known, while the 'medium' quality of the species is difficult to ascertain due to the abundance of the species' types, their differences, and the variations among individual entities within a single type. As for specifying the validation to a 'slave among his slaves,' there is no parallel for it to be measured against, nor are we aware of any explicit text (nass) regarding it to which one could turn; how then could the ruling be established based on arbitrary opinion? As for the reports of Ahmad regarding its validity, Abu Bakr interpreted them as implying that he married her for a specific slave, and then it became problematic for him. Once this is established, she is entitled to the 'dowry of an equal' (mahr al-mithl) in every case where we have ruled the designation to be invalid. Those who argue for its validity mandated the 'medium' from the designated category, and the 'medium' among slaves is the Sindhi, because the highest are the Turki and the Rumi, the lowest are the Zunji and the Habashi, and the medium are the Sindhi and the Mansuri. The Qadi said: If he gives her the value of the slave, she is obligated to accept it, by analogy to camels in blood money.

Section: It is permissible for the dowry to be immediate, deferred, or partly immediate and partly deferred, because it is a consideration in a contract of exchange, so this is permissible for it, just as with price. Furthermore, if its mention is absolute, it implies immediacy, just as if the mention of the price were absolute. If he stipulates it as deferred to a time, it is [due] at its appointed time. If he defers it without mentioning its time, the Qadi said: The dowry is valid, and its time of fulfillment is at the separation (divorce or death), for Ahmad said: If he marries her for an immediate and a deferred amount, the deferred amount does not become due except upon death or separation. This is the view of al-Nakha'i and al-Sha'bi. Al-Hasan, Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, Abu Hanifah, al-Thawri, and Abu 'Ubayd said: The deferment is void, and it is considered immediate. Iyas ibn Mu'awiyah and Qatadah said: It does not become due until he divorces her, leaves her city, or marries another woman over her. From Makhul, al-Awza'i, and al-'Anbari: It becomes due one year after his consummation with her. Abu al-Khattab chose the view that the dowry is invalid and she is entitled to the 'dowry of an equal'. This is the view of al-Shafi'i, because it is a consideration whose time is unknown, so it is invalid, like the price in a sale. The argument for the first view is that an absolute term is construed according to custom, and the custom regarding a deferred dowry is to refrain from demanding it until the time of separation, so it is construed accordingly, and thus it becomes known by that. However, if he assigned an unknown period for the deferred amount, such as the arrival of Zayd, the coming of rain, and the like, it is not valid, because it is unknown.