Under Islam, the wealth of a deceased person is divvied up in a number of ways and isnt just limited to his/her immediate family. The wife and children get a share, and so do the deceased brothers (sisters also?) and parents/grandparents, depending on who is alive when he/she passes away. The portions vary according to who is alive at the time of one’s death. Adopted or fostered children of the deceased do not have any right to the inheritance. More can be read about it here
There’s always been debate surrounding why there is a difference in the share of inheritance certain siblings receive – particularly females. And the answer usually given the brothers/males are given a larger share because they are in effect responsible for the females of the household and therefore their share of the inheritance would (i am assuming) go in that spending pot.
Even in the event of divorceor their husband’s death, women get their share of inheritance as stipulated by Islamic Law in the same way as men get their share. However, unlike men, women are not responsible for maintaining any relative, irrespective of their sound financial standing. The husband is not at liberty to help his relatives at the detriment of his own family.
But perhaps its just me, but haven’t family dynamics changed? Does an extended family unit exist? If it does, is it “close knit”? Because I very much doubt so. Do brothers still “provide” for their sisters if the father is deceased? Is that “responsibility” emphasised to them and understood as they understand the responsibility the father has towards the family? I’ve only seen this happening in the Indian Subcontinent (the women don’t work because they can’t, or there are no jobs, or become seamstresses to generate some income which is meagre) because thats the only place I am familar with. Is it similar in the Middle East and Arab countries?
Anywhere else (particularly in the West), the sisters are expected to work themselves. There is no-one to “look out for them” aside from the mother and perhaps the brothers if she is in some dire need. Aside from that, she is expected to pave her own way and make her own money.
Most women I know work themselves and generate their own income, and the brother’s are in employment and have their own money because they can’t afford to run the household, their own expenses AND spend on their (female) siblings. Some households have the women contributing towards the finances of the home and without their input they’d be in financial difficulty. They of course do so willingly because the family home is their home also and they believe helping out their father (and mother) is their responsibility.
So from the above POV, wouldnt the lesser inheritance share be inadequate for such a family arrangement? I understand that if the women receive a larger share they are in effect infringing and usurping the share of another but would that not be based on “need” and who would “need” a larger share? Would the deceased parents and grandparents “need” the amount of share they receive? Obviously it’d probably be better to give them their share and then ask for a percentage of it but those decisions would be better made depending on the character of the parents/grandparents and how willingly they’d understand and see your request for the share (insert myriad of family politics in here)
This response states that she may end up receiving “more” than her brothers
Another matter they arouse when they imagine that the woman s share in inheritance always equals to half the man s share of it, depending on what Allah, The All-High says: To the male, a portion equal to that of two females. [Al-Nisa 4:11] ! It is mere an illusion springing from deep inexcusable ignorance, for the Quran decides this verdict only in one case: when the testator dies leaving male and female children or brothers and sisters. It is well known that both of the son and the brother make their sisters their partners in possessing the rest of the inheritance after the owners of the other shares have had their shares. In such a case the brother- who has made his sister a partner-receives twice as much share as his sister who has been made partner. In all the other cases the man and the woman are equal in the limited inheritance portions, and the woman s potion may even exceed the man s in many cases.
I dont think thats necessarily true, and is entirely dependent on the dynamics of the family, the relationship between the siblings and of course whether they actually wish to make their brother or sister a “partner” in possession of the rest of the inheritance. Its too simplified an assumption to make.
The following snippet is in relation to bequests and gifts stated in a person’s will
However, the question arises as to whether it is necessary to distribute the estate equally between the children? The answer to this is that it is permissible to give the male children twofold of that given to the female children, as it would have been distributed as inheritance. It is also permissible to give all the children, male and female, equal shares. However, to give less than this to the daughters or to completely deprive them of any share, or to be unjust in the distribution of the wealth among the sons, without a valid Shar’i reason, is considered to be blameworthy and sinful. One will be sinful for favouring one child over the other, although the gift will stand as valid.
Yes, if there is an Islamically valid reason, such as one child being extremely disobedient or involved in open sinning, it would be permitted to give him/her less. (See: Radd al-Muhtar)
More can be read about the procedures of making a will in accordance to Shariah here
Im wondering if the above is applicable to actual shares of inheritance? The following is in relation to denying someone of their share in the inheritance
However, if you distributed your wealth to your other children before your death (and before any terminal illness), that would be permissible. In this way nothing will remain in your possession at your death to inherit by anyone. You will have to transfer complete ownership to them before your death for this to be a valid transfer.
Is the only reason for brothers inheriting a larger share of wealth due to maintenance and provision for the female siblings, or are there other reasons for it? Is divvying up the inheritance according to Sunni Law the ONLY way a Muslim can share out their wealth and any other way is seen as “unIslamic”?
Inner Reflections Transcribed 
Social dynamics have changed but that doesnt mean Islam has to change. Concentration has to be geared towards moulding into the roles Islam has defined for each invidual, husband, wife, father, mother, brother, sister, and fulfilment of the rights owed to them, rather than changing Islam to fit the sorry state where people have become negligent of these rights and responsblities.
The Islamic laws conform with its own teachings and values and they can’t be viewed to conform with values which contradict it, such as individualism.
Sumera, I have to admitt though (it may seem deviant) I have asked myself this question a few times. My father who is now very old has acquired a lot of wealth, now retired, the state is run by mom and me looking after younger sisters, father and step-mom. On the other hand my older brothers married and moved out long time ago, even though they offer to help but its not really needed since both me and mom can’t sit at home. But what does get me is that, they are not here to look after the elderly parents, yet they will get most of thier wealth. Alhamduliah knowing my brothers, at least I know they will look after us with father’s wealth.. but what about those who won’t? :S
The roles of men and women are supposed to be one way, but in actual fact and in practise they aren’t. Perhaps that may mean re-educating people, but where emphasis has shifted from a cohesive family unit – consisting of a large extended family its now all about the immediate nuclear family and “each to their own”. So these changes can’t completely be ignored and we can’t insist on sorting out people’s ideas of roles first and then address these issues since thats not an overnight thing to do.
Currently the father is seen to be responsible for his family, the husband for his wife but brothers are not seen to be responsible for their sisters. Dont know about you, but in our family circle thats how it is. Sure they’d try their best to help out, but to provide for their sisters for her entire lifespan wouldn’t be possible.
They dont see it as an obligation in the strictest terms (as Islamically it is) but rather its more about “helping” her out. Perhaps they feel a sense of responsibility, but for how long would they do that? And personally I think it’d be unreasonable to have such expectations from them for a long duration, especially if they have families of their own to tend to, or if they emigrate or move cities, you’d have to move with them. I’d feel like a burden.
But the thing is Tia, I personally dont see my paternal uncles or maternal uncles caring for us if we end up in such a position whereby that would become necessary. I also can’t see my brothers doing the same since they’re in the process of setting up their own homes and thinking about marriage and what not.
This issue really isnt that problematic for me because my father has stated he has divvied up his wealth equally between me and my brothers and he stated to have done it this way due to the above reasons (and because he see’s me as being more capable and responsible than them! The model daughter :p )
But I can see where your thoughts have drifted in from. It seems as though they’ll acquire a large share yet haven’t really “earned” it (by not being present to care for your elderly parents) and may not “put it back into the pot” to care for the rest of you. Its a hard one to get your head round.
Surely there is some kind of leeway/flexibility with regards to assigning inheritance?
First, let me suggest we change our point of view. We do not distribute to the daughter half of a son’s share because the son has more duties, responsibilities or whatever. We do it because Allah has said so in the Quran and we accept His word. So the reason the guy gets ‘more’ is because Allah said so.
As to why Allah mandated this, He has His reasons, and we can at best guess. Even today, there’s more expenditure on a daughter than a son (from clothes, cosmetics, jewelery and wedding). Moreover, the man is almost always looking out for more people than just him, even today in the West. Many parents take a year or two off when they get their first child. Women earn less than man (glass ceiling) so while they could contribute to the family, most of the contribution is made by men.
Finally, one part of Islam cannot be examined while ignoring the other. A man in Islam has the legal, fiqh, responsibility to look after his unmarried sister, orphan children of his brother, his parents in their old age and his wife (or wives), not to mention his own kids. Thus, a man needs more money.
Dear Sumera
I would like to thank you for all you view points on aspects of Islam.
I would also like to thank you for being such an inspiration.
Today I have decided to leave my husband and have chosen to have an independent single life and would like to thank you for helping me clear my head and get my priorities straight.
I have also chosen to live life without my hijab for the time being until I can clarify many things in my head. Thank you for all your clarifications on matters that used to confuse me but not anymore.
May God reward you.
Haleem: Theres a lot of things we would just “do” because its mentioned in the Quran. But we are human and usually wish to know why – even if our assumptions are off track.
The reasons why daughters “expenses” are more is simply because they desire more. Not everyone has rampant expensive taste, plus spendng on your children is a parents duty. They could easily refuse her certain material things just as they refuse their sons. Its necessary at times to do that anyway. So if we sit here counting pennies it seems like any “care” one provides to another is a chore.
