Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (11/234)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

then a full sister or a paternal half-sister inherits, as a residuary heir, whatever remains after the prescribed share of one daughter or more. That is, when daughters are joined by full sisters or paternal half-sisters, give the daughters their allotted share, and the remainder goes to the sisters as residuary heirs.

For example, if a deceased person leaves behind two daughters and two full sisters, the two daughters receive two-thirds, and the remainder goes to the full sisters as residuary heirs. If he leaves behind one daughter and one full sister, the daughter receives one-half, and the remainder goes to the full sister as a residuary heir.

In summary, whenever daughters inherit alongside full sisters, the full sisters are residuary heirs alongside another. Hence, the scholars say: “Sisters alongside daughters are residuary heirs,” though they are residuary heirs alongside another.

Accordingly, I say: the scholars—may Allah have mercy on them—have divided residuary heirs into three categories: residuary heirs in their own right, residuary heirs through another, and residuary heirs alongside another. Residuary heirs through another comprise four categories: daughters, sons’ daughters, full sisters, and paternal half-sisters, when accompanied by a male counterpart equal to them in degree and category. This is based on Allah’s saying: “Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male is a share equal to that of two females” [4:11]; and His saying: “And if they are brothers and sisters, male and female, then the male shall have the share of two females” [4:176].

Residuary heirs alongside another are only of two categories: full sisters and paternal half-sisters, alongside daughters or sons’ daughters. Why did the scholars distinguish between “through another” and “alongside another”? “Through another” is clear, because the preposition indicates causation: these women became residuary heirs because of others. As for “alongside another,” there is no causal agent, but there is companionship: full sisters are not made residuary heirs by daughters or by men; rather, they become residuary heirs through their association and accompaniment in the same inheritance case.

The residuary heir in his own right has a dedicated section, which will come, if Allah wills.

فالأخت الشقيقة أو لأب ترث بالتعصيب ما فضل عن فرض البنت فأزيد، يعني إذا اجتمع بنات وأخوات شقيقات أو أخوات لأب، فأعطِ البنات نصيبهن، والباقي للأخوات تعصيباً. مثال: هلك هالك عن بنتين وأختين شقيقتين، للبنتين الثلثان والباقي للأخوات الشقيقات تعصيباً. هلك عن بنت وأخت شقيقة، للبنت النصف والباقي للأخت الشقيقة تعصيباً، والحاصل أنه متى ورثت البنات ومعهنَّ أخوات شقيقات، فإن الأخوات الشقيقات يكن عصبة مع الغير، ولهذا يقولون: الأخوات مع البنات عصبات، لكن عصبة مع الغير. ومن هنا أقول: قسم العلماء ﵏ العصبة إلى عاصب بالنفس، وعاصب بالغير وعاصب مع الغير، العاصب بالغير أربعة: البنات وبنات الابن والأخوات الشقيقات والأخوات لأب مع ذكَر يساويهن درجة ووصفاً، لقوله تعالى: ﴿يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلَادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنْثَيَيْنِ﴾ [النساء: ١١] وقوله تعالى: ﴿وَإِنْ كَانُوا إِخْوَةً رِجَالاً وَنِسَاءً فَلِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنْثَيَيْنِ﴾ [النساء: ١٧٦]. العصبة مع الغير صنفان فقط: الأخوات الشقيقات، والأخوات لأب مع البنات أو بنات الابن، لماذا فرق العلماء بين «بالغير» و «مع الغير»؟ أما «بالغير» فواضح؛ لأن الباء للسببية، أي: كان هؤلاء النساء عصبة بسبب غيرهن، وأما «مع الغير» فليس هناك سبب، لكن هناك معية؛ لأن الأخوات الشقيقات لم يعصبهن بنات ولا رجال، لكن كن عصبة بالمصاحبة والمعية في مسألة واحدة. والعاصب بالنفس له باب معين سيأتي إن شاء الله.