two narrations. The first: It is incumbent for the fetus. Abu Bakr preferred this, because it is incumbent due to its existence and ceases upon its separation, which indicates that it is for its sake. The second: It is incumbent for her for its sake, because it is incumbent regardless of wealth or poverty, thus it is for her like the maintenance of wives, and because it does not lapse with the passage of time, so it resembles her maintenance during his lifetime. Al-Shafi'i has two opinions, like the two narrations. Several sub-issues are built upon this disagreement; among them is that if the pregnant divorcee is a slave, and we say: Maintenance is for the fetus, then her maintenance is upon her master, because it is his property. But if we say: It is for her, then it is upon the husband, because her maintenance is his obligation. If the husband is a slave, and we say: It is for the fetus, there is no maintenance upon him, because he is not liable for the maintenance of his offspring. But if we say: It is for her, then maintenance is upon him, for the reasons we mentioned. If she is pregnant from an invalid marriage or intercourse by mistake (wat' shubha), and we say: Maintenance is for the fetus, it is upon the husband and the man who had intercourse, because it is his child, so her maintenance is incumbent upon him just as it is after delivery. But if we say: It is for the pregnant woman, there is no maintenance upon him, because she is not a wife who is entitled to maintenance. If a person's wife becomes rebellious (nashiz) while she is pregnant, and we say: Maintenance is for the fetus, her maintenance does not lapse, because the maintenance of his child does not lapse due to the rebellion of its mother. But if we say: It is for her, then she has no maintenance, because she is a rebellious wife.

Section: The husband is obligated to pay the maintenance of the pregnant divorcee to her day by day, just as he is obligated to pay the maintenance of a revocably divorced woman. Al-Shafi'i said in one of his two opinions: He is not obligated to pay it to her until she gives birth, because the pregnancy is not certain, and for this reason, we held the inheritance in suspension. This is contrary to the saying of Allah the Almighty: {And if they should be pregnant, then spend on them until they give birth to their burden}. Furthermore, she has been judged to be entitled to maintenance, so it is obligatory to pay it to her, just like the revocably divorced woman. What he mentioned is not correct, for pregnancy is established through signs, and its rulings are established regarding marriage, the hadd punishment, retaliation (qisas), the annulment of a sale in the case of a sold slave-girl, the prohibition of taking [the fetus] into account in Zakat, and the obligation of paying blood money (diyah). Thus, it is as if it is certain, and this does not resemble inheritance; for if inheritance is not established by mere pregnancy, it is because it requires birth and crying out (istihlal) after birth, and that is not found before it. Also, we do not know the condition of the fetus, its size, or the existence of the condition for its inheritance, unlike our issue, where maintenance is incumbent upon the mere existence of the pregnancy and does not differ based on its variation. Therefore, when this is established, if she claims pregnancy and he confirms it, he pays her. If it turns out to be a pregnancy, she has fulfilled her right, and if it turns out she was not pregnant, he recovers it from her, whether he paid her by the ruling of a judge or otherwise, and whether he stipulated that it was maintenance or did not stipulate it. There is another report that he does not recover it. The correct view is that he does recover it, because he paid it on the basis that it was a duty, so when it is shown that it was not a duty, he takes it back, just as if he had paid a debt for her and then it was shown that he did not owe the debt. If he denies her pregnancy, trusted women inspect [the matter], and their word is relied upon. The word of one woman is accepted if she is an expert and upright, because it is testimony regarding what men cannot observe, resembling breastfeeding, and the precedent has been established by the report.