Section: It is recommended not to make the dowry excessive, based on what was narrated from 'A'isha, from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), that he said: "The most blessed of women are those with the easiest provision." Reported by Abu Hafs, with his chain of authority (15). On the authority of Abu al-'Ajfa', he said: 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "Beware, do not make the dowry of women excessive, for if it were a sign of nobility in the world or piety in the sight of Allah, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would have been the most deserving of it. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not give any of his wives, nor was any of his daughters given, a dowry of more than twelve uqiyahs. A man may increase the dowry of his wife until there remains hostility in his heart toward her, to the point that he says: 'I have carried the weight of the water-skin rope for you' (16)." Al-Nasa'i and Abu Dawud (in summarized form) recorded it (17). On the authority of Abu Salamah, he said: "I asked 'A'isha about the dowry of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and she said: 'Twelve uqiyahs and a nash.' I asked: 'What is a nash?' She said: 'Half an uqiyah.'" They both also recorded it (18). An uqiyah is forty dirhams, so it is not recommended to exceed this, because if it becomes large, it might become difficult for him, and he would be exposed to harm in this world and the Hereafter.

Section: Everything that is permissible as a price in a sale, or as wages in a lease, whether tangible assets or debt, immediate or deferred, small or large, and the benefits of a free person, a slave, or others, is permissible to be a dowry. Al-Daraqutni narrated with his chain of authority, saying: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Marry off the unmarried, and fulfill the obligations." It was asked: "What are the obligations among them (19), O Messenger of Allah?" He said: "What the families agree upon, even if it is a stick (20) of arak wood (21)." Al-Juzajani also narrated it. Malik and al-Shafi'i held this view. Abu Hanifah said: The services of a free person cannot be a dowry, because they are not wealth, and Allah the Almighty said: {that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property}. To us, there is the statement of Allah the Almighty: {I intend to wed one of these two daughters of mine to you on condition that you serve me for eight years} (22). And the hadith we mentioned. Also, because it is a benefit for which compensation is permissible in a lease, it is permissible as a dowry, like the benefit of a slave. As for their statement that "it is not wealth," it is denied, as it is permissible to exchange compensation for it and through it. Furthermore, even if it were not wealth, it has been treated as wealth in this [context], so it is likewise in marriage. Muhanna narrated from Ahmad: If he marries her on condition that he serves her for a year or more, how would this be? It was said to him: What if a woman has (23) estates and lands she cannot cultivate? He said: This is not correct. Abu Bakr said: If the service is known, it is permissible; and if it is unknown and cannot be regulated (24), then she is entitled to the dowry of an equal (sadaq al-mithl). It is as if he interpreted the question of Muhanna to mean that the service was unknown, and therefore it was not valid. Abu Talib narrated from Ahmad: Marriage on the condition of building a house, sewing a garment, or doing something [specific] is permissible; that is (25) because it is something known for which compensation can be taken, so it is permissible for it to be a dowry, just like tangible assets. If he marries her on condition that he brings back her runaway slave from a specific place, it is valid; because it is a known work for which wages (26) can be taken. If he gives her as a dowry the act of bringing it back from wherever it is, it is not valid, because it is unknown.

Section: If he marries her on the condition that he takes her to Hajj, the naming [of the dowry] is not valid. Al-Shafi'i held this view. Al-Nakha'i, Malik, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, the scholars of opinion (Ashab al-Ra'i), and Abu 'Ubayd said: It is valid. To us, the cost of transport is unknown and cannot be fixed to a limit, so it is not valid, just as if he were to give her something unknown as a dowry.