its equivalent, it is not counted towards the dower recorded in the marriage contract. Indeed, even if he had not paid it to her, she would be entitled to claim it according to the stronger of the two scholarly opinions. It would form part of the dower to which her entitlement becomes established upon his death, and she would receive it in full after his death.

For if she agrees to an upfront portion and a deferred portion—what the early generations called “immediate” and “deferred”—and stipulates that he pay a certain amount upfront and defer a certain amount, then, even if she does not mention this when the contract is concluded, a prior stipulation that is not rescinded when the contract is concluded has the same force as one included in the contract, according to the stronger of the two scholarly opinions. I have discussed this at length in the substantial work I wrote on “Questions of Means and Legal Stratagems” and “An Exposition of the Evidence for the Invalidity of Marriage Intended to Permit Remarriage to a Former Husband.” The exception is where the intention was that, should he consummate the marriage, he would pay her that amount beforehand. If he does not consummate the marriage, she is not entitled to the amount stipulated as payable before consummation.

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

A woman’s husband paid her a sum upfront without specifying it in the dower document, then died. The judge sought to count that upfront payment towards the dower specified in the marriage contract, because the upfront payment had not been mentioned in the dower document.

He replied:

Praise be to Allah. If they had agreed upon an immediate, upfront portion and a deferred portion—as is customary—the wife is entitled to claim the entire deferred portion if the upfront payment was not mentioned in the contract. The same applies if he had given her gifts, as is customary. But if he had paid her part of the specified dower, that payment is counted towards her dower entitlement. Allah knows best.