Section: The husband is not discharged from the dower except by delivering it to someone who may receive her wealth. If she is legally competent (rashida), he is not discharged except by delivering it to her or to her agent; he is not discharged by delivering it to her father or anyone else, whether she is a virgin or previously married (thayyib). Ahmad said: "If a father takes his daughter's dower and she denies it, it is hers; she returns to her husband for the dower, and the husband returns to her father." It was said to him: "Did the Prophet (peace be upon him) not say: 'You and your wealth belong to your father'?" He said: "Yes, but this man did not take from her; he only took from her husband." This is the school of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: "He has the right to receive the dower of the virgin, but not the previously married woman, because that is the custom, and because the virgin is shy, so her father stands in her place, just as he stands in her place in her marriage contract." Our argument is that she is legally competent, so no one else has the right to receive her dower, just like the previously married woman, or any substitute she has acquired while being legally competent; no one else has the right to receive it without her permission, just like the price of what she has sold or the rent of her house. If she is not legally competent, he delivers it to her legal guardian (wali) regarding her property, whether it is her father, his executor, or the judge, because it is part of her property, so it is like the price of what she has sold or the rent of her house.

1213 - Issue: He said: "He is not obligated to pay for his wife's maintenance if a person like her cannot be engaged in sexual intercourse, or if he is prevented from her without a valid excuse. But if the prevention is on his part, maintenance becomes obligatory for him."

In summary, if the woman is someone who cannot be engaged in sexual intercourse due to her youth, and her guardian requests that he take custody of her and provide maintenance for her, this is not obligatory upon the husband, because maintenance is in exchange for enjoyment (istimta'), and this is why it lapses due to recalcitrance (nushuz), and he is unable to enjoy her. If she is an adult but prevents herself from him, or her guardians prevent her, there is also no maintenance for her, because she is in the position of a recalcitrant woman, as she has not delivered what is obligatory upon her, so what is in exchange for it—namely maintenance—is not obligatory to be delivered. In every case where maintenance is obligatory upon him, it is obligatory for him to deliver...