Section

The rulings on these five cases involving the term “posterity” (ʿaqib) are exactly the same as those we have explained for the term “children” (walad), since no scholar distinguishes between the two terms in meaning. The shaykhs differed only concerning “descendants” (dhurriyya) and “progeny” (nasl). One view treats them like “children” and “posterity,” so that daughters’ children are not included under either term according to Mālik’s position. Another view includes them under both.

Ibn al-ʿAttār—may Allah have mercy on him—distinguished between “descendants” and “progeny.” He held that “progeny,” like “children” and “posterity,” does not include daughters’ children unless the founder says, “My progeny and my progeny’s progeny,” in keeping with his position on wording that specifies successive generations. We have already explained that this is not sound according to Mālik’s position. He held, however, that “descendants” includes daughters’ children, citing the words of Allah, Mighty and Majestic—whose word is truth:

“And among his descendants were David and Solomon” [al-Anʿām: 84],

continuing through to His words, “and Jesus.” Thus Allah counted Jesus among the descendants of Abraham—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—even though he descended through a daughter, since he had no father. This is a sound argument that a man’s daughter’s child is among his descendants. Yet one likewise says that such a child is among his progeny and his posterity, just as he is among his children, contrary to Ibn al-ʿAttār’s position on this matter. We have already explained Mālik’s grounds for excluding daughters’ children from an endowment extending through successive generations, despite their being among the children and posterity.

Some scholars held that a man’s daughter’s child is not among his descendants. They challenged the use of this verse as evidence that a daughter’s child is included among one’s descendants, arguing that, because Jesus—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—had no father, his mother took the place of both father and mother. He therefore belonged to the descendants of his maternal forefather Abraham—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—unlike others who have a father.

This is incorrect. If Jesus—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—was among the descendants of his maternal forefather through his mother alone, since he had no father, then other people are among the descendants of their maternal forefathers through their mothers, and among the descendants of their fathers and paternal forefathers through their fathers, since they have fathers. The fact that Jesus—peace be upon him—was created in his mother’s womb without intercourse with a man gives her no greater exclusive claim to him than that of a woman whose child Allah created in her womb through intercourse with a man, in accordance with the customary course He has established. Nor does a person’s belonging to the descendants of his father and paternal forefather, when he has a father, negate his belonging to the descendants of his maternal forefather by virtue of his mother’s having carried and given birth to him.