What is the ruling on a grandmother writing an additional portion of inheritance to one of her daughters on the pretext that she was not provided for in her marriage like her sisters, and what is the interpretation of the grandmother's dream of her deceased husband extinguishing a fire while she rekindles it?

It is not permissible to favor some children over others in a gift unless there is a legitimate reason; otherwise, the gift is null and void and must be returned. Preparing a daughter for marriage is not a valid reason to single her out for a gift, because the fundamental principle is that it is the husband's responsibility. If the maintenance of the daughters is obligatory upon the mother due to her wealth and their poverty, then their preparation and bearing the expenses of their education in a reasonable manner are considered maintenance, not a gift. Equality is obligatory in gifts, not in maintenance, because maintenance is determined by need and custom. Whatever exceeds need and custom is a gift in which equality is obligatory. The value of preparing the sisters and the value of educating the specific sister should be considered. If it is within what is customary, then it is maintenance. If it exceeds what is needed, then it is a gift in which justice is obligatory. A gift is effected by immediate ownership, and whatever is contingent upon death is a will.