[Arabesque]

Originally Posted by ChotooMotoo

If you're more interested in marriage than mehr, why not set it up so that you get some mehr now (like your wedding ring, that counts) and in the even of divorce you get something like $5000 as the rest of your mehr?

She doesn't need a divorce to claim her right for a mahr. Besides, why is a wedding ring included as a mahr? I don't know, maybe it's the niyyah, but more and more I'm appreciating how much the boys back home are investing in weddings.

[Arabesque]

We shouldn't encourage women to give up their right for mahr or reduce it to modest amounts.

Remember ladies, if men are interested in a car or a bike, they will put all their savings in it, even though a car or a bike breaks down very often and has a short life-span. A wife is a lifetime investment, and instead of wasting your money on repair parts and maintenance, she will give you children, clean your house, cook your food, wash your clothes ... etc.

If men don't want to invest in marriage, they're not worth marrying.

And I'm not being a feminist. Any self-respecting man will expect the same from anyone proposing to his sister/daughter.

[A_Muminah]

As-Salaamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullaah,

One of my friends asked for a 20 dollar bill (not 20 $1 or 4 $5).

Another one asked for a house.

Was-Salaamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatulaahi Wa Barakaatuh

[PhDGirl]

Originally Posted by Ibn Abu Ibrahim

That's not the intent of mahr, its just how people use it. I'm not saying thats necessarily 'wrong', but alimony is something separate Islamically.

Yeah, depending on the circumstances of the divorce, the man might still have to provide "maintenance" for his wife's expenses. And then there's also child support to consider. If the kids are living with mom, it's not like he can just give money to the kids and not provide them a place to live, food to eat etc (which of course, also impacts the mom).

To answer your question, the mahr is between the bride and groom. That is, the money/gift whatever would come to the bride and not to her wali. Obviously the wali is involved in helping to set it, but it's not his right, it is hers. There are a number of opinions on how to set it - good luck to you!

[Rida]

Mahr: How Much Should It Be?

[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by Songbird

Geez, why do you think?

And fyi a sister can support her husband. A sister friend of mine is a doctor and she just married a brother who's 7 years younger than her who is still studying. Her wage/salary alone can support them both alhamdulillah.

Subhanalla.

Allah swt bless them

[onetspvanilla]

Originally Posted by Arabesque

We shouldn't encourage women to give up their right for mahr or reduce it to modest amounts.

Remember ladies, if men are interested in a car or a bike, they will put all their savings in it, even though a car or a bike breaks down very often and has a short life-span. A wife is a lifetime investment, and instead of wasting your money on repair parts and maintenance, she will give you children, clean your house, cook your food, wash your clothes ... etc.

If men don't want to invest in marriage, they're not worth marrying.

And I'm not being a feminist. Any self-respecting man will expect the same from anyone proposing to his sister/daughter.

perhaps it's a difference in our respective upbringings, but to me, just because a man gives a modest mehr, doesn't make him any less undedicated or committed to a marriage than a man who shells out more. excuse my bluntness, but using the amount of mehr as a gauge of a man's willingness to "invest" in a marriage is just dumb.

but if one wishes to get married solely to be financially secure for the rest of her life then by all means, she should demand a high mehr and wait for the right bank account, er man to come along. however, by condemning all men who don't cough up extorbiant sums of mehr as "not worth marrying", it comes off as slightly naive.

btw, your take definitely doesn't seem feminist at all, because from what i take from it (correct if me i'm wrong) you are insinuating that for a woman, marriage is *the* designated route to financial stability. which i don't agree with but that's a different thread for a differnet day...

[raatkirani2005]

Originally Posted by Timbit

If he's a student, then why's he getting married?

If mahr is supposed to be your alimony in case of divorce, then why not ask for as much as possible?

Mahr isn't alimony--that's just a myth. It's actually a wedding gift from the husband to the wife. The only thing is that the bride can defer the payment of the gift if she wishes, and that IF the couple divorces, and the husband hasn't paid it, he has to pay up at that time. You can't sweep it under the rug and pretend to forget about it. I think a lot of people confuse it for alimony (for which there is no concept of in Islam--Islamically, after a divorce, the woman would return home and be supported by her family, the children have a right to be maintained by their father) because of the fact that if you divorce, you have to pay it up. Because of this misunderstanding, people ask for exorbitant amounts of money and often times, that will deter men from getting married. If people would think of mahr as a wedding gift (similar to the way westerners give their brides rings, for example), there wouldn't be so much bad blood and sensitivity about this.

I went to a wedding of a close family friend, and the night before the wedding, the girl's dad asked for $100,000 in mahr for his money. That didn't sit well with the guy's family (our family friend) and they threatened to call off the whole thing. My dad talked to the girl's dad and explained to him that mahr was not alimony, and that in the US, she has some financial protection through the courts should the marriage not work. The groom's family offered $10,000, to which they agreed, but it's an understatement to say that there wasn't some tension afterwards between the fathers. If the girl's family had seen the mahr as a wedding gift, then even $1000 (along with the loads of jewelry and clothes she received) would seem like a good amount.

[raatkirani2005]

Originally Posted by Arabesque

We shouldn't encourage women to give up their right for mahr or reduce it to modest amounts.

Remember ladies, if men are interested in a car or a bike, they will put all their savings in it, even though a car or a bike breaks down very often and has a short life-span. A wife is a lifetime investment, and instead of wasting your money on repair parts and maintenance, she will give you children, clean your house, cook your food, wash your clothes ... etc.

