Islamic Fiqh > Marriage and family > Mahr (dowry): status, mention and limits > Retention of the mahr and the husband's insolvency
Contents
Updated on 27 September 2026 at 3:52 AM
After a valid nikah arises the question of the right of retention (haqq al-hibs): may the wife refuse herself to her husband until she receives the mahr (dower) owed to her? The answer depends on the state of the mahr: prompt (mu'ajjal), deferred (mu'akhkhar), or mixed.
One last situation completes the picture: the husband becomes insolvent (mu'sir) regarding the mahr before consummation; may the wife then have the marriage dissolved (tafsikh)? The leaves of the mawsu'a unfold the cases, school by school.
If the prompt mahr was received by the wife, the husband cannot recover from her what she took: she received it by right, and what is received by right admits no annulment; this, when she was married against a mahr payable at once.
First case: the husband consummated with her consent, she being consenting. The two companions of Abu Hanifa (Abu Yusuf and Muhammad), the Malikis in the most widespread opinion, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis in the madhhab rule thus: the mahr is prompt but not received; the wife gave herself willingly, consenting, then wishes to refuse herself until payment. She may no longer refuse herself nor seclude herself (habs); she keeps only the right to claim her mahr. The delivery settled the compensation with the consent of the one who delivered, like a seller who delivered the goods: by a single consummation, or a valid seclusion (khalwa), she delivered the whole object of the contract, being capable of delivery, and her right of retention falls.
The whole mahr becomes due through a single consummation, for the object of the contract here has the status of a body ('ayn); the whole of a price does not become due through the delivery of part of the object, and the repeated consummations attach to use, with no counterpart of the mahr. The effects attached to consummation specialize in the first one, the sequel being accessory. (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/288, al-Hidaya 1/211, Mawahib al-Jalil 5/158-159, Sharh al-Kabir ma'a Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 3/136-137, al-Mughni 7/200, Mughni al-Muhtaj 4/365)
Abu Hanifa, some Malikis and Ibn Hamid among the Hanbalis grant her, on the contrary, retention until payment: the mahr is the compensation for all the enjoyments of the private part in all the consummations, not the first alone; no enjoyment may be empty of compensation, out of dignity of the private part and display of its worth; by refusing, she therefore withholds the delivery of what deserves compensation, and she may refuse him after the first consummation until payment, then after the second and the third. The mahr nevertheless becomes due from the first consummation, for it is present and determined, what follows being absent and undetermined; it then competes at each consummation, like a slave who commits an offense and must be surrendered: each new offense competes with the previous one in the obligation to surrender him, and so on without limit.
First case: the mahr is deferred to a known term and consummation is stipulated. The fuqaha of the four madhhabs agree: the contract is valid, every contract bearing on a determined object and a debt being able to be prompt or deferred, like the sale; the wife must then deliver herself and cannot seclude herself: she consented to the deferral, and the husband, having stipulated consummation, did not consent to delaying his right of enjoyment.
Second case: the mahr is deferred to a known term, with no stipulation of consummation. The majority (Abu Hanifa, Muhammad, the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis): she cannot seclude herself; by the deferral she consented to abandon her right of retention, and the husband's right does not fall, like the seller who defers the price and loses the right to withhold the goods; it is otherwise if the deferral is set at a period unknown in a grave way (jahala mutafahisha): the deferral is then invalid, the term is not established and the mahr remains prompt. The validly deferred mahr has as its rule that its delivery follows that of the person: advancing it would have established her right through the compensation, and by deferring it she abandoned her right over herself, without the husband's right falling.
Abu Yusuf grants her, on the contrary, retention, the period being short or long, known or unknown in an approximate way, like harvest or grapes: the rule of the mahr requires that its delivery always precede that of the person; the husband's acceptance of the deferral equals consent to the delay of his right of taking, unlike the seller, whose rule of the price does not require delivery before that of the goods.
Third case: the term has fallen due. Abu Hanifa, Muhammad, the Shafi'is according to the sounder opinion and the Hanbalis: she cannot refuse herself to receive the mahr; the right of retention fell with the deferral, and what has fallen does not return, like the price in the sale: the delivery of her person was already incumbent on her before receipt, and her first consent to the debt in the husband's estate does not revive with the due date. Abu Yusuf and the Shafi'is according to the opposite opinion: she may seclude herself, entitled to claim after the due date as at the outset, and what held before the due date holds more strongly after it.
The Malikis specify: if the determined mahr (a designated slave, a house, a commodity) is not delivered, or the guaranteed prompt mahr is not paid, the wife may refuse herself the entry (dukhul) until delivery, for she is a seller, and the seller withholds his goods until the price. If the mahr is not determined, she may refuse herself to consummation after the entry, so long as there has been neither consummation nor enabling (tamkin). Once she has delivered herself, consummation made or not, she can no longer refuse, the husband being solvent or not; she keeps only the claim and recourse to the judge, like a debtor; this is what Ibn al-Qasim stated. Muhammad b.
al-Mawwaz grants her retention, but the first opinion is the sound one. (al-Taj wa-l-Iklil 2/576-577, Mawahib al-Jalil 5/158-159, Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil 3/257-258, Sharh al-Kabir ma'a Hashiyat al-Dasuqi 3/136-137, Tathbir al-Mukhtasar 3/12-13, Hashiyat al-Sawi 5/83, 87)
Third situation: the mahr is partly prompt, partly deferred to a known term. By consensus (ijma'), the wife may refuse herself until she receives the prompt share; she may not refuse herself for the deferred share: the prompt share follows the regime of the wholly prompt mahr, the deferred share that of the wholly deferred mahr, according to the disagreement exposed above.
