of acceptance, because nothing can enter a person’s ownership unless he accepts it, nor can something be waived from a person if he does not accept its waiver.

In fact, this may become a means of imposing a favor upon the recipient of the gift or upon the person released from the debt. Thus, the view that it does not enter his ownership except with his consent is closer to what is correct.

In summary: the bridal gift is reduced by half by every separation initiated by the husband before consummation, seclusion, sexual touching, or looking at that which none but a husband may look at.

His statement, “excluding its separate increase,” means that a separate increase belongs exclusively to the wife. For example, if a woman’s bridal gift from her husband was a she-camel and it gave birth to an offspring, the offspring belongs solely to the wife, because it is a separate increase. Likewise, if it was a house that was rented out, and rental income accrued between the marriage contract and consummation, that income belongs to the wife.

His statement, “excluding its separate increase”: from when? From the marriage contract until the divorce. As for whatever comes after the divorce, it belongs to them both.

For example, if a man gives his wife a sheep as her bridal gift, and the sheep gives birth before he divorces her, then the offspring and the milk belong to the wife. But if he divorces her, the milk produced after the divorce is divided equally between them, because it is an increase in property jointly owned by them both. The same applies to a house if he gives it to a woman as her bridal gift and it is rented out: the rental income after the contract belongs to the wife; then, once he divorces her, the rental income is divided equally between them.

His statement, “In the case of a connected increase, he is entitled to half of its value without its increase”: an example of this is: