DIYAH (دية). A pecuniary compensation for any offence upon the person. [[FINES].]
DOGS (Arabic kalb, pl. kilāb; Heb. כֶּלֶב) are unclean animals; for according to a tradition by Abū Hurairah, Muḥammad said that when a dog drinks in a vessel, it must be washed seven times, and that the first cleansing should be with earth. (Mishkāt, book iii. c. ii. pt. 1.)
“Most people believe that when a dog howls near a house it forebodes death, for, it is said, a dog can distinguish the awful form of Azrāʿīl, the Angel of Death.” (Burton’s Arabia, vol. i. p. 290.)
Ibn ʿUmr says that dogs used to come into the Masjid at Makkah in the time of the Prophet, but the Companions never purified the mosque when the dog was dry.
The Imām Abū Yūsuf holds that the sale of a dog that bites is unlawful, whilst the Imām ash-Shāfiʿī has said that the sale of a dog is absolutely illegal, because the Prophet said the wages of whoredom and the price of a dog are forbidden. Abū Ḥanīfah holds that dogs which are trained to hunt or watch may be lawfully sold. (Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 543.)
It is lawful to hunt with a trained dog, and the sign of a dog being trained is that he catches game three times without killing it. The dog must be let slip with the ejaculation: Bismillāhi ʾllāhi Akbar! “In the name of God, the great God!” when all game seized by him becomes lawful food. This custom is founded upon a verse in the Qurʾān, [Sūrah v. 6]: “Lawful for you are all good things and what ye have taught beasts of prey to catch, training them like dogs; ye teach them as God taught you. And mention the name of God over it.”
Rules for hunting with dogs will be found in Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 170.
DOG STAR. Sirius, or the dog star, was an object of worship amongst the ancient Arabs, and is mentioned in the Qurʾān, under the name of ash-Shiʿra, [Sūrah liii. 50]: “He (God) is the Lord of the Dog Star.”
DOWER. Arabic, mahr (مهر), Heb. (מֹהַר). Dower is considered by some lawyers to be an effect of the marriage contract, imposed on the husband by the law as a mark of respect for the subject of the contract—the wife; while others consider that it is in exchange for the usufruct of the wife, and its payment is necessary, as upon the provision of a support to the wife depends the permanency of the matrimonial connection. Thus, it is indispensable a fortiori, so much so, that if it were not mentioned in the marriage contract, it would be still incumbent on the husband, as the law will presume it by virtue of the contract itself, and award it upon demand being made by the wife. In such case, the amount of dower will be to the extent of the dowers of the women of her rank and of the ladies of her father’s family. Special beauty or accomplishments may, however, be pleaded for recovering a larger award than the customary dower, where the amount of dower is not mentioned in the contract. There is no limit to the amount of dower; it may be to a very large amount, considering the position and circumstance of the bridegroom, but its minimum is never less than ten dirhams; so where it is fixed at a lesser amount, the law will augment it up to ten dirhams. The dower need not invariably be in currency, or even in metal; everything, except carrion, blood, wine, and hog. Also the bridegroom’s own labour, if he is a free man, being held by the law to be a good dower.
Dower is generally divided into two parts, termed muʿajjal, “prompt,” and muʾajjal, “deferred.” The muʿajjal portion is exigible on entering into the contract, while the muʾajjal part of the dower is payable upon dissolution of the contract. Although the first part is payable, and is sometimes paid, at the time the contract is entered into, yet it has been the general practice (at least in India) to leave it unpaid, and so like an on-demand obligation it remains due at all times—the wife’s right to the same not being extinguished by lapse of time. The wife’s (or her guardian’s) object in leaving the exigible part of the dower unrealised, seems to be that there may always exist a valid guarantee for the good treatment of her by her husband. The women of the respectable classes reserve their right and power to demand their exigible dowers till such time as occasion should require the exercise thereof. The custom of fixing heavy dowers, generally beyond the husband’s means, especially in India, seems to be based upon the intention of checking the husband from ill-treating his wife, and, above all, from his marrying another woman, as also from wrongfully or causelessly divorcing the former. For in the case of divorce the woman can demand the full payment of the dower. In the event of the death of the husband, the payment of the dower has the first claim on the estate after funeral expenses; the law regarding it as a just debt. (Tagore Law Lectures, 1873, p. 341; Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 122.)