Thats my entire point; man may be responsible and obligated to care for those that come under his wing, but how many do?
Anonymous: I hope things clear up for you soon.
good questions. I would also add that if a woman has money then her male relatives have no compuntion about asking her for some. When im in bangladesh, my cousins whose fathers got more inheritance than my mother did – still ask me for money, because they assume i have more seeing as i live ‘abroad’. next time ill say well im female, so i have no obligation to you. Of course it doesn’t work in real life – family is family.
certainly a lot of Bangladeshi men don’t seem to have any such moral ethics Haleem – ( supporting their family) loads of them are hanging about waiting for prestigious jobs and will fleece off their married sisters and families in the meantime. What you are talking about is the ideal, certainly not the reality.
and let’s not forget – the dowry. All those men wanting money from their wives’ family and parents – why are they relying on the wife for money in that instance? oh -so that they can pay her bills right?! Pah.
Haleem – “Even today, there’s more expenditure on a daughter than a son (from clothes, cosmetics, jewelery and wedding).”
frankly that’s absolute rubbish. and I can’t believe the kind of blanket assumptions you’re making. Have you ever actually taken a look around Bangladesh! As well you and I know, most Bangladeshi families will spend a lot more on the boy’s education – send him abroad etc. Those are the ones with some money as well, in the villages – it is a FAR MORE DIRE situation.
I can’t believe in this day and age, people are making such blanket assumptions – i am very disappointed.
and let us not forget – the girls are doing a huge amount of work – which they are so obviously not paid for. So in the end – even though they are paying their way really, they are seen as a burden. And then everyone says, oh its the men who work so hard, have to support everyone, let’s give them more money.
Actually parents spend A LOT more on sons especially Arab parents upon whom Islam was revealed. From cars to education, boys cost a lot more than girls in Arabia. Boys are given better, higher and more expensive education.
Yes Allah has ordained so but I don’t think many women are happy with it. Sex change operations are the most in thing in KSA where strict shariah laws insist that girls inherit less.
I have one maternal uncle and four paternal uncles. My father expired a few months ago and not one uncle has kept in touch with us on a regular basis. “I” call them every Friday. “I am” supporting my mother and my sister. They live with “me.”
This is the kind of thing that i find really infuriating. and it seems, the only way the men will get it is if all the women STOP working, stop doing things for their families, for their in-laws, and then the men and their religious rulers might see what was happening. of course it won’t – because the women have too much empathy and will carry on working hard for their families.
And finally – there is no reason to assume the woman will marry a well-off man, he might not have had any inheritance. Insisting a woman should marry a man who has an inheritance – well where does that leave us? Wed them off to the highest bidder – that’s what.
And I am now very glad i do not have any male siblings.
If females create more expenses, then when it comes to weddings, dont the boys side gift their daughter in law with jewellery and clothes? They aren’t obligated to do so (its termed “wadhi” in punjaabi, not sure what it is in Urdu!) but they do because its a cultural expectation (and I think its a sweet gesture from the inlaws side). Its appalling to think one sex is more “expensive” to maintain than the other. It simply takes us back to the era where girls were seen to be a burden, didnt contribute much to the family in monetary value and were more of an “effort” generally. Is it any wonder that people STILL favour boys over girls with this kind of an attitude?
Achelois, that was one thing that led to this question. Most families have a multitude of family politics -and those continue to exist long after a person has deceased. So to expect any “care” or “concern” from them is fanciful. Which is why its even more pertinent that the immediate family is given a fair amount of inheritance. After all, they are the one’s who would “need” it more and it’d probably go back into the pot thats spent towards the family as oppose to the inheritance that paternal or maternal uncles may receive.
Sonia, the dowry situation if it still occurs amongst Muslims today is a dire thing. Why should they demand money from the girls side of the family? Sometimes its disguised under “jahez” (the items the girls family gifts her with). I’ve not really seen it occur in the community I live in, but have heard about it. Its an appalling thing to do – sometimes the grooms family threaten to walk out on the wedding if the girls side dont “come up with the goods”! (some sly ones up the amount on the actual wedding day – putting the girls family into a quandry. Shameful!)
See, if the distribution of inheritance was based on need, then the eldest child should get the most!
I am the oldest child of four siblings, I started working quite early and have supported my family and indeed help my sister through college. My youngest brother is just 14. When he will grow up to go to university, he won’t have as much responsibilities as me. Yet, we both get the same inheritance, even though I have more ‘needs’.
