in the same way. This is known from the custom and convention (1) established (2) in a speaker’s discourse, just as the meanings of words are known from the established usage (3) of the people who speak that language: they intend that particular meaning.

That being so, the Quran’s usage of the plural form of address varies: sometimes it includes the Messenger—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and sometimes it does not. It therefore does not follow that this particular passage includes him (4).

At most, the claimant can argue: “The basic principle is that the kāf suffix includes him,” just as he says: “The basic principle is that the rulings applicable to his community apply equally to him, and those applicable to him apply equally to his community, unless evidence establishes an exception.” It is well known that he had many rulings that applied exclusively to him and not to his community.

Ahl al-Sunnah maintain:

Among the rulings exclusive to him is that his estate is not inherited. Thus, one may no more deny that this ruling was exclusive to him than deny his being singled out (5) for all (6) his other distinctive rulings. One is, however, entitled to demand evidence that the ruling was exclusive to him. It is well known that the sound, widely transmitted—indeed, mass-transmitted—hadiths [from him] (7) affirming (8) that his estate is not inherited are of greater weight than the hadiths narrated concerning many of his distinctive rulings, such as his exclusive entitlement to property acquired without battle (9) and others.