the Muslim woman before consummation, she has no dower, because the annulment is on her part. Discussion of this has already passed in a manner that is sufficient.

Section: If a Magian marries a woman from the People of the Scripture, and then they refer the dispute to us before they embrace Islam, a separation is made between them. Ahmad said regarding a Magian who married a woman from the People of the Scripture: "He is to be prevented from her." It was said: "Who will prevent him from that?" He said: "The Imam." This statement implies that they should be separated even if they do not refer the dispute to us, because she is higher in religion than he is, so his marriage to her is forbidden just as a Dhimmi (a non-Muslim subject) is forbidden from marrying a Muslim woman. If a Dhimmi marries a polytheist or a Magian woman, and then they refer the dispute to us, there are two views regarding it: one is that he is allowed to remain in his marriage with her because she is not higher in religion than him, so he is maintained in his marriage as a Muslim is maintained in his marriage with a woman from the People of the Scripture. The second is that he is not allowed to remain in his marriage with her, because she is among those with whom a Muslim is not allowed to remain in marriage, so a Dhimmi is not allowed to remain in marriage with her, like the apostate.

1172 - Issue; he said: (And what he specified for her while they were both disbelievers, and she received it, then they both embrace Islam, she has nothing other than it, [even if it was unlawful]. And if she had not received it, and it was unlawful, she is entitled to a dower of her like [mahr al-mithl], or half of it, where that is required.)

The sum of this is that when disbelievers embrace Islam and they bring their case to us after the contract and receipt [of the dower], we do not interfere with what they have done. What she has received of the dower has already been finalized, and she has nothing other than it, whether it was lawful or unlawful, based on His saying, the Exalted: "O you who have believed, fear Allah and give up what remains [due to you] of interest" (Quran 2:278). He commanded the abandoning of what remains, not what has been received. And He, the Exalted, said: "So whoever has received an admonition from his Lord and desists, then what is past is his, and his affair rests with Allah" (Quran 2:275). This is because interfering with what has been received by invalidating it would be difficult due to the passage of time and the frequency of their dealings in unlawful things; thus, it would act as a repulsion for them from Islam, so it is pardoned, just as what they left of the religious duties and obligations is pardoned. Furthermore, they received it under the ruling of polytheism, so the liability of the one who owed it is discharged, just as if they had conducted an invalid sale and taken possession. If they had not taken possession, and the specified [dower] was lawful, what they specified is binding because it is a specification that is valid in a valid marriage, so it is obligatory, like the specification of a Muslim. But if it was unlawful, such as wine and swine, it is void, and no judgment is passed based on it, because what they specified cannot be made mandatory by legal ruling, nor can it be a dowry for a Muslim woman, nor in a Muslim's marriage. The dower of her like becomes due if this is after consummation, or half of it if the separation occurs before consummation. This is the meaning of his saying: "Where that is required." This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i and Abu Yusuf. Abu Hanifa said: If he gave her specific wine or a specific pig, she has nothing but that. But if they were not specific, she is entitled to the value in the case of wine, and the dower of her like in the case of a pig, by way of istihsan (juristic preference). To us, wine has no value in Islam, so what is due is the dower of her like, just as if he had given her a pig as a dowry, and because it is forbidden, so it resembles what we mentioned.