In a dispute between a husband and wife regarding the amount of the Mahr (dower) when there is no evidence, whose statement is accepted?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Dowry (Mahr)
Primary text
When a husband and wife disagree on the amount of the Mahr and possess no proof regarding its value, the statement of the one claiming the Mahr of the equivalent (Mahr al-Mithl) is accepted. If the wife claims Mahr al-Mithl or less, her statement is accepted. If the husband claims Mahr al-Mithl or more, his statement is accepted. This position is held by Abu Hanifa and similar views are ascribed to Al-Hasan, Al-Nakha'i, Hammad bin Abi Sulayman, and Abu Ubayd. The legal rationale is that accepting the claim of Mahr al-Mithl aligns with the default position of the denier in other claims and parallels the case of a trustee (mudi') admitting loss or return.
Supporting text
Alternative opinions exist. One narration from Ahmad states the husband's word is accepted in all cases, which is also the view of Al-Sha'bi, Ibn Abi Layla, Ibn Shubruma, and Abu Thawr. Abu Yusuf agrees unless the husband claims an unusual amount inconsistent with customary practice, in which case the wife's claim is preferred based on the principle that the oath falls upon the defendant. Al-Shafi'i holds that both parties must swear an oath (tahaluf); if one swears and the other refrains, the swearer's claim is established; if both swear, Mahr al-Mithl is obligatory. Al-Thawri agrees with Al-Shafi'i based on analogy with contracting parties disputing the price. Malik mandates mutual swearing before consummation, leading to nullification of the marriage, but accepts the husband's word after consummation, arguing the wife implicitly entrusted him if the contract occurred without witnesses.