namely three grandmothers: two through the father and one through the mother.

As for Ibn Masʿūd, his position rests on analogy, likening the additional grandmother to the paternal grandmother, yet the ḥadith contradicts that analogy.

The jurists then differed over whether the father excludes his own mother (the paternal grandmother). Zayd held that he does, and this was likewise the view of Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, Abū Ḥanīfah, and Dāʾūd. Others maintained that the grandmother inherits alongside her son; this is reported from ʿUmar, Ibn Masʿūd, and a number of Companions, and was adopted by Shurayḥ, ʿAṭāʾ, Ibn Sīrīn, Aḥmad, and the jurists of Egypt.

Those who exclude the grandmother by her son argue that, since the grandfather is barred by the father, the grandmother is even more entitled to be barred. They add that, just as the mother’s mother unanimously inherits nothing when the mother is present, so the father’s mother should receive nothing when the father is present.

The second group base themselves on what al-Shaʿbī narrates from Masrūq, from Ibn Masʿūd:
“The first grandmother to whom the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—gave one-sixth was a grandmother whose son was alive.”
They further reason that, since both the mother and the mother’s mother are reduced in their shares—but not totally excluded—by the presence of male descendants, the same principle should apply to all grandmothers.

It should be noted that Mālik differs from Zayd in only one inheritance case: a woman dies leaving a husband, a mother, uterine siblings, full siblings, and a grandfather. Mālik rules that the husband receives one-half, the mother one-sixth, and the grandfather the residue—namely one-third—while the full siblings receive nothing. Zayd, however, allocates the residue to the full siblings. Thus Mālik departs here from his own principle that the grandfather does not exclude full or paternal-half siblings, arguing that because the grandfather already excludes the uterine siblings from the third they would otherwise take, he has a stronger claim to that share than the full siblings. Zayd, by contrast, remains consistent with his principle that the grandfather does not exclude them.

Chapter on Exclusion (Ḥijb)

The scholars are unanimously agreed that:
• A full brother excludes a half-brother through the father.
• A half-brother through the father excludes the sons of a full brother.
• The sons of a full brother exclude the sons of a half-brother through the father.
• The sons of a half-brother through the father take precedence over the sons of a full nephew (the son of a full brother).
• The sons of a half-brother through the father take precedence over the paternal uncle.
• The son of a full paternal uncle takes precedence over the son of a paternal uncle who is related through the father only.
Each of these heirs excludes his own descendants, and whoever excludes a given category also excludes those whom that category would have excluded.

In brief, among siblings the nearer excludes the more remote; and when they are equally near, the one connected to the deceased through two links—mother and father—excludes the one connected through a single link, namely the father alone. The same principle applies to paternal uncles: the nearer of them excludes