The discussion regarding the rulings on annulment due to a defect.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And she annulled the marriage before consummation.
The questioner : If she annulled the marriage before consummation, she is entitled to half the mahr according to the correct opinion, whereas according to the author’s view, she is entitled to nothing.
The Shaykh : Well done, did you hear the answer? If she found a defect in her husband and annulled the marriage before consummation, then according to the author’s statement, she is not entitled to the mahr, but according to the stronger opinion, she is entitled to the mahr because the annulment was due to his defect. She is entitled to half the mahr because the annulment was due to his defect. And if she learned of it after consummation.
The questioner : If she learned of it after consummation, then the full mahr is obligatory, based on what was made lawful of her private parts.
The Shaykh : Yes, fine, and does the husband have his right?
The questioner : And the husband returns to the one who deceived him...
The Shaykh : Fine, correct? If it was after consummation, then she is entitled to the full mahr because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saidJami` at-Tirmidhi 1102Hasan (Darussalam) in a matter other than this one, and the husband returns to the one who deceived him. Fine, if no deceiver is found... behind me? ... Beautiful?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : He returns to her guardian.
The Shaykh : No, the guardian did not know, and she also did not know?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : How? What does he say?
The questioner : He returns to the wife.
The Shaykh : The wife did not know, meaning she did not deceive the husband, and we have illustrated this, and we will ask you for the example. Is there no one who knows? Come on?
The questioner : No, he returns with nothing.
The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah. One hundred thousand salam in the mahr.
The questioner : It went on him.
The Shaykh : It goes on him like this? And what do you say, people?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Correct?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct, because no one deceived him, and Allah (Mighty and Majestic) may decree loss on something for any of the reasons. Fine, is it possible for there to be a case in which there is no deception? Yes?
The questioner : There may be, it may be, for example, a small leprosy between her shoulders, or...
The Shaykh : Fine, look, it is not a condition between her shoulders, but this is the example we mentioned. Fine, it may also be on the back. Can any of you possibly look at his back?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Never, except with a mirror... he searches. Fine, this case has no deception, so the husband does not return to anyone. Fine, may Allah reward you.
The questioner : Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Then, yes?
The questioner : ... We said in the author’s statement...
The Shaykh : His right to annul is established, but the discussion is about the mahr. Otherwise, the annulment is his right, but the discussion is about the mahr. As for according to the school of thought, the issue is clear: if he annuls before consummation, she is not entitled to the mahr, whether there is a defect in her or not. And if it is after consummation, she is entitled to the mahr based on what was made lawful of her private parts. It appears that this is based on what we mentioned, whether there is a defect in the other party... or not.
The questioner : If she annulled the marriage before consummation, she is entitled to half the mahr according to the correct opinion, whereas according to the author’s view, she is entitled to nothing.
The Shaykh : Well done, did you hear the answer? If she found a defect in her husband and annulled the marriage before consummation, then according to the author’s statement, she is not entitled to the mahr, but according to the stronger opinion, she is entitled to the mahr because the annulment was due to his defect. She is entitled to half the mahr because the annulment was due to his defect. And if she learned of it after consummation.
The questioner : If she learned of it after consummation, then the full mahr is obligatory, based on what was made lawful of her private parts.
The Shaykh : Yes, fine, and does the husband have his right?
The questioner : And the husband returns to the one who deceived him...
The Shaykh : Fine, correct? If it was after consummation, then she is entitled to the full mahr because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said
the Mahr is for her in lieu of what he enjoyed from her private part
لها المهر بما استحل من فرجهاThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : He returns to her guardian.
The Shaykh : No, the guardian did not know, and she also did not know?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : How? What does he say?
The questioner : He returns to the wife.
The Shaykh : The wife did not know, meaning she did not deceive the husband, and we have illustrated this, and we will ask you for the example. Is there no one who knows? Come on?
The questioner : No, he returns with nothing.
The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah. One hundred thousand salam in the mahr.
The questioner : It went on him.
The Shaykh : It goes on him like this? And what do you say, people?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : Correct?
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, correct, because no one deceived him, and Allah (Mighty and Majestic) may decree loss on something for any of the reasons. Fine, is it possible for there to be a case in which there is no deception? Yes?
The questioner : There may be, it may be, for example, a small leprosy between her shoulders, or...
The Shaykh : Fine, look, it is not a condition between her shoulders, but this is the example we mentioned. Fine, it may also be on the back. Can any of you possibly look at his back?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Never, except with a mirror... he searches. Fine, this case has no deception, so the husband does not return to anyone. Fine, may Allah reward you.
The questioner : Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Then, yes?
The questioner : ... We said in the author’s statement...
The Shaykh : His right to annul is established, but the discussion is about the mahr. Otherwise, the annulment is his right, but the discussion is about the mahr. As for according to the school of thought, the issue is clear: if he annuls before consummation, she is not entitled to the mahr, whether there is a defect in her or not. And if it is after consummation, she is entitled to the mahr based on what was made lawful of her private parts. It appears that this is based on what we mentioned, whether there is a defect in the other party... or not.