Benefit from hadith regarding wife taking wealth of the husband due to miserliness

Our Shaykh, the ‘Allaamah, the Sincere Adviser, Abu ‘Abdirrahman Yahya bin ‘Ali Al-Hajoori – may Allaah preserve him – on the 14th, Jumaada Al-Uwlaa 1440H, said:

Chapter ‘What has come concerning rulings’

Hadeeth Aa’ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, concerning the story of Hind bint ‘Utbah relating to the right to take one’s right, and relating to the marital, guardianship, sufficiency, lineage rights, and relating to the custom.

1041 – Abdullah bin Haashim narrated to us, he said that Yahyaa ya’nee ibn Saeed narrated to us, on the authority of Hishaam, he said Abee Urwah informed me, on the authority of Aa’ishah, may Allaah be pleased with her, said: that Hind bint ‘Utbah said: “Oh Messenger of Allaah! Verily Abu Sufyan is a miserly man, and he doesn’t give me and my son what suffices us except what I take from his wealth and he doesn’t know”, he said: “Reasonably take what suffices you and your son.”

Chain of the hadith is authentic agreed upon (Bukhari and Muslim)

Explanation of the Hadith

Hind bint ‘Utbah, Hind is the mother of Mu’awiyah and wife of Abu Sufyan Sakhr bin Harb, may Allaah be pleased with them, she became Muslim after her husband Abu Sufyan.

Abu Sufyan was a leader amongst his people before Islam and after Islam.

Her statement “Verily Abu Sufyan is a miserly man” al-Qurtubi pointed out that this is not an continuous attribute but rather he used to be generous with his guests because he is considered the head of his people.

Benefit : Ash-Shuh (Miserliness): Is more general and severe than Bukhl (Stinginess)

Spending on the wife and children is obligatory in the book of Allah and Sunnah of the Messenger ﷺ and the people of knowledge have unanimously agreed upon this.

Benefit : A woman if she takes what is sufficient for her and her child from the wealth of her husband it is not called stealing but rather this is from taking one’s due right.

And even if she took more than her need this is not called stealing because it is not safeguarded away from her, while it is not allowed for her to take from the wealth of her husband and possibly her husband could hate her (for that) and the origin is trust between husband and wife, and in the hadith (A woman is a Shepard in the house of her husband (during his absence) and she is responsible for her flock) and it could lead to her husband having bad thoughts of her and not trusting her.

And his statement “Reasonably take what suffices you and your child.”: Children here (include) male and female ya’nee all children.

Spending is (incumbent) upon the husband and it is not incumbent on the woman to spend on her husband even if the woman well off and the husband poor for verily the provision still remains on the man and for that reason it is accepted for her to give zakaat to her husband, as Zainab ath-Thaqafiyyah did with her husband Abdullah bin Mas’ood.

And in this hadeeth is the obligation of a man spending reasonably on his wife.

The ruling of a man spending on a disobedient wife

The majority of scholars are upon that there is no spending on her because spending is in exchange for good companionship and obedience.

And Ibn Hazm sees that spending is binding on him so long as she is under his care and he doesn’t repel her oppression with oppression due to the apparent of the verse:

(وعلی المولود له رزقهن وكسوتهن بالمعروف)

which translates to what means (But the father of the child shall bear the cost of the mother’s food and clothing on a reasonable basis.)

And there isn’t any exception made for the disobedient wife.

Shaykh Yahya, may Allaah preserve him, said:
The issue is strong on both sides and what is apparent to me is that he doesn’t wrong her, if he has the capability to spend on her, he spends on her and if not he separates:

(فإمساك بمعروف أو تسريح بإحسان)

Which translates to mean: (either you retain her on reasonable terms or release her with kindness)

(ولا تنسوا الفضل بينكم)

Which translates to mean: (and do not forget illiberality between yourselves)

Benefit : What a woman needs from comb, soap and the likes of it which the cleanliness of the woman is up-kept by it, is obligatory upon the husband, because good companionship cannot be up-kept except through it, as for dye and other affairs of adornment then if it is requested from him, he buys it and if he doesn’t want to, and she wants it, then she buys it.

As for the issue of the medication of the woman then the majority of the scholars see that it is not obligatory on the husband.

The Shaykh said: Her medication is from doing that which is good and if he doesn’t maybe life will become bitter between them altercations and indeed Allaah said:

(وعاشروهن بالمعروف)

which translates to what means (And live with them honorably)

Her medication is from the honourable (things), according to one’s capability.

As for clothing then it is obligatory upon the husband according to custom by consensus, all according to capability without flaunting and squandering.

Benefit : Hadeeth Aa’ishah which has preceded concerning the story of Hind bint ‘Utbah, Ibn ul-Qayyim has spoken some good speech about it in Zaad ul-Ma’ad and mentioned a number of benefits so return to it.

And from the benefits of the hadeeth listening to one side of the disputants.

And in it is listening to the voice of woman complaining without softening her speech.

And Allaah knows best.

Transcribed to Arabic and summarized by Hamood Ath-Thawaabi may Allah reward him with good.

Translated by Abu ‘Abdillah ‘Omar bin Yahya Al-‘Akawi