The gist of the matter is that a woman has the right to refuse [to deliver] herself until she receives her dowry, because delivering herself before receiving her dowry leads to him consuming the benefit for which the contract was made—namely, intercourse—without having delivered her dowry, and she would then be unable to recover what he has consumed from her. This is unlike a sold item, for if the buyer takes possession of it and then becomes insolvent regarding the price, he [the seller] can still recover it. Therefore, we have obligated him to pay her dowry first, and we have established that she may refrain from delivering herself until she receives her dowry. This is because if he pays the dowry and she then refuses to deliver herself, he can recover it. Once this is established, whenever she refuses to deliver herself in order to receive her dowry, she is entitled to her maintenance, because she is refusing for a rightful cause. If it is said: "If she refused due to minor age or illness, her maintenance is not binding upon him," we reply: The difference between the two is that her refusal due to illness is for a reason on her part, and the same applies to the refusal due to minor age. Here, however, the refusal is for a reason on the part of the husband, which is his withholding of what is rightfully due to her from him. This is similar to a case where enjoyment is impossible due to the husband's minor age; in that case, her maintenance does not cease to be his obligation, whereas if it is impossible due to her minor age, her maintenance is not binding upon him.

Section: If his wife travels without his permission, her maintenance ceases to be his obligation, because she is considered disobedient (nashiz). The same applies if she moves from his home without his permission. If she travels with his permission for his needs, she remains entitled to her maintenance, because she traveled for his work and his desire. If it is for her own needs, her maintenance ceases, because she has forfeited [his] access for her own benefit and the fulfillment of her own needs, which is similar to the case where she asks him for a respite before consummation and he grants it. However, if he is traveling with her and is able to enjoy her, her maintenance does not cease, because she has not forfeited [his] access, so she is like one who is not traveling. It is also possible that her maintenance does not cease even if he is not with her, because she is traveling with his permission, making it similar to the case where she travels for his needs; it does not matter if her travel is for trade, a voluntary pilgrimage (hajj), or a visit. If she enters into the state of ihram for a voluntary pilgrimage without his permission, her maintenance ceases, because she is in the same position as one who is traveling. If she enters into it with his permission, the Qadi said: She is entitled to maintenance.