OUR DIALOGUE

Q. We are four brothers and three sisters. Our mother passed away and our father married another woman. Our father owns some real property, and two of his sons paid money to complete his building, with one providing more than the other. Our father decided to divide the property among his four sons only, excluding his daughters. When he married his second wife, he told her that she would not be having a share of the property, but she may have his pension. Later, my father excluded his youngest son from this division and disallowed him from even coming to the house because he married a woman my father disliked. Please comment.

A. The main problem in such cases is that people tend to look at what they have as their own property and think that they have absolute rights to do with it what they like. This may be the case in many societies, particularly in Western countries, but not under Islamic law. In Islam, whatever we have belongs to God. All our money, whether in cash or other possessions, including real property, belongs to Him. It is He who has given it to us, placing us in charge of it, and to Him it all belongs when we depart this life. Therefore, we do not have much say in how our property should be divided among our heirs. We do not even decide who our heirs are. God allows us to bequeath a portion of our property by will, but this portion must not exceed onethird. The Prophet tells us God has given you onethird of your property as a charity, i.e. sadaqah. Consider carefully what this means the money does not belong to us. God permits us to use it in a way that will bring us some reward after we die. Hence, it should go to beneficial purposes, such as gifts to poor relatives who are not our heirs, poor neighbors, charitable services, etc.
With inheritance, God determines who inherits and the shares they inherit. A Muslim cannot disinherit any of his heirs, but Islamic law may block the inheritance of any person for a specific reason, as in the case of a son declaring that he is no longer a Muslim and adopting a different religion. In this case, the rule that the followers of two different religions may not inherit each other applies.
When we look at this case, we may treat it in two ways. If the father is making the division now and allowing his sons to have the real property he is dividing among them, then he is contravening Islamic law by making gifts to some of his children and excluding others. Children must be treated fairly. If you make a gift to one child, you have to give all your children similar gifts. Boys and girls receive the same. There must be no distinction between them. When the Prophet was told by one of his companions that he gave a child a certain gift but did not give the others, he described his action as injustice and told him that he would not witness any injustice. Needless to say, all injustice is forbidden in Islam.
If the father means this division to take place after he dies, he is then determining his inheritance. Three aspects of his division run against the Islamic rules of inheritance. The first and easiest to deal with is the inheritance of his wife. She will be entitled to oneeighth of all his property. If the pension she receives is equivalent to this share, then it is appropriate. If not, she should still receive her share. He cannot deprive her of it. Secondly, the father cannot deprive his daughters of their shares of inheritance. It is God who has given them these shares, and it is not up to the father to make any decision in this regard.
Thirdly, the father cannot deprive his son of his share because of his marriage. The young man is entitled to marry the woman he wants. His father may advise him against it if he feels that this marriage is unsuitable, but the son does not contravene Islamic law by choosing his wife. This is entirely up to him. The father is punishing him for no sin he has committed.
As for the contributions of his two sons in building the property, the father and his sons should work out some arrangement for this. Either the contributions were made towards building a family home and they are a form of help provided by son to parents, or they are investment buying a share in the family home. In the first case, they are a gift from the sons to the parents, and thus they belong to the father. The sons cannot make a special claim in lieu of giving their parents a gift. In the second case, the father should assign a portion of the house to each of his sons, which should be proportionate to the contributions they made.
I have not discussed the inheritance of the mother in this case, as it was not touched upon in the question. I hope that it was distributed among her heirs in the proper Islamic way. Otherwise, it has to be reconsidered and properly divided.

Q. An old couple have one son and four daughters. They have lot of properties. They made a gift of many of these properties to their son, excluding their daughters. Their reason is that their son has looked after them in their old age, while their daughters have not. Is their action acceptable in Islam

