And if he married his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, and they did so without a mahr, both marriages are invalid. If a mahr is named for them, it is valid.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said "And if he married his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, and they did so without a mahr between them" to the end. This is the type of defective marriage that invalidates the contract. If he married him, meaning a man married a person who is his ward, meaning under his guardianship, and "ward" here is a passive participle meaning "one who is under guardianship," on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, and he did not say "his daughter" on the condition that he marries his daughter to him, as mentioned in the hadith, because what came in the hadith is not a restriction but an example. The jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) mentioned what indicates generality, because the intended meaning of "his ward" is anyone who has guardianship over her, whether she is his daughter or his mother, right? Whether she is his daughter or his mother, is that possible?
The questioner : Yes, it is possible.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : Yes, we have seen it.
The Shaykh : Yes, it is correct. She is divorced and has an adult son, and he married her. She has no father, or it was her sister or her aunt. The point is that "his ward" is general, on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, and there is no mahr. This is an invalid marriage, and it is called shighar marriage. Are you with us, brother? Yes? Are you with us? With your heart and your body, or just your body? Say? Yes, and sometimes? I say this is called shighar marriage. If he marries her, let us define the example better. He said, "I will marry you my daughter on the condition that you marry me your daughter." He said, "Okay, I have no objection." So he said, "I have married you my daughter on the condition that you marry me your daughter." He said, "I accepted." Then he said, "I have married you my daughter." The second one said, "I accepted." So each of them took the hand of the girl and walked away. This is forbidden because he made the mahr a woman, and a woman is not money. So the result is that he married her without a mahr. This is a harm. The second harm is that if this door were opened, people would play with women, and a man would treat his daughter like a commodity, and desire and betrayal would enter into it, is that not so?
The third harm is that if this happens and then there is a misunderstanding between one of the spouses and his wife, the other invalidates his wife for him, and this is observed and known. So this is shighar marriage. We say that he marries his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him. The second condition? There is no mahr between them. So this is not valid. It is known from the author's statement that there is no mahr between them that if a mahr is named for them, it is valid. He stated this explicitly, saying "If a mahr is named for them, it is valid". Accordingly, if he says, "I will marry you my ward on the condition that you marry me your ward, and the mahr is such and such," and they specify it, the marriage is valid and it is not shighar marriage. The jurists relied on this based on his statement in the hadithMishkat al-Masabih 3146 They said this interpretation resolves the issue and indicates that if there is a mahr between them, the marriage is valid. "Put down your hands, everyone." They said the derivation indicates it, for he said he prohibited what? Shighar marriage, and it is from "shaghar al-makan" (the place became empty) except for what is in it. And in our usage, this is a vacant position. What does "vacant" mean?
The questioner : Empty.
The Shaykh : Empty, with no one in it. So they said if the derivation indicates it, then the consideration in words is their meanings. So shighar does not have a mahr. If a mahr is named, it does not have emptiness. And this is the school of thought.
The second opinion in this issue says that shighar marriage is when he marries his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, even if there is a mahr between them. They said this interpretation that the first group used as evidence is not from the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), and that the root of the derivation is not from "shaghar al-makan" (the place became empty) when it is empty, but from "shaghar al-kalb" (the dog lifted its leg) when it lifts its leg to urinate. You see the dog when it wants to urinate, it lifts its leg. So this is a simile to disparage this contract. Accordingly, the marriage is not valid whether a mahr is named for her or not. They said the cause of that is so that women are not taken as commodities following desires. Accordingly, shighar marriage is not valid even if a complete mahr is named for them in every respect. If it were said that the middle path is best, and the best of things is the middle, that if the mahr is named and each of them is a suitable match, and each woman is satisfied with her husband or her fiancé, then the marriage is valid. If this were said, it would combine the evidence from one aspect, and it would also be free from playing with women. It would be said that this marriage, if the condition is that he marries his ward to him, the marriage is valid with three conditions. The first is that each of the spouses is a suitable match for whom?
The questioner : For the woman.
The Shaykh : For the woman he is marrying. The second is the consent of each of the two wives. The third is that a mahr is named for them that is not less than the customary mahr. If this were said, it would have a valid aspect, and many issues that people used to practice before would be resolved, especially in the desert.
The questioner : Yes, it is possible.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The questioner : Yes, we have seen it.
The Shaykh : Yes, it is correct. She is divorced and has an adult son, and he married her. She has no father, or it was her sister or her aunt. The point is that "his ward" is general, on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, and there is no mahr. This is an invalid marriage, and it is called shighar marriage. Are you with us, brother? Yes? Are you with us? With your heart and your body, or just your body? Say? Yes, and sometimes? I say this is called shighar marriage. If he marries her, let us define the example better. He said, "I will marry you my daughter on the condition that you marry me your daughter." He said, "Okay, I have no objection." So he said, "I have married you my daughter on the condition that you marry me your daughter." He said, "I accepted." Then he said, "I have married you my daughter." The second one said, "I accepted." So each of them took the hand of the girl and walked away. This is forbidden because he made the mahr a woman, and a woman is not money. So the result is that he married her without a mahr. This is a harm. The second harm is that if this door were opened, people would play with women, and a man would treat his daughter like a commodity, and desire and betrayal would enter into it, is that not so?
The third harm is that if this happens and then there is a misunderstanding between one of the spouses and his wife, the other invalidates his wife for him, and this is observed and known. So this is shighar marriage. We say that he marries his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him. The second condition? There is no mahr between them. So this is not valid. It is known from the author's statement that there is no mahr between them that if a mahr is named for them, it is valid. He stated this explicitly, saying "If a mahr is named for them, it is valid". Accordingly, if he says, "I will marry you my ward on the condition that you marry me your ward, and the mahr is such and such," and they specify it, the marriage is valid and it is not shighar marriage. The jurists relied on this based on his statement in the hadith
which means that a man gives his daughter in marriage on condition that the other gives his daughter to him in marriage without any dower being paid by either
الشغار أن يُزوّج الرجل امراته على أن يزوّجه الأخر ابنته وليس بينهما صداقThe questioner : Empty.
The Shaykh : Empty, with no one in it. So they said if the derivation indicates it, then the consideration in words is their meanings. So shighar does not have a mahr. If a mahr is named, it does not have emptiness. And this is the school of thought.
The second opinion in this issue says that shighar marriage is when he marries his ward to him on the condition that the other marries his ward to him, even if there is a mahr between them. They said this interpretation that the first group used as evidence is not from the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), and that the root of the derivation is not from "shaghar al-makan" (the place became empty) when it is empty, but from "shaghar al-kalb" (the dog lifted its leg) when it lifts its leg to urinate. You see the dog when it wants to urinate, it lifts its leg. So this is a simile to disparage this contract. Accordingly, the marriage is not valid whether a mahr is named for her or not. They said the cause of that is so that women are not taken as commodities following desires. Accordingly, shighar marriage is not valid even if a complete mahr is named for them in every respect. If it were said that the middle path is best, and the best of things is the middle, that if the mahr is named and each of them is a suitable match, and each woman is satisfied with her husband or her fiancé, then the marriage is valid. If this were said, it would combine the evidence from one aspect, and it would also be free from playing with women. It would be said that this marriage, if the condition is that he marries his ward to him, the marriage is valid with three conditions. The first is that each of the spouses is a suitable match for whom?
The questioner : For the woman.
The Shaykh : For the woman he is marrying. The second is the consent of each of the two wives. The third is that a mahr is named for them that is not less than the customary mahr. If this were said, it would have a valid aspect, and many issues that people used to practice before would be resolved, especially in the desert.