From Ḥātim ibn ʿAbd Allāh and from Jābir it is related that

“the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—gave two daughters two-thirds of the estate.”

Abū ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-Barr—so I understand—and ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAqīl remark that a group of scholars accepted this ḥadīth, whereas others did not.

The basis of the general agreement on this matter is the Almighty’s word:

“Allah instructs you concerning your children: to the male a share equal to that of two females …”

and His saying in the same verse,

“But if she is a single daughter, hers is one-half” (al-Nisāʾ 4:11).

The scholars likewise concur that grandsons (the sons of sons) take the place of sons when no sons exist: they inherit as the sons would inherit and they exclude others as the sons would exclude—except for a report from Mujāhid, who held that a son’s son does not reduce the husband’s share from one-half to one-quarter, nor the wife’s from one-quarter to one-eighth, nor the mother’s from one-third to one-sixth, as an actual son does.

They also agree that granddaughters through a son receive nothing alongside direct daughters once the latter have completed the two-thirds. They differ, however, when granddaughters through a son are accompanied by a male grandson, whether he is on their same level or further removed.

The majority of the jurists of the provinces say that such a grandson turns the granddaughters into residuaries for whatever remains after the direct daughters’ shares; the remainder is then divided, the male receiving the share of two females. This was also the position of ʿAlī—may Allah be pleased with him—and Zayd ibn Thābit among the Companions.

Abū Thawr and Dāwūd maintain that once the daughters have taken the two-thirds, the residue belongs solely to the grandson, to the exclusion of the granddaughters, whether they are on his level, above him, or below him. Ibn Masʿūd used to say regarding this verse, “to the male a share equal to that of two females,” but if the women’s portion would exceed one-sixth, they are given only one-sixth.

The majority rely on the general wording of the Almighty’s statement cited above, reasoning that a descendant is, in meaning, a “child.” Moreover, since a son’s son renders those on his level residuaries in the whole estate, it follows that he should do so in whatever remains of the estate.

Dāwūd and Abū Thawr base their view on the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās that the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—said:

“Distribute the estate among those entitled to fixed shares according to the Book of Allah, and whatever remains goes to the closest male agnate.”

They further argue that, since a single granddaughter through a son receives no part of the residue beyond the two-thirds, she is even less entitled to it when accompanied by others.

The root of the disagreement is the clash of competing analogies and the different ways jurists weigh them. Ibn Masʿūd’s position rests on his principle that, because granddaughters through a son never inherit more than one-sixth in the absence of a direct son, they should not receive more than that in the presence of others. His argument is close to that of Dāwūd, whereas the majority maintain that a male descendant through a son renders them residuaries, whether he is on their level or further removed.