Majmu' al-Fatawa - Ibn Taimiya - (34/76)

He—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—was asked:

A married woman is in need. Is her husband obliged to provide her maintenance, or should it come from her dower?

He answered:

Her husband is obliged to maintain her independently of her dower. As for her deferred dower, she may request it from him. If he pays it to her, that is good; if he refuses, he is not compelled to pay until their marriage ends through death, divorce, or the like. Allah knows best.

He—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—was asked: (*)

A man has married a woman from whom he derives no benefit and who does not obey him in anything. She demands maintenance and clothing from him, yet she has made his affairs difficult. Is she entitled to maintenance and clothing from him?

He answered:

If she refuses him marital intimacy or leaves his home without his permission, she is not entitled to maintenance or clothing. Likewise, if he asks her to travel with him and she does not do so, she is not entitled to maintenance or clothing. Whenever she is in breach of her marital duties, disobeying him in matters in which she is obliged to obey him, he is not obliged to provide her with maintenance or clothing.

(*) Shaykh Nāsir ibn Hamad al-Fahd stated (p. 242): “This fatwa was previously mentioned in 32/280, and attention was drawn to it there.”

وَسُئِلَ - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: عَنْ امْرَأَةٍ مُزَوَّجَةٍ مُحْتَاجَةٍ. فَهَلْ تَكُونُ نَفَقَتُهَا وَاجِبَةً عَلَى زَوْجِهَا؟ أَوْ مِنْ صَدَاقِهَا؟ فَأَجَابَ: الْمُزَوَّجَةُ الْمُحْتَاجَةُ نَفَقَتُهَا عَلَى زَوْجِهَا وَاجِبَةٌ مِنْ غَيْرِ صَدَاقِهَا وَأَمَّا صَدَاقُهَا الْمُؤَخَّرُ فَيَجُوزُ أَنْ تُطَالِبَهُ؛ وَإِنْ أَعْطَاهَا فَحَسَنٌ؛ وَإِنْ امْتَنَعَ لَمْ يُجْبَرْ حَتَّى يَقَعَ بَيْنَهُمَا فُرْقَةٌ: بِمَوْتِ أَوْ طَلَاقٍ أَوْ نَحْوِهِ. وَاَللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ. وَسُئِلَ - رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: (*) عَنْ رَجُلٍ تَزَوَّجَ بِامْرَأَةِ مَا يَنْتَفِعُ بِهَا وَلَا تُطَاوِعُهُ فِي أَمْرٍ وَتَطْلُبُ مِنْهُ نَفَقَةً وَكِسْوَةً وَقَدْ ضَيَّقَتْ عَلَيْهِ أُمُورَهُ: فَهَلْ تَسْتَحِقُّ عَلَيْهِ نَفَقَةً وَكِسْوَةً؟ فَأَجَابَ: إذَا لَمْ تُمَكِّنْهُ مِنْ نَفْسِهَا أَوْ خَرَجَتْ مِنْ دَارِهِ بِغَيْرِ إذْنِهِ: فَلَا نَفَقَةَ لَهَا وَلَا كِسْوَةَ؛ وَكَذَلِكَ إذَا طَلَبَ مِنْهَا أَنْ تُسَافِرَ مَعَهُ فَلَمْ تَفْعَلْ فَلَا نَفَقَةَ لَهَا وَلَا كِسْوَةَ فَحَيْثُ كَانَتْ نَاشِزًا عَاصِيَةً لَهُ فِيمَا يَجِبُ لَهُ عَلَيْهَا طَاعَتُهُ لَمْ يَجِبْ لَهَا نَفَقَةٌ وَلَا كِسْوَةٌ.

(*) قال الشيخ ناصر بن حمد الفهد (ص ٢٤٢): سبق أن ذكرت هذه الفتوى في: ٣٢/ ٢٨٠، وتم التنبيه عليها هناك.