times. Oxford University Press.
11. Epstein, I. (1948). The Babylonian Talmud. London: Soncino Press.
12. Ertemel, S., & Kumar, R. (2018). Proportional rules for state contingent claims. International Journal of Game Theory, 47(1), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00182-017-0585-7
13. Chun, Y. (1988). The proportional solution for rights problems. Mathematical Social Sciences, 15(3), 231-246.
14. Chun, Y. (1999). Equivalence of axioms for bankruptcy problems. International Journal of Game Theory, 28(4), 511-520.
15. Gandz, S. (1938). The Algebra of Inheritance: A Rehabilitation of Al-Khuwarizmi. Osiris, 5, 319–391.
16. Ginsburgh, V., & Zang, I. (2001). Sharing the income of a museum pass program. Museum Management and Curatorship, 19(4), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647770100501904
17. Haleem, M. A. (Ed.). (2005). The Qur'an. OUP Oxford.
18. Herrero, C., & Villar, A. (2001). The three musketeers: Four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems. Mathematical Social Sciences, 42(3), 307–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(01)00075-0
19. Hirsch, A. J. (2004). Default rules in inheritance law: a problem in search of its context. Fordham L. Rev., 73, 1031.
20. Hougaard, J. L. (2009). An introduction to allocation rules. Springer Science & Business Media.
21. Jung, M. S. (1933). The Muslim law of inheritance. Allahabad Law Journal, 31(4), 17-30.
22. Kaminski, M. M. (2000). “Hydraulic” rationing. Mathematical Social Sciences, 40(2), 131–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4896(99)00045-1
23. Kelsen, H. (1959-1960). What is the pure theory of law. Tulane Law Review, 34(2), 269-276.
24. Khadduri, M. (1953). Nature and sources of Islamic law George Washington Law Review, 22(1), 3-23.
25. Maine, S. (1861). Ancient Law. Henry Holt and Company.
26. McCloud, A. B., & Abdal-Haqq, I. (2006). Understanding Islamic law: from classical to contemporary. Rowman Altamira.
27. Moulin, H. (1987). Equal or proportional division of a surplus, and other methods. International Journal of Game Theory, 16(3), 161–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01756289
28. Nash Jr, J. F. (1950). The bargaining problem. Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 155-162.
29. O'Neill, B. (1982). A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud. Mathematical Social Sciences., 2, 345-371.
30. Powers, D. S. (1993). The Islamic Inheritance System : A Socio-Historical Approach. Islamic Law and Society, 8(1), 13–29.
31. Pulido, M., Sánchez-Soriano, J., & Llorca, N. (2002). Game theory techniques for university management: An extended bankruptcy model. Annals of Operations Research, 109(1–4), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016395917734
32. Rabinovitch, Nachum. L. (1973). The historical perspective. In Probability and Statistical Inference in Ancient and Medieval Jewish Literature (pp. 152–169). University of Toronto Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3138/j.ctvcj2hxp.17
33. Sajawandi, S. A. M. I. M., Jones, W. & Rumsey, A. (1890) Al Sirajiyyah, or, the Mahommedan law of inheritance. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink. [Pdf] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/ltf91027047/.
34. Schacht, J. (1979). The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
35. Schick, S. E. (2006). Globalization, bankruptcy and the myth of the broken bench. American Bankruptcy Law Journal, 80(2), 219-260.
36. Souaiaia, A. (2004). On the Sources of Islamic Law and Practices. Journal of Law and Religion, 20(1), 123–147.
37. Thomson, W. (2019). How to Divide When There Isn't Enough: From Aristotle, the Talmud, and Maimonides to the Axiomatics of Resource Allocation (Econometric Society Monographs). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108161107
38. Tyabji, F. H. B. (1940). Muslim Law: The Personal Law of Muslims (p. 1056). http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Q2LXHAAACAAJ
39. van der Waerden, B. L. (1985). A History of Algebra From al-Khwārizmī to Emmy Noether. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-51599-6
40. Young, H. P. (1987). On Dividing an Amount According to Individual Claims or Liabilities. Mathematics of Operations Research, 12(3), 398–414. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3689973
41. Young, H. P. (1994). Equity In Theory and Practice. Princeton University Press.