Someone suffering from a fatal disease wishes to grant most of his inheritance to a certain group of his heirs, for he knows they are more in need compared to his other heirs. Is it permissible for him to grant huge amounts of his wealth to some heirs? Can he take an oral or written pledge from the other heirs to give up their shares?

The basic ruling, according to many scholars, is that a Muslim on his death bed cannot grant any of his wealth to anyone, for he is not legally competent at that time. In addition, it is not permissible for him to prefer some heirs to others.
Yet, it is permissible for him to ask the rest of the heirs to give up some of their inheritance to the poorer ones. If the heirs comply after his death, it will be good and they will also be acting dutifully towards him, but if they do not, there is no harm on them because giving this gift is not binding as long as it was not received as such. It is a gift related to someone’s death, and thus it is not binding, unless the rich heirs wish to do it. In which case, it will be better and preferable. Only Imam Malik declares it is binding and believes it is permissible for the poor heirs to sue the richer ones for them (the poor) to receive this gift. Allah knows best!

Dr. Abdullah ibn al-Mahfouz ibn Bayyah, former Mauritanian justice minister and vice chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, was asked about his opinion concerning ending boycott of Arla, a Danish company, as recommended by the conference held in Bahrain. He answered:

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah and upon all his Companions. I see that the boycott should be lifted of this company. I expressed this point of view in a conference held in Bahrain that combined scholars, intellectuals, and researchers. It is based on the following reason:

1. The general principle stated in the Quranic verse “And no laden soul shall carry the load of another”. The other verse in the chapter of al-Najm reads “Or is it that he has not been told of what was in the Scriptures of Moses and of Abraham- who proved ever true [to his Lord’s word: That no laden soul shall carry the load of another; and that there is nothing for a person except that for which he strives.” This principle is found in all heavenly legislations and in all human laws.
2. I believe that the apology presented by the company, along with its renouncement of what these people did, is enough, when added to the first reason, to lift boycott of this company.

3. Taking interests into consideration, we should deal with reasonable persons who desire to build good relations and treatments. We should deal with them equally and should stretch our hands to those who stretch their hands to us. The basic principle in the relations is to have kind and equitable treatment with those who do not fight us or launch war against us- be it verbal or military war. Almighty Allah says “Allah does not forbid you from [honorable relations with] those who have not fought you over religion, nor expelled you from your dwellings- that you relate kindly and equitably with them. Indeed, Allah loves those who are just.” This company did not do harm against us and consequently, it deserves our kind and equitable treatment.

4. Forgiving, pardoning, tolerance, and kind treatment are values and principles beyond doubts in Islam.

Through our conduct and behavior and through stretching our hands to others we can embody these values. Conversely, through our improper conduct we may cause tremendous harms to our interest and our call to Islam which is a call to peace, love, and cordiality. I believe that this attitude is the appropriate one that helps Muslims’ need to create public opinion that deals with the West. If we are to reject every hand stretched to us, this will mean that we will unconsciously provoke others against us, which will be short-sidedness. I believe that this will cause tremendous harm to our interests and will provoke people against us; and thus our call will not reach others and our words will not be listened to. Thus, the interest is to stretch our hands to them.
Finally, I prefer that lifting the boycott should be on the basis of a meeting held between this company and the general secretariat of the conference. This meeting can reach a binding agreement based on some conditions declared by the company that may help in changing the typical image that the West has. This is my opinion. Almighty Allah is the One who says the truth and guides to the right path. Almighty Allah knows best.

Peace and blessings be upon you, together with the mercy and blessings of Allah. Your eminence Sheikh! I work in a big company and I have good and respectable relations with many people from different religions and sects (Shi`ites, Christians, …). I will be married soon; and my question is about inviting them to my wedding and whether this involves showing alliance to them. I want to find a solution to this embarrassing problem in a way that conforms to the Shari`ah. Peace be upon you together with the mercy and blessings of Allah.

All praise is due to Allah alone. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. And upon you be peace, together with the mercy and blessings of Allah. With regard to the wedding feast, is it permissible for him to invite those whom he deems as deviating from the truth or those who are not Muslims. The issue is broad if there is a need or necessity to invite these persons – such as to avoid severance of relations, rancor or hatred, or to bring a benefit that will set things aright. The evidence for this is the report mentioned by Ibn Hisham, Ibn Sa`d, and other scholars of the Prophet’s biography that, by the end of the three days he stayed in Mecca to perform `Umrah according to his agreement with Quraysh, men from Quraysh (Ibn `Amer and Ibn `Abd al-`Uzza) came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) asking him to leave quickly, according to the agreement. He said to them, “What wrong will fall on you if you allow me to make my wedding among you and to make food to serve you when you attend it.” [Reported by al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (6796) on the authority of Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him)]
This was an invitation from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to the idolatrous people of Mecca to attend the wedding feast he would make because of his marriage to Maymonah (may Allah be pleased with her). This is the basic principle if there is a benefit or need that one should deal with non-Muslims or with persons toward whom he has a particular attitude.

Accordingly, I say that the issue is broad and we have mentioned the evidence. Three opinions were reported from Imam Ahmad concerning this issue, as mentioned in Al-Insaf, and the third one mentions the permissibility of congratulating, offering condolences to non-Muslim, and visiting the sick among the non-Muslims, if there is a benefit from this. This was also chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah. Thus, if there is a benefit, this makes things easier and also allows him to invite these people to his wedding feast without feeling uneasy. Allah knows best.

Can a man prevent his wife from working, knowing that he agreed to marry her after he knew that she worked as a teacher. What is the ruling for this case according to the Malikite school or according to ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah (adherents to the Sunnah and the Muslim mainstream)?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him), upon his family and his companions. And upon you be peace, together with the mercy and blessings of Allah. First, we say to the questioner that the Malikite school is not foreign to ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah. Imam Malik is a leading scholar among ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah. Hence, there are not two separate opinions; one according to Malik and the other according to ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah.
As for the wife’s work, the basic principle is that the husband has guardianship over his wife provided that he can afford her provision and needs. Therefore, according to Malik and al-Shafi`i, who are from ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah, if he cannot afford this, his guardianship is not complete and hence she can ask for a divorce. On the other hand, Abu Hanifah views that such a provision remains as a debt on the husband.
Thus, one can prevent his wife from working if he can provide her needs. But for me – and I am one of ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah – it seems that the issue refers to customs and the individuals concerned. I
n some places, if the wife is prevented from work and remains at home, this will be a reason for great inconvenience and for more evils. Accordingly, the issue should be weighed up according to the benefits and evils. Women among the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) worked. Asma’, wife of al-Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with him), worked. She provided fodder for the watering-camel of al-Zubayr, as reported in an authentic hadith. [See al-Bukhary (5224) and Muslim (2182)] Another woman was told to stop working on her palm-trees as she was in her waiting period, but the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him) said to her, “Reap your palm-trees.” This is an authentic hadith [See al-Musannaf by `Abd al-Razzaq (7:25)]

Thus, work for women is not something new. It is something known in Islam and hence we should be broadminded in this regard. It is true that the husband has guardianship over his wife as the head of the family. In the Islamic Shari`ah, things have to be under control. “No three persons should travel without having one person as a chief.” [See al-Bayhaqy (9:359) and al-Musannaf by `Abd al-Razzaq (4:58)] Thus, in order to keep order and discipline, the husband is the person who is the chief. But this does not mean that he may do or say whatever he wants. Rather, the household is arranged according to his counsel. Almighty Allah commands that the two spouses should consult one another with regard to weaning their child, “But if both [parents] desire to wean [the child], by their mutual consent and consultation.” [2:233] How much more, then, should be the case with regard to her own affairs?
In short, if he commands her to do something that does not contradict the Shari`ah, she has to obey him, but he is not permitted to command her to do something that leads to evil or to losing some benefit. But if her work will lead to mingling with men or to other evil consequences, he has the right to command her to leave it and she has to obey him. This is the answer according to the position of Malik and the majority of scholars.

There is a great controversy among scholars on the use of musical instruments. Most scholars judged it to be impermissible, citing a Prophetic hadith that prohibits it, while some others permitted it. To be in the safe side, use non-string and non-wind instruments, such as drums, tambourine, and other percussion instruments.

Once, I met the chanter Sami Yusuf in Canada, where he made several performances. I cannot disapprove of his use of music in chants. Unless there are evident considerations that entail prohibition, no decisive judgment should be given on such controversial issues as the use of music. So, I do not blame Yusuf or others who use music in chants; however, this by no means implies my approval.