Must a parent give children equally in life?

Equality is obligatory, and inequality is a sin that must be undone. Ibn Qudama states it as the school’s rule: a person must treat his children equally in gifts unless one of them is marked out by something that justifies preferring him; if he singles one out or gives them unequal amounts he sins, and equality then becomes due on him by one of two routes — either he takes back the excess he gave, or he brings the others up to the same. The argument is the Nu‘man ibn Bashir hadith, and Ibn Qudama presses every word of it: the Prophet called the gift jawr (a wrong), ordered it returned, and refused to be a witness to it — a wrong is forbidden, and a command imports obligation. He adds a reason of policy that any family will recognise: preferring one child breeds enmity, resentment and the severing of kinship. The school does allow preference for a cause — a child’s need, disability, blindness, a large household, being occupied in study; or withholding from a child who would use the money for wrongdoing — and Ibn Qudama prefers that reading of Ahmad, though the alternative reading of Ahmad’s words bars preference in every case.

Sources: al-Mughni, Kitab al-Hiba wa’l-‘Atiyya, mas’ala 4459 — “yajibu ‘ala’l-insani al-taswiyatu bayna awladihi fi’l-‘atiyya, idha lam yakhtassa ahaduhum bi-ma‘nan yubihu al-tafdil, fa-in khassa ba‘dahum bi-‘atiyyatihi, aw fadala baynahum fiha athima, wa wajabat ‘alayhi al-taswiyatu bi-ahadi amrayn” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · al-Mughni, mas’ala 4459 cont. — the opposing schools named: “wa qala Malikun, wa’l-Laythu, wa’l-Thawriyyu, wa’l-Shafi‘iyyu, wa ashabu al-ra’y: dhalika ja’iz”, with al-Shafi‘i’s argument from “ashhid ‘ala hadha ghayri”; and Ibn Qudama’s reply that the Nu‘man hadith “is proof of prohibition, because he called it jawr, ordered it returned, and refused to witness it”, the report being “hadithun sahihun muttafaqun ‘alayh” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · al-Mughni, fasl 4460–4461 — the grounds that permit singling a child out (need, disability, blindness, a large family, study, or withholding from a child who would spend it on disobedience); and the son/daughter question: “wa la khilafa bayna ahli al-‘ilmi fi’stihbabi al-taswiyati, wa karahati al-tafdil”, the recommended equality being “an yuqassima baynahum ‘ala hasabi qismati ’llahi ta‘ala al-miratha, fa-yaj‘ala li’l-dhakari mithla hazzi al-unthayayn” — against “wa qala Abu Hanifata, wa Malikun, wa’l-Shafi‘iyyu, wa’bnu al-Mubaraki: tu‘ta al-unthaa mithlu ma yu‘taa al-dhakar” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya, “Taswiya” sec. 11 cont. — “wa dhahaba al-Hanabilatu, wa Abu Yusufa mina’l-Hanafiyyati, wa huwa qawlu Ibn al-Mubaraki, wa Tawusin, wa huwa riwayatun ‘ani ’l-Imami Malikin: ila wujubi al-taswiyati bayna al-awladi fi’l-hiba. Fa-in khassa ba‘dahum bi-‘atiyyatin, aw fadala baynahum fiha athima, wa wajabat ‘alayhi al-taswiyatu bi-ahadi amrayn: imma raddu ma faddala bihi al-ba‘da, wa imma itmamu nasibi al-akhar”, with the Nu‘man ibn Bashir hadith of the Sahihayn quoted in full (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) — Ibn Qudama stating his own school, and the Mawsu’a independently attributing the same rule to “al-Hanabila”.

Equality is recommended, not required — and an unequal gift is valid. The Mawsu’a names these three schools together for the view that evenness between the children in gifts is mustahabb and not wajib; al-Mughni names Malik, al-Shafi’i and the Hanafi jurists separately for the same conclusion, that an unequal gift is permitted. Two lines of argument are recorded. The first is the practice of the Companions: Abu Bakr singled out ‘A’isha among his children for a gift, and ‘Umar preferred his son ‘Asim. The second is a variant of the very hadith the other side relies on — in one narration the Prophet said “then have someone other than me witness it”, which al-Shafi’i read as telling the father to go and complete the gift rather than to undo it. It should be said plainly that this is a ruling about validity, not about advice: on the account Ibn Qudama gives, no scholar of any school called an unequal gift a good thing to do.

Sources: al-Mawsu’a al-Fiqhiyya al-Kuwaytiyya, entry “Taswiya” sec. 11 — “ikhtalafa al-‘ulama’u fi wujubi al-taswiyati bayna al-awladi fi’l-‘atiyya. Fa-dhahaba al-Hanafiyyatu wa’l-Malikiyyatu wa’l-Shafi‘iyyatu ila anna al-taswiyata baynahum fi’l-‘ataya mustahabbatun, wa laysat wajiba”, on the precedents of Abu Bakr preferring ‘A’isha and ‘Umar preferring his son ‘Asim, and on the variant “fa-ashhid ‘ala hadha ghayri” (Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs, Kuwait) · al-Mughni, mas’ala 4459 cont. — the opposing schools named: “wa qala Malikun, wa’l-Laythu, wa’l-Thawriyyu, wa’l-Shafi‘iyyu, wa ashabu al-ra’y: dhalika ja’iz”, with al-Shafi‘i’s argument from “ashhid ‘ala hadha ghayri”; and Ibn Qudama’s reply that the Nu‘man hadith “is proof of prohibition, because he called it jawr, ordered it returned, and refused to witness it”, the report being “hadithun sahihun muttafaqun ‘alayh” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) · al-Mughni, fasl 4460–4461 — the grounds that permit singling a child out (need, disability, blindness, a large family, study, or withholding from a child who would spend it on disobedience); and the son/daughter question: “wa la khilafa bayna ahli al-‘ilmi fi’stihbabi al-taswiyati, wa karahati al-tafdil”, the recommended equality being “an yuqassima baynahum ‘ala hasabi qismati ’llahi ta‘ala al-miratha, fa-yaj‘ala li’l-dhakari mithla hazzi al-unthayayn” — against “wa qala Abu Hanifata, wa Malikun, wa’l-Shafi‘iyyu, wa’bnu al-Mubaraki: tu‘ta al-unthaa mithlu ma yu‘taa al-dhakar” (Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi (d. 620 AH)) — all three named in one sentence of the Mawsu’a, and each named again individually by Ibn Qudama (Malik, al-Shafi‘i, ashab al-ra’y at mas’ala 4459; Abu Hanifa, Malik and al-Shafi‘i by name at fasl 4461). Note that the Mawsu’a also records a narration from Malik on the other side, and that Abu Yusuf, within the Hanafi school, held equality obligatory.