Q. My father, who died 19 years ago, built a house and registered it in my mother’s name. My mother continued to live in this house with my sister and her family, until my sister’s husband died last year. All my other brothers and sisters live in other cities or countries. A few months ago, my mother sold the house and bought a smaller and cheaper one, registering it in my sister’s name and living with her and her young son. The rest of the money she distributed equally among her children. My father had written a paper, which we considered to be a “will”, saying that whatever assets he managed to have were obtained with the help of my mother and she has the first right to the house for the rest of her life. After that it goes to his children in accordance with Islamic law. One of our brothers believes that our mother has committed a major sin by registering the new house in my sister’s name. He says that she should have divided the money in accordance with Islamic law. Is he correct? If so, how to put the matter right?
T. Khan
A. The first thing to clear is that the paper your father wrote is not a will. It is an assertion of facts. Had it been a will, it would be invalid because his wife, i.e. your mother, and children are his heirs, and a will cannot be made in favor of an heir. In Islam, a person has the right to make bequests by will in a maximum amount of one-third of his property, but these bequests should be made to nonheirs, such as close relatives in need, or assigned to charity. Hence, what your father wrote was only to confirm your mother’s right to the house. It seems he was fully aware of the procedure to be followed. Hence, he insisted on the repayment of his loan before any division of the property. What this means is that the house was your mother’s property, and none of her children had any right to it while she was alive. Only on her death could her inheritance be divided. It also looks as though your father was fully aware that this arrangement would not be unfair to his children, as eventually the house would come to them in the same proportions, since children inherit from their parents in the same way.
This leaves us with your mother’s action in moving into a smaller house, registering it in your widowed sister’s name. Should we treat this as a gift? Let us first look at the way she distributed the rest of the money. She divided this equally among her children. This is correct, with the daughters getting the same as the sons. Gifts by parents should be equal, not on the lines of inheritance. But what about the house? This is a special arrangement your mother has done to ensure that her daughter, your sister, will continue to have a roof over her head after her own death. She knows that her other children are in better situations, and she did something for the one least fortunate. This means that it is a caring gesture. But it is not a total gift because your mother still lives in the same house, and will continue to do so for the rest of her life.
It is a gift for the future, which seems a pre-inheritance gift. Hence, it is dubious, although it is perfectly well intentioned. What your mother should have done was to consult her children and obtain their agreement to the arrangement.
She should have told them that since their sister will not be able to earn her own living and her own son is too young to work, they would be responsible for her living expenses. In order to reduce their future burden, she wanted to make this arrangement. Had your mother obtained this consent, her action would be right. In the absence of such agreement, there could be some argument about it. However, you and your brothers and sisters will do well to approve your mother’s action. You stand to earn God’s reward for helping your widowed sister and her son, and you will earn further reward by pleasing your mother. In addition, you will reduce your future burden of looking after your sister and her son.
Fasting in Muharram
Q. Could you tell me which days we are supposed to fast in the month of Muharram?
M. Naseem
A. When you say “we are supposed to fast”, you seem to imply that such fasting is required or obligatory. No fasting is obligatory except the month of Ramadan. Any other fasting is recommended, or Sunnah, which means that it is voluntary. In other words, if we are encouraged to fast a particular day, or days, this is voluntary, for which we earn reward when we do it, but do not incur a sin if we do not. This contrasts with fasting in Ramadan, which is obligatory. If one deliberately does not fast, one commits a very grave sin.
Having said this, we confirm that no obligatory fasting is required in Muharram. However, when the Prophet (peace be upon him) immigrated to Madinah, where the population included a large Jewish community, he found out that the Jews fasted on Muharram 10. He asked them the reason for their fasting, and they told him that it was a day when God saved Moses from certain death. The Prophet said: “We have a stronger claim of affinity to Moses, and he recommended fasting that day.” Shortly before his death, the Prophet said: “If I live till next year, I will fast the ninth as well.” He also said to some of his companions that it would be better to fast a day before or after 10 Muharram. Thus you have these two days that are recommended to fast in commemoration of the savior of the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him).
On the other hand, the Prophet recommended fasting the middle three days of every lunar month, i.e. 13, 14 and 15.
