Is it required in the marriage contract that it be expressed using the specific terms of "nikah" (marriage) and "tazwij" (giving in marriage)?

Question : The well-known position in the school of jurisprudence is that it is required, and the contract must be expressed using the term "nikah" or "tazwij," except in the case where a man says to his slave woman, "I have freed you, and I have made your freedom your mahr (bridal gift)." In this case, it is sufficient even if he did not say, "I have married you."

Answer : However, the correct view, as previously mentioned, is that the marriage contract is valid based on the meaning, not the specific wording. If a layperson says, "I give you my daughter in marriage," and the other says, "I accept," the marriage is valid. As for the school of jurisprudence, the marriage is not valid, even if he has entered into marital relations with her and she has borne him children; he must renew the contract because it was not expressed using the terms of "nikah" or "tazwij." If, for example, he says, "I have made my daughter lawful to you," and the other says, "I accept," they say that this contract is not valid because it must be expressed using the terms of "nikah" or "tazwij." It has been previously stated that the stronger opinion is the one chosen by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), and the texts indicate that what is considered is the meaning. This is even the case with the hadith of the woman who offered herself in marriage, in some wordings of the authentic collection of al-Bukhari: