people in different ranks in its distribution. It is also reported that he said:

“If I live until next year, I shall surely make all people one class (1)—that is, a single category.”

Abū Bakr distributed the stipends equally, as did Alī, whereas Uthmān favored some over others. This is a matter of independent legal judgment. May the ruler favor some over others in distributing stipends when the public interest so requires? There are two positions on this question, both narrated from Ahmad. Equal distribution was the position chosen by Abū Hanīfa and al-Shāfi‘i, while differential distribution was Mālik’s position.

As for the claim, “Allah has made equal distribution obligatory,” no evidence was cited for it. Had evidence been cited, we would have discussed it, just as we discuss other matters of independent legal judgment. Those scholars who required equal distribution argued that Allah divided inheritance equally among members of the same category, without favoring anyone on account of a particular quality. Those who permitted differential distribution replied that inheritance is due by virtue of a qualifying cause, not in return for an action (2).

They also argued that “the Prophet—may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him—distributed the spoils equally among members of the same category: he allotted one share to a foot soldier and three shares to a horseman,” as is established in the two Sahih collections (3). This is the position of the majority: Mālik, al-Shāfi‘i, and Ahmad.

It has also been said: