the position of Abū Hanīfah and others, the father may not compel her if she has reached puberty. This is the soundest view, supported by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and corroborated by fundamental legal principles.

It is thus clear that most scholars hold the following view in this case: if she approves the contract, it is valid; otherwise, a fresh contract is required.

It may be said that this is the stronger view here, especially since the father concluded the contract believing that she was a virgin and that he did not need to seek her permission. If the actual situation was otherwise, he was excused. If she then approves the marriage, this is not equivalent to a transaction undertaken by someone acting without authorization. Whether a contract may remain suspended pending ratification is a well-known point of disagreement among scholars. The more persuasive view is to distinguish between different cases, as explained at length elsewhere.

The Shaykh—may Allah have mercy on him—said:

“Neither parent has the right to compel a child to marry someone they do not wish to marry, and refusing does not make the child undutiful. If no one has the right to force a child to eat something they find repugnant when they can eat something they desire, the same applies even more strongly to marriage. The unpleasantness of eating disliked food lasts only a short while, whereas living with an unwanted husband or wife causes prolonged distress to the other spouse, who cannot part from them.”

He—may Allah have mercy on him—was asked:

“A man under his father’s guardianship married without his father’s permission. Well-known men testified that his father had died, although the father was still alive. Is the contract valid or not? Does marrying without his father’s permission entail any obligation for the son or not?”