"And if he gives her as a dowry stolen property, a pig, or the like, the equivalent dowry becomes obligatory"

The Shaykh :"And if he gives her as a dowry stolen property, a pig, or the like, the equivalent dowry becomes obligatory" Now, if he gives her something stolen, such as a car he stole or usurped from its owner. The difference between theft and usurpation is that usurpation is taking it by force, as the common people say, "Your eye is my eye," while theft is done secretly. In any case, he stole or usurped this car and wanted to marry her, so he told the woman, "Your dowry is this car." She accepted. Then the owner of the car came and presented proof that it belonged to him and took it. What is obligatory for the woman? The author says that the equivalent dowry is obligatory. We cancel the first one completely, and the equivalent dowry becomes obligatory. The car he gave her is worth five thousand, and the equivalent dowry for a woman like her is fifty thousand. So the designation of the car is invalid. What is obligatory for her? Fifty thousand, which is an increase of forty-five thousand, because the first designation was not valid, so it is cancelled. This is the view the author adopted. However, the correct view is that she is entitled only to the value of the car, or its equivalent if possible, because the original status of this car is that it is respected property. But because the right of another person is attached to it, we invalidated the designation. So we say: the woman agreed that this car would be her dowry, so we do not oblige him to give more than a car like it, if possible, or its value. What is the value? Five thousand. It is clear that this view is the stronger one in terms of reasoning, because stolen property is respected, lawful property if it were not for the right of the owner attached to it. So we cancel it for the sake of the owner's right. If he gives her a pig, it is not valid, because the pig is forbidden in itself. If he gives her wine, it is not valid, because wine is forbidden in itself. So what is obligatory? Here, the equivalent dowry is obligatory, because the designated item is not lawful under any circumstances. Unlike the car—notice, people—if the man who gave the stolen car as a dowry bought it from the owner, would it be valid to make it a dowry? Yes, it would be valid. But this pig and wine are not valid. So, if he gives her wine or a pig, the designation is not valid, and she is entitled to the equivalent dowry. Now, the pig is worth one hundred thousand, and the equivalent dowry for her is twenty thousand. How much is hers? If she says, "O foolish one, the pig is worth one hundred thousand," we say: the pig has no legal value whatsoever. It is not worth a single cent, and it has no value. Therefore, if someone destroys a pig, there is no liability on him, because it is not legal property. As for wine, if he gives her a carton of wine containing twelve bottles, each bottle worth five or more—five riyals. It is not contradictory that wine is cheap in disbeliever lands where wine is manufactured just like raisins or other things. Now, he gives her how many cartons? A carton containing twelve bottles, each bottle for five riyals, sixty riyals. What do we say? We say: this dowry is invalid because it has no legal value. So what is obligatory for her? The equivalent dowry. The equivalent dowry for her is forty thousand. She was initially satisfied with how much? With what is worth sixty riyals. We say: that is cancelled, and you are obliged to pay forty thousand riyals, and this is her equivalent dowry. This is clear. He said, may Allah have mercy on him: "And if he gives her as a dowry stolen property, a pig, or the like" What is "the like"? Wine, or a pig, or the like, the equivalent dowry becomes obligatory.