"And if he marries her with a thousand for her and a thousand for her father, the designation is valid"

The Shaykh :"And if he marries her with a thousand for her and a thousand for her father, the designation is valid" So if he divorces her before consummation but after receiving the payment, he gets back the thousand, and the father owes nothing for them. Pay attention to this scenario. For example, if the father says, "I will marry you my daughter for two thousand, say a thousand for her and a thousand for her father," the designation is valid, and the daughter gets a thousand and the father gets a thousand. How is this condition valid when Allah the Exalted said ? And in the hadith of the woman who offered herself in marriage, the man said, "I will give her my cloak". If the mahr is for the woman, how is it valid for the father to condition taking something from it for himself? They answered this by citing the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) , which allows the father to condition taking something from his daughter's mahr for himself. Are you with us? Good. But the correct view is that it is not valid for the father to condition taking something from his daughter's mahr for himself, and that it is forbidden for him to do so. This is because it was reported from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that everything agreed upon as a condition or promise before the contract is for the wife. Furthermore, it is clear from the Qur'an , which makes the disposal of the mahr belong to whom? To the wife. And if we allowed this, it would lead to great manipulation and major betrayal. The man would not marry off his daughter except to someone who conditions giving him the most. A righteous man proposed to him. He said, "I will marry you my daughter." He said, "How much will you give as mahr?" He said, "I will give you ten thousand." He said, "Five for me and five for her." He said, "No, a thousand for you and the rest for her." He said, "I will not marry you." Another man came and proposed, saying, "Marry me your daughter." He said, "There is no obstacle. The mahr is ten thousand, on the condition that you give her five and me five." He said, "I will give you two thousand." He said, "No." How many proposals were rejected? Two. A third came and proposed. He said, "There is no obstacle. How much is the mahr?" Ten thousand. "How much will you give me?" He said, "Three." He said, "No, give me five." He said, "No, I will not give you more than three, and seven for the daughter." He said, "No." How many were rejected? Three. The fourth came, and the fifth came. The fifth might have said, "I will give you five." The fifth married her, and he might have been worse in character than the first two or less in religion. If this door were opened for fathers to manipulate their daughters, the correct view is that the condition is not valid. And if it is assumed that the husband agreed to a thousand for her and a thousand for her father, both thousands are for her, and we do not give the father anything. If someone asks, "How do you answer their argument using the saying 'You and your wealth belong to your father'?" We answer that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said . At that time, the mahr had not yet become the daughter's wealth. Once the daughter owns it and it is given to her, he may take something from it. But while it is with the husband and has not yet become hers, their argument based on the hadith is invalid. They described the argument based on the verses as .