The fuqaha differ: if the husband becomes insolvent (a'sara) regarding the mahr, may the wife have the nikah dissolved? The Hanafis, and the Shafi'is and Hanbalis according to one view, answer no: no dissolution for insolvency, before or after consummation. Al-Tahawi reports: our companions make no difference between the two cases; this is the view of al-Thawri. (Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al-Ulama of al-Tahawi 2/367)
The majority (the Malikis, the Shafi'is in the madhhab and the Hanbalis in the madhhab, with internal details): insolvency before consummation opens the dissolution. After consummation, the Malikis, one Shafi'i view and one Hanbali view refuse it; the Hanbali madhhab and one Shafi'i view admit it before and after.
Among the Malikis: the husband who wishes to consummate before paying the prompt mahr may do so only with her consent; she may refuse herself until payment; if he has known property, it is seized for her. If he becomes insolvent before consummation, the mahr being prompt, the judge grants him successive deadlines according to the property hoped for from trade or elsewhere; if he becomes able, he is compelled; otherwise the spouses are separated and she follows him for half the mahr as a debt in his estate, which she collects as soon as he can; no nafaqa (maintenance) for her from him, for she is not in his 'idda (waiting period); and if he maintained her before consummation, that does not prevent her from refusing him for her prompt mahr. If he consummated and then becomes insolvent regarding the mahr or its remainder: no separation, no retention for her; a deadline is set for the insolvent man according to his state and the property hoped for from trade or a craft, a deadline neither bounded nor limited, left to the ijtihad of the judge.
(al-Kafi of Ibn Abd al-Barr 1/255, al-Tafri' 2/12-13, al-Tabsira 5/2016-2017)
Among the Shafi'is, the detail is exposed by al-Mawardi, al-'Amrani and others. Al-'Amrani (statements reported by Ibn al-Sabbagh) presents three paths. First path: after consummation, no option of dissolution (khiyar) in any case; before consummation, two opinions: the option is established, for he could not deliver the compensation while the compensated thing remains, like the buyer insolvent over the price with the goods intact; or the option is not established, the deferral of the mahr causing no certain harm, like the servant for the maintenance. Second path: before consummation, the option is established by unanimous view; after consummation, two opinions: refusal, for the object of the contract has perished, like the goods perishing in the hands of the buyer become insolvent; or establishment, the choice of the shaykh Abu Ishaq (al-Shirazi): the enabling is owed in exchange for the whole mahr, even if she delivered part of it; the dissolution therefore holds for the remainder, like a seller finding part of his goods in the hands of the bankrupt.
Third path: option by unanimous view before consummation, refusal by unanimous view after: the object is intact before, destroyed after; the mahr settles with the first consummation, like the price with the full delivery of the goods, the remainder being accessory. If she married knowing his insolvency, two opinions (Ibn al-Sabbagh): no option, she having consented to the deferral, unlike the maintenance, which is not owed by the contract and which the insolvent man can honor through earning; or the option is established, for he may become solvent again after the contract, her knowledge not amounting to consent to the deferral. If he becomes insolvent and she consents to stay: no further option of dissolution, the right over the mahr not renewing itself; this is the arrangement of the Baghdadians. Al-Mas'udi in al-Ibana: if she consented then retracts, before consummation she may refuse herself; after consummation, no.
Consent to stay removes the right of dissolution, but not the duty to deliver herself: she may refuse herself until receipt of the mahr, consent removing the dissolution, not the retention. The dissolution for insolvency takes place only through the judge, a matter of ijtihad, like the dissolution for defect. (al-Bayan 9/453-454, al-Umm 5/91, al-Hawi al-Kabir 11/461-463, al-Iqna' 2/488)
Among the Hanbalis: if he becomes insolvent regarding the prompt mahr before consummation, she has the dissolution, the compensation of the contract having become unreachable before the delivery of the compensated thing, like the buyer insolvent over the price before delivery of the goods. If he becomes insolvent after consummation, dissolution likewise in the madhhab; one view refuses it, based on her inability to refuse herself, like the bankrupt owing a debt to another. The dissolution takes place only through the ruling of a governor, a matter of ijtihad. If she consents to stay after his insolvency, or marries him knowing his insolvency, the dissolution is prevented by her consent: this is the madhhab; another opinion keeps her that right.
The one who consented to stay, or married in knowledge, keeps, on the contrary, the right to refuse herself until she receives her prompt mahr, the right of retention not having been established for him over her. (al-Mughni 7/201, al-Muharrar 2/38, al-Furu' 5/222, al-Mabd' 7/177, al-Insaf 8/312-314, Kashshaf al-Qina' 5/183)
In practice: the wife's right of refusal for an unpaid mahr varies among the schools and depends on whether consummation has occurred, but the path of the judge remains central: fixing deadlines for the insolvent husband, separation or dissolution according to the moment and the madhhab. Neither retention nor dissolution is exercised by self-help: both pass through the judicial authority.