If men don't want to invest in marriage, they're not worth marrying.
.

That's a very wrong attitude and not conducive to marriage. In Arab countries for example, many men are marrying outside their areas because mahr demands are too high and it's creating a bit of a marriage crisis. Now you have guys who'll enter into misyar marriages because, guess what? They don't have to give their misyar wives a cent.

Why is everyone so greedy when it comes to mahr? Assuming you'll have a traditional lifestyle where the husband works and the wife is the homemaker, it counts for nothing that the guy is working his tail off, providing food, shelter, clothing, etc to his wife during the marriage? All that money he brings in to the house for you to share doesn't register on the scale? I don't know of any decent married man who'll put their life savings in a car--once married, they try to save up for a home, retirement, emergencies and children--something the wife also greatly benefits from. You may be cleaning his house and cooking his food, but he'll be providing for you so that you do have a house to clean and food to cook--many people around the world don't even have that. Isn't his working and providing considered the investment?

Also, large amounts of mahr are extremely hard to enforce in court. Unless you had a truly legalized Nikah, which most of us don't, you don't stand a chance (like the way it is with Islamic rules of inheritance--you still need a legal will in the US, regardless of whether you sign a paper stating you want your property divided Islamically after your death) Also, you don't have to choose between mahr and alimony. They can go hand in hand very easily--you can get your mahr AND alimony based on the length of marriage and other factors. Which is why I think in places like the US, you don't need a huge mahr--a turnoff for many guys and their families.

[kamuzrana]

make him take you on hajj

i so admire girls who ask for that for their mahr.

my own mahr was delayed. i got some as nikkah and i can ask for the rest whenever i want it. as it's my right.

[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by raatkirani2005

I went to a wedding of a close family friend, and the night before the wedding, the girl's dad asked for $100,000 in mahr for his money. .

that explains the single muslimah's in america...

[raatkirani2005]

Originally Posted by LEGALEAGLE

that explains the single muslimah's in america...

Actually, the girl was straight from Pakistan. The groom was Pakistani-American and the wedding was held in the US for family reasons. Most of my desi-American cousins and friends had very affordable mahrs.

[rxrlm]

Originally Posted by onetspvanilla

perhaps it's a difference in our respective upbringings, but to me, just because a man gives a modest mehr, doesn't make him any less undedicated or committed to a marriage than a man who shells out more. excuse my bluntness, but using the amount of mehr as a gauge of a man's willingness to "invest" in a marriage is just dumb.

but if one wishes to get married solely to be financially secure for the rest of her life then by all means, she should demand a high mehr and wait for the right bank account, er man to come along. however, by condemning all men who don't cough up extorbiant sums of mehr as "not worth marrying", it comes off as slightly naive.

btw, your take definitely doesn't seem feminist at all, because from what i take from it (correct if me i'm wrong) you are insinuating that for a woman, marriage is *the* designated route to financial stability. which i don't agree with but that's a different thread for a differnet day...

I agree. But for many girls, marriage really is a designated route to financial stability, not for everyone but alot of girls are solely dependant on their husbands once they are married and their own families are of no help if they get divorced. In the end, Allah is the provider and planner of all plans.

Originally Posted by Arabesque

We shouldn't encourage women to give up their right for mahr or reduce it to modest amounts.

Remember ladies, if men are interested in a car or a bike, they will put all their savings in it, even though a car or a bike breaks down very often and has a short life-span. A wife is a lifetime investment, and instead of wasting your money on repair parts and maintenance, she will give you children, clean your house, cook your food, wash your clothes ... etc.

If men don't want to invest in marriage, they're not worth marrying.

And I'm not being a feminist. Any self-respecting man will expect the same from anyone proposing to his sister/daughter.

While I agree that girls should not be pressured to reduce their mahr to riduculously low amounts, I don't think its wise to judge a man solely on how much he can afford to give you. A man can be financially well off but not be responsible and mature to be married to.


Anyways, here's something useful. Payments to and from the Bride in Islamic Law and Tradition

[ChotooMotoo]

Originally Posted by kamuzrana

make him take you on hajj

i so admire girls who ask for that for their mahr.

my own mahr was delayed. i got some as nikkah and i can ask for the rest whenever i want it. as it's my right.

With Hajj costing $6000 or more per person these days, that's quite a mehr.

Mehr is supposed to be for your support. Taking you to Hajj is no the same as giving you $6000. If the man died suddenly and left no property, the $6000 you were given in mehr can pay your rent for several months while you adjust to your new situation. That's what mehr is for, financial security.

[Arabesque]

Originally Posted by onetspvanilla

perhaps it's a difference in our respective upbringings, but to me, just because a man gives a modest mehr, doesn't make him any less undedicated or committed to a marriage than a man who shells out more. excuse my bluntness, but using the amount of mehr as a gauge of a man's willingness to "invest" in a marriage is just dumb.

but if one wishes to get married solely to be financially secure for the rest of her life then by all means, she should demand a high mehr and wait for the right bank account, er man to come along. however, by condemning all men who don't cough up extorbiant sums of mehr as "not worth marrying", it comes off as slightly naive.

btw, your take definitely doesn't seem feminist at all, because from what i take from it (correct if me i'm wrong) you are insinuating that for a woman, marriage is *the* designated route to financial stability. which i don't agree with but that's a different thread for a differnet day...

I think you misunderstood my point. If a man can afford to pay more, then why should women have to accept less than what they wo