What is the ruling on the gold that a mother used to buy for her daughter when she was young? Is she obligated to distribute its value equally among her children, or is it the daughter's right in exchange for the mother's contribution to her brother's marriage and furnishing his apartment? And if distribution is obligatory, should it be based on the value of the gold at the time of purchase or its value today?

If a mother buys jewelry for her daughter for adornment, this is not a preference for her over her brother, and she is not obliged to give her brother the same. Nor is she obliged to give the daughter the equivalent of what she spent on her brother's marriage by custom, because fairness in expenses is achieved by giving each child what they need. However, if the jewelry exceeds the need for adornment and the mother gave it to her daughter as a gift, then justice dictates that she should be fair between her and her brother by returning the jewelry, or by giving the brother the same or its value. The same applies to the expenses of marrying off the brother: if they exceed the need, they are a gift in which fairness must be observed.