Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

The second view on this issue is that she is entitled to half of the customary dowry, because the dowry was referred to and an obligation was stipulated, though it was not specified. Yet the Quran states: “...or you have not specified for them an obligation.” [Quran 2:236] Here, an obligation was stipulated: it was said to be a dowry, but it was not specified.

Upon considering the two lines of reasoning, it becomes clear that the established position of the school is stronger, because it is supported by the evidence—namely, the Prophet’s saying: “Every condition not found in the Book of Allah is invalid.” This is invalid because of the defect in its designation; and what is legally invalid is like that which is physically nonexistent. Thus, we return to the ruling that no dowry was specified, and she is consequently entitled to a consolatory gift.

His statement, “by virtue of the contract,” means by the contract itself, not by leaving the matter unspecified.

His statement, “and the judge determines it,” means the customary dowry. What is meant by “the judge” is the qadi. You should know that some scholars disliked referring to the qadi as “the judge,” citing the saying of Allah, Most High: “Judgment belongs to none but Allah. He relates the truth, and He is the best of those who decide.” [Quran 6:57] However, this view is incorrect. The correct view is that it is permissible, and the Quran itself indicates this. Allah, Most High, says: “And if you judge, judge between them with justice.” [Quran 5:42] It is well known that when one says, “So-and-so judged,” the active participle derived from “judged” is “judge.” There is no doubt that this is permissible; hence, jurists are nearly unanimous in using the term “judge.”

The determination of the dowry was entrusted to the judge in order to prevent disagreement between the two spouses: the husband might say, “The customary dowry is one thousand riyals,” while she says, “The customary dowry is two thousand.”

His statement, “according to its proper amount,” means according to the proper amount of this dowry. For if it is set too high, that would be unfair to the husband; and if it is set too low, that would be unfair to the woman. In this regard, the woman’s circumstances are taken into consideration, while the husband’s circumstances carry no weight. Thus, even if she is wealthy and of honorable lineage,

والقول الثاني في المسألة: أن لها نصف مهر المثل؛ لأن المهر أشير إليه وفرضت الفريضة، ولكن ما عينت، والذي في القرآن: ﴿أَوْ تَفْرِضُوا لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً﴾ [البقرة: ٢٣٦] وهنا فرضت، فقيل: بمهر، ولكن ما عُين. وعند التأمل في التعليلين يظهر أن المذهب أقوى؛ لأنه مدعوم بالدليل، وهو قوله ﷺ: «كل شرط ليس في كتاب الله فهو باطل»، وهذا باطل لفساد تسميته، والباطل شرعاً كالمعدوم حساً، وحينئذٍ نرجع إلى أنه لا تسمية، فيكون لها المتعة. وقوله: «بالعقد» أي: بمجرد العقد، لا بالتفويض. قوله: «ويفرضه الحاكم» أي: مهر المثل، والحاكم المراد به القاضي، واعلم أن بعض أهل العلم كره أن يقال للقاضي: الحاكم، لقوله تعالى: ﴿إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلَّهِ يَقُصُّ الْحَقَّ وَهُوَ خَيْرُ الْفَاصِلِينَ﴾ [الأنعام: ٥٧] وهذا القول ليس بصحيح، بل الصحيح أنه يجوز، وقد دل عليه القرآن، قال تعالى: ﴿وَإِنْ حَكَمْتَ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ﴾ [المائدة: ٤٢]، ومعلوم أنه إذا قيل: حكم فلان، فاسم الفاعل من حكم حاكم، ولا شك في جوازه، ولذلك الفقهاء يكادون يجمعون على التعبير بلفظ الحاكم. وإنما جعلنا الفرض للحاكم؛ لئلا يقع النزاع بينهما، فيقول الزوج: مهر المثل ألف ريال، وهي تقول: مهر المثل ألفان. قوله: «بقدره» أي: بقدر هذا المهر؛ لأنه إن زاد أجحف بالزوج، وإن نقص أجحف بالمرأة، ويراعى في ذلك حال الزوجة، والزوج لا عبرة به، فلو كانت هي غنية، حسيبة،

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies