with them when they cast their pens to decide which of them should be Mary’s guardian; nor were you with them when they disputed.” [Al ‘Imran: 44]

It is also mentioned in the sunnah in six instances, among them the Prophet’s saying: “If people knew the reward of the call to prayer and the first row, and could find no way to attain them except by drawing lots, they would draw lots for them.” (1)

His statement, “then the closest in inheritance,” means that if he has paid the Fitr charity for those among his dependants who take precedence, and he has an additional amount, he pays it on behalf of the one closest to him in inheritance. If they are equal in kinship, such as two full sisters, he draws lots between them. If they differ in their shares of inheritance, such as a maternal brother and a full brother, and he possesses only one saʿ, then—if we hold that he pays on their behalf in proportion to their maintenance—one-sixth would go to the maternal brother and the remainder to the full brother, since this is how they would inherit from him if he died leaving them behind. But if we give the maternal brother one-sixth and the full brother five-sixths, the obligatory charity would fall short of a full saʿ.

Therefore, lots are drawn between them, because zakat is a legislated act of worship whose legally prescribed measure is one saʿ. If we assigned five-sixths to one of them, it would not constitute a complete saʿ on his behalf; likewise, if we assigned one-sixth to the other, it would not constitute a complete saʿ on his behalf. Their joint entitlement here is one of competing claims, so lots are drawn between them, unlike the case of a slave, as will be discussed.

This is according to the less-preponderant view; according to the stronger view, this issue does not arise.

His statement, “then the closest in inheritance,” is not unrestricted; rather, it is qualified