Is the wife obligated to accept the monetary equivalent for a dower specified as an undelivered slave?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Dowry (Mahr)
Primary text
The wife is not obligated to accept the monetary equivalent because she is entitled to the right arising from a contract of exchange (mu'awada), similar to the 'maslum fihi' (a commodity traded on deferred payment). Furthermore, since the slave was mandated as dower, it is analogous to a defective item, where the recipient is not automatically forced to accept the price.
Supporting text
The ruling regarding blood money (diyah) is distinguished because the monetary values are the foundation (asl) in blood money, just as camels are, allowing the payer the choice between paying any of the foundational forms, making it obligatory for the guardian to accept the monetary equivalent on her behalf. Blood money is considered an exception to strict analogy (qiyas) and should not be used to negate rulings in exchange contracts. Furthermore, drawing an analogy between consideration in one contract to consideration in other exchange contracts is stronger than drawing an analogy to non-exchange contracts, and the issue of a specific, identified slave invalidates the analogy to blood money.