If the father's children have wealth and the father chooses one of them and takes money from him for himself and his mother, knowing that this taking will affect the maintenance of the children of the one from whom it was taken

The questioner : If a father has several children, all of whom are living on a subsistence level, and he asks a specific person to take a sum from him so that the father and mother can subsist on this amount, excluding the other siblings, and this person has children who need to be raised, then if he gives the amount that is sufficient for the mother and father, it will be deducted from what he has for his children. What is your opinion?

The Shaykh : Here there are two issues: one concerning the father and one concerning the son. ... As for what concerns the father, why does he single out that son to take from him, excluding his other children? Does it mean that this son is more affluent and wealthier than the others, or is he in the same position as them, whether in ease or in hardship, from the father's perspective?

The questioner : They are equal, but he sees that he is more religious, so he might be able to bear it more!

The Shaykh : They are equal; he might be able to bear it more, meaning he responds to him while the others do not respond. In that case, we say that this is the son's portion, but his portion in the hereafter, not in this world, and the hereafter is better and more lasting. So, regarding the father, the ruling is concluded: if the father singles out one of the children to ask from him in this arbitrary manner, he is being unjust, which is the opposite of the previous case where he gives to one and not to the others. There, the opposite is exactly the case: he takes from one and not from others, and they are equal in his eyes, whether in material means or in status. So in this case, when they are equal in his eyes, it is not permissible to single one of them out to ask from him, excluding the others. However, if the motive and driving force for him to single one of them out to ask from him is his belief in his religion, his righteousness, his piety, and that he responds to his father's desire, then as I said earlier, it is a blessing for this son, as he was the object of his father's good opinion of him. As for the son who has a family and who, if he gives his father what he is giving him, it will reduce the spending on his family, here one must look at whether the reduction is in the luxuries or in the necessities. If it is in the luxuries, he must obey his father. But if it is in the necessities, he should excuse himself to his father in the best manner, and not as most sons do today with their fathers. Yesterday, a young man from our committed brothers came to me and told me a story... that the father was angry with him and shouted in his face until he was about to hit him, so he fled from his father's house and came to me because I support him with my generosity toward his father, and I do not know... but he wanted to get a fatwa. After I heard him, I rebuked him severely, indeed I admonished him. I said, meaning, if your father were to hit you, would you hit him? You today, O sons, treat your fathers as equals, peer to peer, like a brother to his brother or a friend to his friend: if he is angry with him, he is angry with him, and if he is pleased with him, he is pleased with him, and so on. And I reminded him of some texts, including the great verse: , ... The important thing is that I continued to advise this young man until he burst into tears, as if, Allah knows best, he admitted that he had made a mistake by leaving his house in anger and without permission, of course. So I ordered him to return to his father and apologize to him. My purpose in all of this is that when one of the fathers asks his dutiful son for some money, and he sees that he needs to spend it on his wife and children, as I said first, if what he is asking for is from the luxuries for the son, meaning the son has abundance, then in that case, he should not delay it at all. And if he does not have anything but the necessary sustenance, he gives him from the necessary sustenance in response to his request and his father's request. In that case, he excuses himself to him, and the point here is that he lowers to him the wing of humility out of mercy and uses gentle, soft speech. If he submits and responds, praise be to Allah. Otherwise, he must obey him for fear of falling into angering him, because we assume that even if it is from the necessary sustenance, the meaning of this necessity is not that he and his family are exposed to harm in their health.