A Criticism of Accepting Registering instead of Pronouncing in Executing Marriage Contract; a Comparative Study with Iranian Civil Law

Mashayekhi, Fatemeh; Pourabdollah, Kobra

doi:10.30497/sj.2025.246864.1419

A Criticism of Accepting Registering instead of Pronouncing in Executing Marriage Contract; a Comparative Study with Iranian Civil Law

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

fatemeh mashayekhi ¹

Kobra Pourabdollah ²

¹ دانشجوی دکتری فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه امام صادق علیه السلام، پردیس خواهران، تهران، ایران

² Assistant Professor, Jurisprudence & Islamic Law Department, Imam Sadiq University

10.30497/sj.2025.246864.1419

Abstract

There is a controversy among the past and present scholars and jurisprudents about the validity of Mu’atat marriage (Marriage by intention) in general and the right of using various tools to create a marriage contract, in particular. In the present study, which is of a fundamental-applied type and has used a library method, a criticism of the paper entitled "Mu’atat marriage from the Jurisprudential Perspective” is presented (published in the 40th issue of the “Scientific-Research Quarterly Journal of Strategic women Studies”). The author in this paper has stated that if a man and a woman, with the intention of marriage, declare it in an explicit way, the marriage will take place considering the generality of the necessity of fulfillment of contract and obligation. Meanwhile, both the pronouncement and registering of the vow have been considered effective. The results of this research show that registering the intention had legitimacy at the beginning of Islam. In addition, the use of words as a tool for declaration of will, doesn’t cause Haraj based on the presented rational and scientific proofs, and customary inference. As a result, the fulfilment of a marriage contract through words isn’t subject to the mentioned rule. Such an understanding is consistent with the Iranian Civil law.

Keywords

Word

Mu’atat

Writing

Mu’atat Marriage

Rule of La-Haraj

Civil law