A. The Prophet says Fear God and maintain fairness among your children. This is a highly authentic Hadith that makes it clear that unfairness among ones own children is contrary to taqwa, which we normally translate as fearing God. It is to be noted that the Prophet did not attach the need to be fair in ones treatment of ones children to any consideration other than being Godfearing. So if you want to attain this quality, which is essential to achieve admission into heaven, you have to remain fair in your treatment of your children. The Prophet did not make such fairness conditional on the children being dutiful or taking care of their parents. He left it in general terms so as not to allow personal feelings, or favoritism to dictate our actions.
The parents in this case may be very grateful to their son for looking after them. They might have expected more from their daughters. Normally a daughter takes good care of her parents, but here we have four daughters who seem to fail in this respect. Should we not wonder at the reason Are these daughters married and do they have families of their own to look after If so, they may have little time to spare. May be the parents expect from their daughters what they cannot reasonably provide.
Be the reason as it may, parents must not favour any of their children with gifts to the exclusion of others. They must maintain fairness. Parents may need to give special attention to one or more of their children because of special circumstances, such as one of their children suffering from a disability, or having special needs for education. In this case, providing for such needs does not constitute favoritism. Giving special gifts to one or more of their children to the exclusion of others constitute unfairness, which the Prophet has forbidden.
Parents who receive more care from any of their children, particularly when they are ill or in their old age, may reward their son or daughter in another way they can pray to God to look after that child and give him or her a comfortable life, and protect him from evil, etc. Such prayers, especially when they are made in appreciation of their childs attention to their needs, are certainly accepted and answered by God. This is far more beneficial to that child than any gifts they can give him. Moreover, such special gifts to one of their children have their negative effects, as other children will feel that they have been unfairly treated. This leads to nurturing a feeling of jealousy among brothers and sisters. This is unhealthy for all concerned.
To sum up, parents must always maintain fairness in their treatment of their children, not favoring any of them with gifts or other kinds of special attention, unless the children require such attention for circumstances beyond their control. If a son or a daughter are in a situation where they need help, while other siblings are better off, parents may provide that help. However, if this constitutes a special gift, they need to explain the situation to their other children and have their agreement to such action.

Q Is it obligatory to follow one of the four schools of thought and stick to it all the time This question has puzzled people over a very long period and they do not receive a clear answer. Please clarify.

A. The question says Is it necessary to stick to one of the four schools My answer starts with the words No, it is not. What can be clearer I go on to show that even in practice this does not happen.
I have been asked this question many times over the years, and sometimes I gave very detailed answers while on other occasions I made my answers short. What we need to understand is that a school of thought is not the work of only its founder. The Hanafi school does not consist only of the views and rulings of Imam Abu Haneefah. There is a very long tradition of scholarship in that school, with many distinguished scholars making very significant contributions to that school. However, they all use the methodology established by Abu Haneefah, and start with his rulings and views. Some of these may disagree with him, or with his most immediate students and associates. Yet all form part of the Hanafi school. The last major figure of this school is Ibn Abideen who lived less than 200 years ago, i.e. more than 1000 years separate him from Abu Haneefah. What I have just said about the Hanafi school also applies to all schools of Islamic thought. Each is a long tradition of scholarship, following its own methodology. Each may have more than one view on some questions.
Thus the views of some Hanafi scholars, who were imams in their own right, differ with Abu Haneefahs views. Yet they are part of the Hanafi school and they may be the ones adopted by the majority of the Hanafi scholars. This means that you may be following the Hanafi school, but not Abu Haneefah. How can this be
Suppose that Abu Haneefah looked into a problem put to him and did not find a direct ruling on it in the Quran or the Hadith. He would have given a ruling on the basis of his overall knowledge of Islam. Suppose that two or three centuries later, a major Hanafi scholar looked at a very similar problem, but he was aware of an authentic Hadith that directly relates to it. He would give the ruling on the basis of the Hadith, not on the basis of Abu Haneefahs earlier ruling. Everyone of the four Imams, and indeed all other scholars, make clear that when a Hadith is authentic, then the Hadith must be adopted, while their own views should be discarded. Once AlShafie was asked about a certain problem. He answered his questioner by quoting a Hadith. The questioner said But what is your own view AlShafie was disturbed and he literally trembled. He said to the man What part of the sky would shelter me, or what part of the earth would carry me, if I say something different from what the Prophet says
A person may ask How could any of those most distinguished Imams be unaware of a Hadith, while later scholars may know it This is easily explained. The Hadith anthologies we refer to, including all six major anthologies, were compiled after the time of these Imams. In fact Ahmad ibn Hanbal was one of AlBukharis teachers. When AlBukhari compiled his anthology, he showed it to Imam Ahmad for review and comments. All four Imams studied Hadith, but Abu Haneefah did not have the same wealth of Hadiths available to him as the others. Malik produced the first authentic anthology classified according to areas of Fiqh, known as AlMuatta. Ahmads anthology, AlMusnad, is the largest authentic anthology. AlShafie was a very prominent scholar of Hadith and also had an anthology of his own. However, the study of Hadith attained a level of high distinction with the six authentic anthologies, but did not stop at that. Many later scholars made further great efforts and valuable contributions to this area. Thus they made the Prophets Hadiths more available to scholars of Fiqh. You appreciate that a scholar in old days had to rely on his books and memory. Today, we can easily look at all Hadiths relating to a certain question by referring to a concordance of Hadiths or by a computer search. Hence, the thought that a later scholar may be more informed on Hadith than an earlier one is by no means strange.
Where does this leave us concerning the basic question is it necessary to follow a single school of thought in all respects The answer is a definite No, it is not. If you are able to look at the views of different schools and study the evidence in support of their different views, you should do so and choose the view that is better supported. If you cannot do that, you ask a scholar. The scholar should do this on your behalf and give you the view that is most suitable and better supported.
On the other hand, if a person wishes to study a particular school in depth and stick to it, he may do so. Only this type of person actually sticks to one school because he knows it well. Ordinary people do not. There is no problem with that.

