or to make that claim and establish it before a judge other than the one who imprisoned him and barred him from disposing of his property, without that judge’s permission. And Allah knows best.

He—may Allah sanctify his soul—was asked:

A man borrowed money from merchants. When repayment was demanded, he refused despite being able to repay, and he was imprisoned under Islamic law. May the judge punish him until he pays what he owes? What is the ruling of Islamic law concerning him?

He replied:

If he refuses to fulfil his obligation to disclose his assets and enable people to receive all that is due to them, and his assets are known but repayment requires some action on his part which he refuses to take, insisting instead on remaining in prison, then, according to the jurists generally, he is to be punished by beating until he fulfils his obligation in this matter.

This has been expressly stated by the followers of Mālik and al-Shāfi'ī, including the Iraqi and Khurāsānī scholars, and by the followers of Imam Ahmad and others. We know of no disagreement concerning this. Indeed, they discuss this issue repeatedly in their books: besides mentioning it in its customary place, they also mention it elsewhere, such as in the chapter on the marriage of non-Muslims. They make it a precedent upon which they base an analogous ruling when a non-Muslim embraces Islam while married to more than four wives and refuses to choose