Is the father required to be just among his children and give to the needy and the non-needy?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
If the father gives to all his children, both the needy and the non-needy, and sometimes pays off their debts, is he required to be just? And how is justice defined if some of them have no debt?
The Shaykh:
Justice in giving, in giving and in transferring ownership, as for maintenance, he gives each one according to his need, even if some are in greater need. What contradicts maintenance is the requirement of justice; rather, justice is that he gives each one according to his need. The maintenance of the adult is not the same as the maintenance of the infant who is nursing. So justice is that he gives each one only according to his need.
And the one who needs marriage, he marries him. It is not required that he provide a mahr for the second one and write him up and detain him. No, this is from maintenance. Marriage is from maintenance. He marries the one who needs marriage, and the one who does not need marriage due to his youth has nothing. So maintenance does not have justice in the sense of equality, but rather it is giving each one according to his need. The needs of the children differ, the adult and the child, and what else? The question has been stated.
The questioner:
He says: So is he required to be just if he pays off their debts?
The Shaykh:
And likewise, the debt: if his son is unable to pay and cannot settle it, he pays off the debt for him. It is not required that he give to the second one, because this situation is not a situation of transferring ownership; this is a situation of freeing, freeing his son from the debt. So he does not give the others like this, unless they are in debt and cannot pay, and he pays for them just as he pays for the other. But if one of them is rich and can pay, and one is poor and is being pressed and harassed, he pays for him and does not pay for the other rich one. Yes.
The presenter:
He says: Honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh:
The result is that the criterion in this is transferring ownership, the gift of transferring ownership. As for spending, paying off the debts of those who are unable to pay, this is not from transferring ownership; this is from fulfilling the need only. Yes.
If the father gives to all his children, both the needy and the non-needy, and sometimes pays off their debts, is he required to be just? And how is justice defined if some of them have no debt?
The Shaykh:
Justice in giving, in giving and in transferring ownership, as for maintenance, he gives each one according to his need, even if some are in greater need. What contradicts maintenance is the requirement of justice; rather, justice is that he gives each one according to his need. The maintenance of the adult is not the same as the maintenance of the infant who is nursing. So justice is that he gives each one only according to his need.
And the one who needs marriage, he marries him. It is not required that he provide a mahr for the second one and write him up and detain him. No, this is from maintenance. Marriage is from maintenance. He marries the one who needs marriage, and the one who does not need marriage due to his youth has nothing. So maintenance does not have justice in the sense of equality, but rather it is giving each one according to his need. The needs of the children differ, the adult and the child, and what else? The question has been stated.
The questioner:
He says: So is he required to be just if he pays off their debts?
The Shaykh:
And likewise, the debt: if his son is unable to pay and cannot settle it, he pays off the debt for him. It is not required that he give to the second one, because this situation is not a situation of transferring ownership; this is a situation of freeing, freeing his son from the debt. So he does not give the others like this, unless they are in debt and cannot pay, and he pays for them just as he pays for the other. But if one of them is rich and can pay, and one is poor and is being pressed and harassed, he pays for him and does not pay for the other rich one. Yes.
The presenter:
He says: Honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh:
The result is that the criterion in this is transferring ownership, the gift of transferring ownership. As for spending, paying off the debts of those who are unable to pay, this is not from transferring ownership; this is from fulfilling the need only. Yes.
Source
قناة «العلامة الدكتور صالح الفوزان»، هل يلزم الأب العدل بين أولاده ويعطي المحتاج وغير المحتاج؟ للشيخ صالح الفوزان — youtube.com
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.