It is narrated from Ata that Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) said: The obligatory shares are six; in these (issues) we do not accept 'awl (increase in shares by proportionate reduction).
Hadith Referenceسنن دارمي / من كتاب الفرائض / 3195
Hadith Gradingتحقیق (حسین سلیم أسد الدارانی):إسناده ضعيف ابن جريج عنعن وهو مدلس، [مكتبه الشامله نمبر: 3206]
Hadith Takhrijاس اثر کی سند ابن جریح کی تدلیس کی وجہ سے ضعیف ہے، لیکن صحیح سند سے بھی یہ اثر مروی ہے۔ دیکھئے: [ابن أبى شيبه 11236] ، [عبدالرزاق 19035] ، [ابن منصور 35]
Brief Explanation
(Hadith Explanation 3194)
«عول» is said in Arabic as «عالت الفريضه تعول», meaning when the shares (siham) exceed the original calculation and a deficiency occurs in the share of every heir.
Except for Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhuma, all the noble Companions are in agreement that the method of ‘awl (proportionate reduction) should be employed. During the time of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and Sayyiduna Abu Bakr radi Allahu anhu, such an issue did not arise. In the era of Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu, a woman passed away leaving behind a husband and two sisters. The issue was calculated from six, in which the husband’s share is one-half, and the sisters from the same mother (akhawat laab) receive two-thirds. Now, if the husband is given half of six (i.e., 3 shares), the sisters will be left with a deficiency. And if the sisters are first given two-thirds (4 shares), then only 2 will remain for the husband, and he will be at a loss. Therefore, Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu consulted the Companions, and all, by analogy with debts, adopted the method of ‘awl, and this issue was solved from seven: in which 3 shares went to the husband and the remaining 4 (i.e., two-thirds) to the sisters. This is what is called ‘awl.
Then, the scholars of inheritance (farā’id) have similarly accepted ‘awl when the shares from twelve increase up to seventeen, from six up to ten, and from twenty-four up to forty-seven. However, Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhuma opposed this, which is not correct in the face of the consensus of the Companions.