Once it is understood that the children of some deceased persons inherit from them, whereas the children of others do not, and that the verse does not distinguish (1) between those whose heirs inherit from them and those whose heirs do not, nor specify the status of either the heir or the deceased, it becomes clear that the verse was not intended to explain that matter. Rather, it was intended to set out the entitlements of these persons when they qualify as heirs.

Accordingly (2), since the verse does not specify whose estate may be inherited or who may inherit it, it contains no indication as to whether [someone other than] (3) the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—inherits or is not inherited from (4). It follows, a fortiori, that it contains no indication that he himself may be inherited from.

The same principle applies to the Prophet’s words—peace and blessings be upon him:

“On that which is watered by rain, one-tenth is due; on that which is irrigated (5) by water-lifting wheels and water-drawing camels, half (6) of one-tenth is due” (7).

For if his purpose in this statement was to distinguish between cases in which one-tenth is due and those in which half of one-tenth is due, and not to explain which things are subject to either levy and which are subject to neither, then its general wording cannot, for this reason, be cited as evidence that zakāt is obligatory on vegetables.