The starting point in answering this question should be the lawsuit filed by the widow of the deceased son. She is claiming something to which she feels entitled, or at least she is led to believe so by her sons-in-law and daughters. You have mentioned that the law in your country is not Islamic law and the court will judge the case according to that law. Therefore, the lady who has filed this lawsuit may gain something as a result. If judgment is passed in her favor, she will be able to enforce that judgment and receive that amount of money, whatever it is. Nobody will be able to oppose her, because she will be backed by the force of law. But even if the amount of money she could gain is enormous, she should first ask herself whether she is doing right or wrong. To some people, this advice may sound wrong. They will say that if the law of the land gives that lady an amount of money, why should she not claim it or enforce judgment by law? Is it not that her relative will be denying her something to which she is entitled? In answer, I will say that matters of inheritance have been legislated by Allah Himself, who has given us a detailed system of inheritance, assigning shares to relatives of deceased people according to their degree of kinship. It is the portions prescribed by Allah which determine our entitlements. If we claim these, we are within our rights. If we claim something else, we will be doing others injustice. We would be claiming something to which we are not entitled at all. If a secular law supports such a claim, that is only because that law is made by man and it does not conform to what Allah has legislated. It is Allah's law which takes precedence. That is a matter left to us. We may seek the enforcement of Allah's law or some other law. If we try to win something with the support of man-made law, knowing that Allah has not given us a claim to it, we will be guilty of a grievous offense.

In order to understand the magnitude of such an offense, it is pertinent to quote the Hadith in which the Prophet, peace be upon him, explains his position as a judge in disputes between individuals. He is quoted as saying something on the following lines: "I am only a human being and you put to me your disputes. One of you may have a better or stronger argument than that of his brother. I may, therefore, judge in his favor. Let him then reflect that if I give him something which belongs by right to his brother, I am only giving him a brand of fire. Let him then take it or leave it." That is certainly a very apt description by the Prophet, peace be upon him, of what we may do with the help of the law, knowing that in reality, and according to Allah's law, it does not belong to us. Who of us wants to close his hand on a brand of fire? What we get of someone else's rightful property is a brand of fire which we swallow and which remains burning in our hearts. We must, therefore, be extra careful. We must never attempt to get something to which we are not entitled.

The foregoing is a simple principle of Islamic justice. It does not matter what verdict a judge may pass; we know that we are entitled to and must finally stick to it. To claim something which is not rightfully ours is to try to usurp the right of others. That will be unjust and it will earn us punishment in the Hereafter. No one in his right mind will buy something in this life knowing that the price will be punishment by Allah in the Hereafter.

You have not explained what the lady is actually claiming. What is it that her sons-in-law and her daughters have persuaded her to claim and to seek the support of the law for her claim? I guess that the deceased may have left some property of his own. That may have been part of the family's wealth. The family might have decided to keep the wealth intact and to look after the deceased man's widow and daughters. If this is the case, then the widow is right to make her claim. It is not right for the grandfather or his two sons to decide that the family wealth should be kept intact. If they wanted it so, they should have allotted the widow and her daughter their rightful shares in the business.

The man's sons may argue that they have paid for the education and marriage of the two daughters. That may be so, but it does not deprive the heirs of their late brother of their rights. They should not forget that it was the duty of the grandfather to look after his granddaughters after their father's death. The kindness the family had shown to the widow is certainly well-placed, since she had decided not to marry again, but to look after her daughters. Moreover, the gifts given to the daughters on their marriage are gifts. They do not deprive them of their right.

The matter should be explained to the old man and he should see to it that everybody receives her rightful share. The deceased son's property should have been divided on the following lines: One sixth to his father, one eighth to his widow and the remainder to be divided equally between the two daughters.

No, there is no contradiction in the matter, because I have been talking about two different situations. I stressed equality of boys and girls in the gifts a parent wishes to give them in his lifetime. In this case all children must be given equal gifts, because they have the same claim on their father's or mother's care. If a father were to give more generous gifts to one or more of his children, whether on the basis of sex or personal affection, then he is not maintaining justice between them. The Prophet, peace be upon him, teaches us: "Fear God and maintain justice between your children."

In inheritance, however, the matter is different. To start with, let me remind you that the Islamic system of inheritance is very elaborate. It has been outlined by God Himself in the Qur'an. We may not deviate from it at all, in any circumstances. Now why would God, the most just of judges, wish to give a woman half the share of a man who relates to the deceased on the same footing? There is no favoritism here, because God does not admit such favoritism. It is simply because of the duties and responsibilities He has placed on each of them.

This means that God has taken stock of what He has imposed of duties on men and women and considered the rights He has given to each of them. He then determined their rights of inheritance on the basis of balancing their respective rights against their duties.

I understand that in your community, women are not given their full share of inheritance because they receive their dowry.

But this is not the proper Islamic way. Inheritance becomes due when a person dies and it applies to all his property which he owned at the time of his death. His heirs are those whom God has defined. So no heir may be denied his or her share on any grounds. Each must be paid in full, in the same way as they all have to meet the obligations of the deceased if he is in debt when he dies.

I have explained on several occasions that the dowry which is paid by the bride's family to the bridegroom is contrary to the Islamic practice, which makes a woman entitled to receive a dower, or mahr, from her husband to ensure the validity of the marriage. This is not our main point of discussion now. We should consider, however, this dowry as a gift to the daughter on her marriage. This should be the basis of our discussion of this question.

Islam makes it clear that justice must be maintained between all children. So when a father gives one of his children a gift, he should maintain justice between his children and give everyone of them a similar gift. What is more is that girls and boys are entitled to equal gifts. I have often quoted the highly authentic Hadith which mentions that An-Nauman ibn Basheer was given a slave by his father as a gift. His father requested the Prophet to be a witness to this transaction. The Prophet asked him: "Have you given all your children similar gifts?" When An-Nauman’s father answered in the negative, the Prophet refused to be a witness, telling him: "Seek yourself some other witness, for I do not witness an act of injustice."

Note how the Prophet describes the giving of a gift to one child without giving similar gift to all one's children as 'an act of injustice. 'All injustice is forbidden in Islam. We should also note that the Prophet phrased his question to An-Nauman’s father without distinction between sons and daughters: "Have you given all your children similar gifts?" He did not say, 'your sons,’ which indicates that both sons and daughters are entitled to the same treatment. Indeed this fits with the Islamic principle which requires a father to look after all his children in the same way. A daughter is entitled to receive the same care and education from her parents as a son.

So what you and your father should do is to ensure justice between yourself, brother and sisters. What your father has done to his children to see them properly settled in life should be valued and you should receive the same value as a gift. If you have contributed to the expenses of your sister's marriages, then this may be considered, so that fairness is maintained. Your father should call a family meeting and explain to everyone how much he had given to each of his children.