Radd — the return of a surplus to the fixed-share heirs

This is legal information only. For advice on your own circumstances, speak to a lawyer.

Where the four schools differ

This question turns on one issue in our madhhab register: Radd — the return of a surplus to the fixed-share heirs — where the fixed shares do not use up the whole estate and no residuary heir survives, what happens to what is left over?

Position of each Sunni school on where the fixed shares do not use up the whole estate and no residuary heir survives, what happens to what is left over?
School	Position
HanafiHanbali	It goes back to the heirs. Whatever is left after the fixed shares are paid is returned to those same heirs in proportion to their shares — so a sole daughter entitled to a half takes the whole estate, half by her fixed share and half by radd. The reasoning is that these heirs are blood relatives, and Surah al-Anfal 8:75 makes blood relatives the nearer claimants; the public treasury represents the Muslims at large, who have only the one connection. Ibn Qudama adds that if a shortfall (‘awl) is shared out among all of them, a surplus should be too. Neither school returns anything to a surviving husband or wife — see the separate issue. Sources: al-Mughni, Kitab al-Fara’id, mas’ala 4855: “yuraddu ‘ala kulli ahl al-fara’id ‘ala qadri mirathihim, illa’l-zawja wa’l-zawjah” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid, vol. 2 — Book of Wasaya (bequests) and Book of Fara’id (inheritance), trans. Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee (Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 595 AH)) · al-Mughni (Maktabat al-Qahira edition) — full Arabic text (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) — Abu Hanifa and his companions named in al-Mughni, which is itself stating the Hanbali rule; Ibn Rushd separately attributes it to the jurists of Iraq, Kufa and Basra.
MalikiShafi’i	Classical position It goes to the public treasury. Following Zayd ibn Thabit, both schools held that a fixed share is a fixed share: the verse gives a sister “half of what he leaves”, and a rule that hands her the whole gives her something the text did not. The surplus therefore leaves the family and passes to the bayt al-mal, which these schools treat as an heir in its own right — an heir without a fixed fraction. Applied in Canada today Both schools attach a condition to that: the treasury has to be a functioning one. The Fatwa Centre of Qatar’s Ministry of Awqaf records the Hanbali and Hanafi rule as also being the second view within the Shafi’i school where the public treasury is not properly administered, and as the position later Maliki authorities give fatwa on, subject to that same condition. There is no bayt al-mal in Canada; the alternative here would be escheat of the surplus to the provincial Crown, which is not what the classical rule contemplated. Sources: al-Mughni, Kitab al-Fara’id, mas’ala 4855: “yuraddu ‘ala kulli ahl al-fara’id ‘ala qadri mirathihim, illa’l-zawja wa’l-zawjah” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid, vol. 2 — Book of Wasaya (bequests) and Book of Fara’id (inheritance), trans. Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee (Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 595 AH)) · Fatwa 7292, “A question of inheritance by the method of tanzil” (27 Dhu’l-Hijja 1421 / 22 March 2001) — records that the Hanbali and Hanafi rule is also the second Shafi’i view where the public treasury is not properly administered, and the position later Maliki authorities give fatwa on (Fatwa Centre, Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Qatar (IslamWeb)) — Malik and al-Shafi’i separately named in both al-Mughni and Bidayat al-Mujtahid; the condition on the rule sourced separately to a contemporary fatwa body.

Researched positions from our madhhab register — issue radd, reviewed 2026-08-19.

Why the classical rule bends here

This is the same fork as dhawu al-arham and it bends the same way. In a country with no public treasury to receive an estate, the practical distance between the four schools on this point is close to nil: all four end up keeping the surplus in the family. What a Canadian will should not do is leave the question to chance — name a residuary beneficiary, and the surplus never has to be argued about.

Full positions, evidence and history: Radd — the return of a surplus to the fixed-share heirs — the issue page.

Which row is yours? Most families follow the school of their region of origin — the four madhahib page maps them. The comparison is here so you can see your school’s position, not so you can pick the convenient answer — assembling a plan from several schools at once (talfiq) can produce a distribution no school would accept. If your estate turns on this point, put it to a scholar of your school.

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.

Classical fiqh works

al-Mughni, Kitab al-Fara’id, mas’ala 4855: “yuraddu ‘ala kulli ahl al-fara’id ‘ala qadri mirathihim, illa’l-zawja wa’l-zawjah” — Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)
Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid, vol. 2 — Book of Wasaya (bequests) and Book of Fara’id (inheritance), trans. Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee — Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 595 AH)
al-Mughni (Maktabat al-Qahira edition) — full Arabic text — Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)
Fatwa 7292, “A question of inheritance by the method of tanzil” (27 Dhu’l-Hijja 1421 / 22 March 2001) — records that the Hanbali and Hanafi rule is also the second Shafi’i view where the public treasury is not properly administered, and the position later Maliki authorities give fatwa on — Fatwa Centre, Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Qatar (IslamWeb)