عنوان مقاله [English]
One of the controversial jurisprudential and legal issues is the discussion of "increasing the dowry" after the marriage. This issue of whether such an action is fundamentally correct and possible or is it facing legal and jurisprudential obstacles is a question to which conflicting and different views have been presented in the procedure of the courts and relevant institutions. The second question that comes to mind according to the first question is that, does this "increase" have the nature and rulings of the same seal, or does it have a special nature and rulings?
In jurisprudence, the difference in views and opinions between Islamic schools of thought is clearly visible, in such a way that in Imami jurisprudence, some people have such an increase in the opinion of absolute impermissibility, and a minority of people have the opinion of permissibility. Others have distinguished between temporary and permanent marriage and considered it valid only in temporary marriage. In Hanafi, Hanbali and Maliki jurisprudence, they accept the increase of the dowry, but they disagree about its nature and rulings. Shafi'i jurists do not consider the increase of dowry to be fundamentally shari'a. There is this difference of opinions in the legal system of Iran as well, in such a way that even the unanimous vote of the General Board of the Administrative Court of Justice and the theory of the Guardian Council presented in this context could not clearly define the issue.
In this article, the analytical-descriptive method attempts to document and critique the opinion of Islamic religions (Imamiyyah, Hanafiyeh, Hanbaliyyah, Malikiyeh and Shafi'i). In the end, the opinion is that in Iran's legal system, according to the existing legal bases, the increase of dowry cannot be considered correct, although an attempt has been made to present the