This is why I said the reason we share the inheritance in that way is because Allah said so, not because guys have more needs. There are so many things in Islam one may not like (I personally don’t like waking up for Fajr on the weekends) but one must do because Allah has said so – that is the test of a Muslim – obeying Allah’s commands.
Moreover, you are all by God’s grace intelligent and dynamic women, but you are the exception. Even in countries like Canada, more men than women work, and provide for their families. This is fact. [pdf – rural Canada, widening gap]
There’s other fields where men are disadvantage. If a man is divorced, for example, he HAS to provide living support and alimony to his wife, REGARDLESS of how much she earns. I don’t like it, but what can you do?
Sorry for the long comment Sumera.
There may be a few instances where men do not support their families, and a sister is left to support them. In fact there may be many instances. I don’t think that is the real question. I see the real concern here being can we alter a ruling because facts don’t fit any more. The question then becomes, aren’t we undermining the legal system of Islam then? What do you do with the source texts? You can, in essence, come up with anew methodology for extracting rules of Islam, but it will probably be divorced from the source texts (Qur’an and hadith). What this means is that it will not be shariah, but something else entirely; a new body of “common” law. And that really is ok, as long as you recognize that these rulings are not based on Islam, even as understood by the Prophet. After all, even during the Prophet (saws)’s time, women earned money and some were much wealthier than others, even some men.
No-one is speaking of altering a ruling (I wasnt anyway) but were wondering if there is leeway within the existing set of rulings regarding this to account for individual cases and circumstances.
with all Islamic laws there are compensations and ‘leeway’ that’s why there exists the concept of judiciary in Islam and quiet institutionalised. That is the Islamic court system (Hisbah), where historically disputes regarding inheritance and such were taken up. It was based on those disputes that scholars were able to formulate the fiqh of inheritence. Fiqh is not literally the law (hukm) itself but the detailed explanation of it. Therefore, the details may vary as in, all laws… since the laws came for human beings who are not all the same in terms of circumstances and problems.
I really like this blog as it highlights the kind of challenges faced by Muslims. And unfortunately those so called Scholars with answers are mostly not up to the challenge, keeping Muslims intellectually contained to keep their own fatwa shops running.
(I made new post on my baby blog on these lines) 🙂
Asalaam alaykum Tia
Theres a lot of things that perhaps due to ones own limitations in terms of understanding, or in using inadequate comparisons (such as comparing the West with the East and vice versa) and a myraid of other factors that not only make some issues challenging but also terribly confusing. I also dont know if thats took to indicate a lack of faith – but I hope its not. It can sometimes seem like so.
These online fatwa websites don’t really help much either as most dont even answer the question!
I appreciate your contribution Tia. Really, you have no idea how much! 🙂
wa alaikum assalam Sumera
Thinking and questioning is productive as progression of mankind and nations is linked to thoughts. It would be rather futile to carry doctrinal thoughts without conviction, therefore constant questioning of ones own set of beliefs is analogous to attaining progression. Islam postulates thinking, it is this thinking which transformed nomadic Arabs into greatest civilisation and when it ceased they became backward once again.
Rules and laws by nature can’t be left alone with individuals. The idea of ‘Freedom’, however flimsy it appears seems to be somewhat functioning and instituting a progressive society. Imagine, if people were left alone in an Island with the idea of freedom, it would be chaotic. Hence, there is need for Mechanisms to regulate ‘freedom’ such as government, education, police, judiciary,etc. Similarly, for Islam as an ideological doctrine requires these mechanisms for it to function correctly, and the reason why ‘Islamists’ like me can’t see any other way except Islam materialising at State level.
Imagine, if a person was negligent of his responsbilities or was unfair to his subjects could easily be taken to the court, it may sound strange but Islamic history is full of such cases of sisters taking brothers to court etc. We don’t have to look so far away, Fatima bint Muhammed (saw) -the princess of Jannah, disputed with Abu Bakr(ra)- the Caliph, over her inheritence. Basically, for any laws to work they have to be regulated, defined, codified and implemented. Islam has all the mechanisms from talbeegh (preaching), tarbiyah (training), tazkiyah (purification) but these are not enough, if they were there would be no need for hudood or vice versa.
I should really take my rants to my own blog.
Feel free to rant here all you like!
The entire post was filled with ignorance., and im equally horrified to read the comments.
There is no way the shari’ah can be changed just because “family dynamics” have changed. A male gets twice the female simply because Allah has said so. Any other reason given by scholars is not the actual reason for the ruling, but only a perceived wisdom.
If you don’t have knowledge, refrain from speaking, lest you lead people astray.
Stop spreading fitnah in the name of Islam!