Assalaamu ‘Alaykum; Please calculate the inheritance according to the following information -Does the deceased have male relatives who are entitled to inherit: (A father) (A full brother) Number 3 (A nephew from a full brother) Number 11 (A full paternal uncle) Number 1 (A cousin from a full paternal uncle) Number 2 -Does the deceased have female relatives who are entitled to inherit : (A mother) (A daughter) Number 4 (A wife) Number 1 (A full sister) Number 1 - Information about the deceased’s debts : (Debts to people) - Additional information : Wife worked continuously prior to marriage and all through marriage earning much more than husband and added all earnings to assets. Wife had assets prior to marriage and husband came to marriage with 64.00 dollars. Wife paid all bills while husband was away in another country from her assets/ earnings while supporting him and child 100%. Assets acquired due to wife's earnings and contribution from wife's family. Husband's family did not support family not even when wife was pregnant on her own trying to support herself, husband and soon to be born child. Husband's family had their own needs. Wife had child and lived on her own financially supporting herself and her husband in another country and paying legal bills to get husband back home. Not illegal but immigration issues.

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, is His slave and messenger.

As long as the deceased is liable to debts, they should be paid off before dividing the estate among the heirs because the repayment of the debts should take precedence to the right of the heirs in the deceased’s estate. Allaah, The Exalted, says (what means): {… after any bequest he [may have] made or debt…} [Quran 4:11]

Moreover, Al-Mawsoo‘ah Al-Fiqhiyyah (The Fiqh Encyclopedia) reads, “It is impermissible for the heirs to divide the deceased’s estate before repaying the debts to which the deceased is liable; this is because their prescribed shares cannot be clearly designated except after the repayment of the debt. Allaah, The Exalted, says (what means): {… after any bequest he [may have] made or debt…} [Quran 4:11] If they divide the estate before the payment of the debts and liabilities, the division is canceled in order to preserve the rights of the creditors because those heirs have divided what they do not own in the first place…”

After the payment of the debts and liabilities, the residue of the estate should be divided among the heirs entitled to inherit as per the Islamic Sharee'ah.

If the deceased did not leave behind except those mentioned in the question, his mother is entitled to one-sixth of the estate as a fixed share and his father gets one-sixth as well as a fixed share because the deceased has offspring entitled to inherit. Allaah, The Exalted, says (what means): {…And for one's parents, to each one of them is a sixth of his estate if he left children…} [Quran 4:11]

The deceased’s wife gets one-eighth of the estate as a fixed share because the deceased has offspring entitled to inherit. Allaah, The Exalted, says (what means): {…But if you leave a child, then for them is an eighth of what you leave, after any bequest you [may have] made or debt…} [Quran 4:12]

The deceased’s four daughters get two-thirds as a fixed share; Allaah, The Exalted, says (what means): {… But if there are daughters, two or more, for them is two thirds of one's estate…} [Quran 4:11]

The full brothers and sisters as well as nephews are not entitled to any share in the estate because they are totally excluded by the presence of the father. Ibn Al-Munthir wrote, “Muslim jurists unanimously agreed that full-brothers and full-sisters and half-brothers and half-sisters from the father's side do not inherit if the deceased has a son or a grandson (son of a son) down to all levels. They do not even inherit if the father is alive.” [Al-Ijmaa’]

Thus, the legal heirs exhaust the deceased’s whole estate, exceeding the sum of the total inheritance, which is known as ‘Awl. To solve such kind of inheritance problem, portions of every heir are reduced proportionally so that everyone can be accommodated and all heirs can therefore enjoy the deceased’s property.

Hence, the estate should be divided into 27 shares; the mother gets four shares, the father gets four shares as well, the wife gets three shares, and each daughter gets four shares.

The questioner remarked that the deceased’s wife had greater earnings than her husband’s (which have been included in the estate). If she means that the wife is more entitled to her husband’s estate than the other heirs because she has earned the greater portion of it, the answer is that as long as the property is registered in the name of the husband and has been at his disposal during his lifetime, the basic principle is that it is the husband’s property – not the wife’s - and it should be included in his estate. If the wife claimed that a part of property is hers and the heirs did not believe her, she is to be asked to bring forth Sharee'ah-acceptable evidence supporting her claim. If she did, she is entitled to the ownership of that part of property - the subject of dispute; otherwise, she should demand that the heirs take an oath that they do not acknowledge her ownership of such a property. If they refused to take the oath, she should take an oath herself that this property is hers and assume ownership of it. Otherwise, she is not entitled to take it. Verily, this should take place before the Sharee'ah-court judge or competent Muslim scholars, in case there are no Share'ah-courts in your country.

If some of the property is registered in the name of the wife, in her possession, and at her disposal and she claimed the ownership of the property, the basic principle is that she is entitled to the legal ownership of that part of the property. In this case, she is not required to bring forth evidence proving her ownership of the property. Rather, if the other heirs claimed that this property is her husband’s, they are the ones asked to bring forth evidence to support their claim.

When a person takes possession of a property and it is in his disposal, this is considered a preponderance of evidence that the ownership belongs to him. Al-Mawsoo‘ah Al-Fiqhiyyah (The Fiqh Encyclopedia) reads, “Muslim jurists unanimously agree that the physical possession of property under dispute is a cause of preponderant evidence of the ownership belonging to that person if there are no other stronger pieces of evidence proving otherwise, such as clear evidence. If two people dispute over the ownership of a property, while one of them has possession of the disputed property, and none of them brought forth clear evidence proving his ownership, he is given the legal ownership of the property that is within his physical possession based on his oath, as unanimously agreed upon by Muslim jurists. This is based on the report stating that ‘The proof is required from the claimant, and the oath is required from the one who denies (the allegation).’”

In fact, Muslim jurists have held extensive discussions about ownership disputes and how to pass judgment in such disputes, but we would not like to cite those discussions at length. Instead, the case should be referred to Sharee'ah-courts, if any; otherwise competent scholars who are qualified to settle such legal disputes should be consulted.

Allaah Knows best.