in the same order that governs the agnate heirs. The other jurists who awarded them a share adopted the method of “substitution” (tanzīl): every uterine kinsman or kinswoman whose link to the deceased passes through a Qurʾānic sharer or an agnate is treated as standing in the very place of that intermediary.

Mālik and those who follow him argue that, because the shares of inheritance admit no scope for analogy, nothing new can be affirmed in this field except on the basis of a Qurʾānic verse, an established Sunna, or an undisputed consensus—and none of these, they maintain, is found in the present question.

The second group contend that their position is supported by the Qurʾān, the Sunna, and reasoning by analogy. Their Qurʾānic proofs are the Almighty’s words,

“and the relatives by womb…” (al-Anfāl 8:75),

and,

“Parents and close kindred…” (al-Nisāʾ 4:7).

They hold that the term “kindred” (qarāba) encompasses the uterine relatives, whereas the opposing party considers these verses to be restricted by the detailed inheritance passages.

As for the Sunna, they cite what al-Tirmidhī related from ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, who wrote to Abū ʿUbayda that the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—said:

“Allah and His Messenger are the patron of him who has no patron; and the maternal uncle inherits from him who has no other heir.”

By way of rational argument, the early companions of Abū Ḥanīfa said: uterine relatives have a stronger claim than the general body of Muslims, for they combine two causes—kinship and Islam—just as a full brother is preferred to a paternal brother; whoever possesses two causes outranks one who possesses only a single cause.

Abū Zayd and the later Ḥanafīs likened inheritance to custodianship, saying: because the duty of preparing the body, leading the funeral prayer, and burying the deceased devolves upon the uterine relatives in the absence of Qurʾānic sharers and agnates, the right to inherit should likewise devolve upon them. The first group raise objections to these analogies, but they are weak.

With this preliminarily settled, let us proceed to treat each category of heirs in turn, mentioning those questions that serve as foundational—whether unanimously agreed upon or disputed.

[Inheritance of the Direct Descendants]

The Muslims unanimously agree that when sons and daughters inherit together from their father or mother, the male receives the portion of two females; that a lone son takes the entire estate; that if only daughters inherit and there is a single daughter, she receives one-half; and that if there are three daughters or more, they collectively receive two-thirds. They differ, however, concerning two daughters: the majority hold that the two share two-thirds, whereas a report from Ibn ʿAbbās states, “Two daughters receive one-half.”

The cause of their disagreement is the ambiguity of the Almighty’s words:

“If there are only daughters, more than two, theirs is two-thirds of what he leaves” (al-Nisāʾ 4:11).

Should the unspoken ruling for exactly two daughters be aligned with the ruling for three, or with that for one? The more evident inference, on the basis of the implied meaning of the text, is that the two daughters follow either the ruling of three or that of one. It is further reported that the view most widely attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās actually concurs with the opinion of the majority, and another narration is attributed to ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAqīl