Where the four schools stand
Agreed. No — not as an heir. Grandchildren through a son step into a son’s place only when there is no son left; if even one uncle survives, they take nothing by inheritance. The Kuwaiti Mawsu’a states it as the first application of the law of exclusion — “a son’s son is excluded by the son, or by a nearer son’s son” — and footnotes that sentence to one book of each of the four schools. Reading those four confirms it. Ibn ‘Abidin states the principle and gives this as its example: “one who is connected to the deceased through another person does not inherit alongside him — as a son’s son does not inherit alongside the son”. al-Baji quotes Malik verbatim: the sons’ children stand exactly in the children’s place when there is no child, and “if the deceased’s own children and a son’s children come together, and there is a male among the deceased’s own children, then NO ONE of the son’s children inherits anything alongside him”. al-Shirbini: “the son’s son is excluded by nobody except the son, or a nearer son’s son”. al-Buhuti sets out the agnatic order — “the nearest of them is the son, then his son however far down” — and the rule that the nearer “drops whoever is further”, on the hadith “to the nearest male”. Ibn Qudama goes further and reports consensus on the correlative rule for granddaughters: “the scholars are agreed that a son’s daughters stand in the daughters’ place IN THEIR ABSENCE”, and where there are daughters, “the daughters take two thirds and the son’s daughters get nothing”. The textual root is the same in every school: the Qur’an apportions to “your children”, and al-Bukhari titles his chapter “the inheritance of a son’s son when there is no son”, citing Zayd b. Thabit — sons’ children stand in a child’s place “when there is no male child below them”. We checked this point; the schools do not differ on it.
Shared evidence: al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, entry “Hajb” §3 — “fa-ibnu al-ibni yahjubuhu al-ibnu aw ibnu ibnin aqrabu minhu”, footnoted to Ibn ‘Abidin (Hanafi), al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyya (Maliki), Mughni al-Muhtaj (Shafi’i) and al-Mughni (Hanbali) · Hanafi — Ibn ‘Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar, fasl fi’l-hajb: “anna man adla bi-shakhsin la yarithu ma‘ahu — ka-ibni al-ibni la yarithu ma‘a al-ibn” · Maliki — al-Baji, al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’, quoting Malik: “fa-in ijtama‘a al-waladu li’l-sulbi wa waladu al-ibni fa-kana fi waladi al-sulbi dhakarun fa-innahu la miratha ma‘ahu li-ahadin min waladi al-ibn” · Shafi’i — Mughni al-Muhtaj, fasl fi’l-hajb: “wa ibnu al-ibni la yahjubuhu illa al-ibnu aw ibnu ibnin aqrabu minhu” · Hanbali — al-Mughni, mas’ala 4818: “ajma‘a ahlu al-‘ilmi ‘ala anna banati al-ibni bi-manzilati al-banati ‘inda ‘adamihinna”, and 4819: with daughters present “laysa li-banati al-ibni shay’”; and Kashshaf al-Qina’: “wa aqrabuhum al-ibnu, thumma ibnuhu wa in nazal … wa yasqutu bihi man ba‘ud” · Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-Fara’id, “bab mirath ibn al-ibn idha lam yakun ibn” — Zayd b. Thabit: “waladu al-abna’i bi-manzilati al-waladi idha lam yakun dunahum walad”, and “wa la yarithu waladu al-ibni ma‘a al-ibn” · Surah al-Nisa’ 4:11 — “God instructs you concerning your children”, the verse the whole structure rests on.
Not covered by this finding: This entry answers only whether the orphaned grandchild inherits AS AN HEIR. It does not touch three things that decide most real cases. (1) A bequest. Because such a grandchild is not an heir, he is an ordinary stranger for the purposes of a will — so up to a third of the estate may be left to him, and on the majority view no heir’s consent is needed for that; see one-third-cap and heirs-consent-timing. (2) Lifetime gifts. Nothing stops a grandparent providing for the child during his own lifetime. (3) Statutory reform. Several Muslim-majority states have legislated an obligatory bequest for exactly this case; that is described in the callout below, and it is legislation, not the doctrine of any school. Note also that the grandchild is excluded here by a surviving SON; whether he is excluded by daughters, and in what combinations, is a separate and more intricate question — Ibn Qudama’s mas’ala 4819 is the starting point. — not yet researched school by school. Treat that as open and ask a scholar of your school.
Researched finding from our madhhab register — issue orphaned-grandchild, reviewed 2026-09-01.
The obligatory bequest (al-wasiyya al-wajiba) is statute, not the doctrine of any school — and it does not apply in Canada. The exclusion of the orphaned grandchild was the single most legislated-upon question in twentieth-century Muslim family law, and the device used was not a reinterpretation of the shares but a compulsory bequest read into the estate. Egypt went first, in the Bequest Law, Law No. 71 of 1946, Chapter Six, arts. 76–79. Article 76 provides that where a person has not made a bequest to the issue of a child who predeceased him, a bequest becomes due to that issue equal to what their parent would have inherited had he been alive — capped at one third of the estate, and on condition that they are not otherwise heirs. Article 78 gives it priority over all other bequests. The AUC study of the reform describes the method as takhayyur, and records that Syria followed in 1953, Tunisia in 1956 and Iraq in 1959, and that Pakistan went further still in 1961 by giving orphaned grandchildren full representation. Three things follow for a Canadian family. First, none of this is the position of the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i or Hanbali school; it is legislation, and quoting it as though it were classical doctrine is exactly the error this register exists to prevent. Second, these statutes do not reach an estate administered in Canada — a Canadian estate is not governed by Egyptian or Syrian law — so if the grandparent leaves nothing in writing, no obligatory bequest is read in for him and a faraid distribution produces the classical exclusion. Third — and this is the practical point — the same result the statutes force can be achieved voluntarily, by the grandparent simply making the bequest himself. That is the ordinary advice where a child has predeceased: name the grandchildren in the will, within the one-third, and say so expressly.
Full evidence and history: A grandchild whose parent died first — the issue page.
Questions that turn on this
Every answer below renders its madhhab position from this one entry, so the positions cannot drift apart between pages.
Citations & sources
Every factual claim on this page traces to a source below. Details change — check the original source before relying on any figure, fee or legal position.
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 85: Laws of Inheritance (Faraid) — Sunnah.com
- Surah an-Nisa 4:11 — shares of children and parents — Quran.com
- al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya al-Kuwaytiyya, entry “Hajb” §3 — the three governing rules of exclusion (one who is connected to the deceased through another heir is excluded by that heir, save maternal siblings with the mother; the nearer excludes the more remote; the stronger tie excludes the weaker), and their first application: “fa-ibnu al-ibni yahjubuhu al-ibnu aw ibnu ibnin aqrabu minhu li-idla’ihi bihi in kana abahu, aw li-annahu ‘asabatun aqrabu minhu; wa yahjubuhu kadhalika abawani wa bintani li’l-sulbi bi-stighraqihim li’l-tarika” — footnoted to Hashiyat Ibn ‘Abidin 5/496, al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyya p.391, Mughni al-Muhtaj 3/11 and al-Mughni li-Ibn Qudama 6/166 — Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait
- Radd al-Muhtar (Hashiyat Ibn ‘Abidin), Kitab al-Fara’id, fasl fi’l-hajb — one page carrying two rules: “(anna man adla bi-shakhsin la yarithu ma‘ahu) ka-ibni al-ibni la yarithu ma‘a al-ibn”; and “wa’l-mahrumu ka-ibnin kafirin aw qatilin la yahjubu ‘indana aslan” — the gloss adding that the Hanafis reserve the word <i>mahrum</i> for one barred by something in himself, such as being a slave or a killer, and <i>mahjub</i> for one barred by someone else — Muhammad Amin b. ‘Abidin (d. 1252 AH)
- al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’, Mirath al-Sulb — quoting Malik in terms: “wa manzilatu waladi al-abna’i al-dhukuri idha lam yakun waladun ka-manzilati al-waladi sawa’, dhakaruhum ka-dhakarihim wa unthahum ka-unthahum, yarithuna kama yarithuna wa yahjubuna kama yahjubun”; and “fa-in ijtama‘a al-waladu li’l-sulbi wa waladu al-ibni fa-kana fi waladi al-sulbi dhakarun fa-innahu LA MIRATHA MA‘AHU LI-AHADIN MIN WALADI AL-IBN” — Abu’l-Walid al-Baji (d. 474 AH)
- Mughni al-Muhtaj, Kitab al-Fara’id, fasl fi’l-hajb — “al-abu wa’l-ibnu wa’l-zawju la yahjubuhum ahadun, wa ibnu al-ibni la yahjubuhu illa al-ibnu aw ibnu ibnin aqrabu minhu” — al-Khatib al-Shirbini (d. 977 AH)
- al-Mughni, Kitab al-Fara’id, masa’il 4818–4819 — al-Khiraqi: “wa banatu al-ibni bi-manzilati al-banati, idha lam yakun banat”; Ibn Qudama: “ajma‘a ahlu al-‘ilmi ‘ala anna banati al-ibni bi-manzilati al-banati ‘INDA ‘ADAMIHINNA fi irthihinna wa hajbihinna li-man yahjubuhu al-banat”; and 4819: “fa-in kunna banatin wa banati ibnin, fa-li’l-banati al-thuluthani, wa laysa li-banati al-ibni shay’un, illa an yakuna ma‘ahunna dhakarun fa-yu‘assibahunna fima baqi” — Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)
- Kashshaf al-Qina’, Kitab al-Fara’id, ta‘rif al-‘asaba bi’l-nafs — the six lines of agnatic succession in order (sonship, fatherhood, grandfatherhood and brotherhood, nephews, uncles, patronage); “wa ahaqquhum bi’l-mirathi aqrabuhum” to the deceased, on the hadith “fa-li-awla rajulin dhakar”, “wa yasqutu bihi man ba‘ud”; and “wa aqrabuhum al-ibnu, thumma ibnuhu wa in nazal” — Mansur b. Yunus al-Buhuti (d. 1051 AH)
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-Fara’id, “bab mirath ibn al-ibn idha lam yakun ibn” — the chapter heading itself conditions the son’s son’s inheritance on there being no son; al-Bukhari citing Zayd b. Thabit: “waladu al-abna’i bi-manzilati al-waladi IDHA LAM YAKUN DUNAHUM WALAD, dhakaruhum ka-dhakarihim wa unthahum ka-unthahum, yarithuna kama yarithuna wa yahjubuna kama yahjubun”, and closing: “WA LA YARITHU WALADU AL-IBNI MA‘A AL-IBN” — Muhammad b. Isma‘il al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH), via al-Maktaba al-Shamela
- al-Mawsu'a al-Fiqhiyya al-Kuwaitiyya — the Kuwaiti encyclopaedia of fiqh — Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait