—that is, he must have a surplus above what he and those dependent upon him need for that day. Anything that may be sold to pay a debt may likewise be sold to meet this maintenance. According to the sounder view, anyone able to earn is obliged to do so in order to fulfil the duty. No maintenance is due to someone who already possesses, or who is earning, what suffices for his own needs. It is, however, owed to a poor person who cannot earn—such as one who is chronically ill, a minor, or insane; where the needy relative is able-bodied yet unemployed, there are several opinions, the strongest of which still obliges maintenance, while a third opinion restricts the duty to ascendants and not to descendants.
I add: that third opinion appears the clearest, and Allah knows best. The obligation extends only to what meets the need; once that need is gone, the obligation lapses. It does not turn into a debt against the provider unless a judge fixes it, or authorises the dependant to borrow because of the provider’s absence or refusal.
A mother is obliged to nurse her child with the first milk (colostrum). Thereafter, if no wet-nurse is available except herself or an unrelated woman, she must continue to suckle him; but if both are available, she is not compelled. Should she wish to nurse while still married to the child’s father, the sounder position—preferred by most scholars—is that he may not prevent her, and Allah knows best. If both parents agree and she asks for the customary wage, she must be given it; if she asks for more, she is not. In the same way, if an unrelated woman volunteers or agrees to a lesser wage, the mother is not compelled—on the stronger view—to match it.
When two sets of relatives are equally close, they share the expense; if they differ, the sounder opinion assigns it to the nearer. If they are equal in closeness, the sounder view is to divide the burden according to their prospective shares of inheritance; another opinion looks first to inheritance and then to closeness. Where the two heirs are equal in both respects, should they bear the cost equally or in proportion to their inheritance shares? Both views are reported.
If both parents are alive, the obligation rests on the father; another view makes it joint if the child has reached puberty. Among grandparents, if some are linked through others, the nearer is responsible; otherwise, liability follows the nearer degree, though another opinion bases it on inheritance, and yet another on financial guardianship.
Where both ascendants and descendants exist, the sounder view places the burden on the descendant, however remote; and if several relatives are needy, a man supports his wife first, then the next-closest relative. Another opinion gives priority to those who would inherit, while a third assigns it to whoever is the financial guardian.
Section
Ḥaḍāna (custody) is the care of one who cannot fend for himself and the management of his lodging. Women are generally better suited to it. The foremost right belongs to the mother, followed by the maternal grandmothers connected through females, the nearer taking precedence. According to the new opinion, after them comes the father’s mother, then her female ancestors, then the grandmother through the father’s father and her female ancestors. The old opinion, however, prefers sisters and maternal aunts over them, and in it a full sister takes precedence over a maternal aunt.