with his wealth, since he has offered a bridal gift. Thus, the marriage is valid by virtue of the bridal gift, whether it is small or large.

Some scholars, including al-Khiraqi, one of the Hanbali jurists, said that it is invalid even if a bridal gift is stipulated for both women. They held that shighar does not derive from vacancy, but from the expression used for a dog when it raises its leg to urinate; it was given this name as a censure of it. This is the apparent meaning of the report concerning Mu'awiyah—may Allah be pleased with him—when he ordered the marriage to be annulled despite a bridal gift having been stipulated, saying, “This is the shighar which the Messenger of Allah—may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him—forbade” (1). It is true that the bridal gift may be complete, but a person may nevertheless neglect his trust because he will thereby obtain marriage to this woman.

Other scholars adopted a detailed view: if the bridal gift is the customary bridal gift for a woman of her standing, without any reduction, and the woman has consented to the husband and he is a suitable match for her, then the marriage is valid. This is the sound view according to us: if three conditions are met—suitability of the match, the customary bridal gift, and consent—then there is nothing wrong with it. There is no injustice to the women, for they have been given their bridal gifts in full, nor is there any coercion. The most that has occurred is that each man desired the other’s daughter and stipulated that he marry her to him—especially in times such as ours, when people, may Allah protect us, are unwilling to marry off their daughters and instead keep them tightly under their control.

Yet, even if we say that this is valid in principle, the door should not be opened to the general public. For a man who has no fear of Allah, if he desires to marry this man’s daughter, then even if she—