Q. A certain purchasing manager accepted bribes in the course of his work to facilitate deals for some international companies. Although he received large amounts, he now has very little. He has regretted his action and declared his repentance. He often goes to Makkah for Umrah or to pray in the Haram, and he earnestly appeals to God for forgiveness. Does he need to do anything else to ensure that God will grant him forgiveness

A. There is no doubt that bribery is forbidden in Islam. The Prophet (Pbuh) says God curses the one who gives a bribe and the one who takes it. This is due to the fact that a bribe is normally given in order to take an unfair advantage. In this persons capacity, he could influence the decisions of his employers, so as to buy certain products in preference to others. He might have ensured a very good price for the companies he was buying from. Had he not taken bribes, he would have made his advice on the qualities each product had, and which product could give the best performance. His action is extremely reprehensible. However, his repentance is very commendable. May God forgive him.
How to ensure Gods forgiveness We need to remember that God may forgive all sins. However, He forgives what is due to Him. If a person neglects certain duties owed to God, such as prayer and fasting, then genuinely repents, God forgives him that. What is needed is simply genuine and sincere repentance, together with a resolve not to do the same sin again.
Where a sin involves taking what is due to other people, or encroaches on their rights, or leads to depriving them of what should have been fairly theirs, such repentance is not enough. In such matters, a sin involves a dual violation of duty one towards God as the person who commits such a sin actually does what is forbidden, and one towards those whose rights have been compromised. The first part God forgives, but the other He does not, unless the people concerned also forgive the sinner. On the Day of Judgment, God puts the two parties face to face and asks whether the aggrieved are willing to forgo their rights. If they do, God rewards them generously for that and forgives the offender. If they do not, then God takes some of the good deeds of the offender and credits them to the other party. If the offenders good deeds are not sufficient to compensate the other party, God takes some of the sins of that party and adds them to the offender, so as to administer justice.
However, a persons repentance may be so genuine that he completely mends his ways and becomes a devoted servant of God. In this case, God in His wisdom and compassion may decide to take over that persons liability towards others. He grants them as much reward as they wish so that they would forgive the repentant offender without taking any part of his good deeds.
To ensure forgiveness, then, one needs to undo the harm he had done to others. If one has deprived people of something due to them, one must return to them what is due to them. I realise that this may be very difficult, or even impossible. In the case of someone who had taken bribes, this can easily be impossible. To start with, if he is to admit taking bribes, he may find himself in prison, when such imprisonment will not benefit anyone. If the bribe was to facilitate a certain deal, the deal might have already gone through and nothing can be done about it. In such cases, one must only try hard to make sure that his repentance is absolutely genuine. He must also try to increase his good deeds. One of the best ways we may try is to give to charity as much as we can. If one can organize an act of charity that continues after ones death, as in the case of an endowment, this ensures continuing reward for him. At all times, one must seek Gods forgiveness, because we all make mistakes, slip and commit sins. Unless God forgives us, we will be in real trouble.