to recover them, because they are subordinate in cases of rescission, thus resembling a market increase. Our view is that this is an increase that occurred while in her possession, so it is not halved upon divorce, just like separable increases. As for a market increase, it is not her property. It is distinct from the produce of a sold item, because the cause for rescission is a defect, which precedes the increase, whereas the cause for halving the dowry is the divorce, which occurs after it. Furthermore, the husband’s right is established in half of the specified dowry, not in the essence itself. This is why if he finds it decreased, he has the right to recover half of its equivalent or its value, unlike a defective sold item. The specified dowry was not fat, so he does not have the right to take it [as such], whereas in a sale, his right is attached to the essence itself, so he follows it with its price. However, if the dowry decreases in one aspect and increases in another—such as if [a slave] learns a trade but forgets another, or becomes emaciated but learns [a skill]—the choice is established for each of them, and he has the right to refuse the essence and recover the value. If they both agree on half of the essence, it is permissible. If the woman refuses to offer half of it, she has that right due to the increase; and if he refuses to recover half of it, he has that right due to the decrease. When one of them refuses, he recovers half of its value.

Section: If the essence is destroyed and it is among those things having like-kind, he recovers half of its equivalent. Otherwise, he recovers half of its value at the lowest point it reached from the time of the contract until the time of possession, or until the time he was enabled to take it, according to the disagreement we have mentioned; for if the essence increased, the increase belongs to her and is hers exclusively, and if it decreased before that, the decrease is his liability. If he divorces her before taking possession of the dowry and before the consummation, and it has had a separable increase, it belongs to her, and she keeps it exclusively, while he takes half of the original. If the increase is inseparable, she has the choice between taking the half [of the original] and leaving him the half, or taking the whole and paying him the value of the half without the increase. If it is decreased, she has the choice between taking it in its decreased state or having him demand half of its value without the decrease.