It is permissible to take one’s right from the debtor’s property if the cause is apparent, and it is not permissible if the cause is hidden

Question : Now, it is permissible to take one’s right from the debtor

Answer : if the cause is apparent. It is not permissible if the cause is hidden. An example of an apparent cause is maintenance. It is permissible for a woman to take from her husband’s money what he does not know about, in order to spend on herself and her children. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) issued a ruling to that effect. Why? Because the cause is apparent: she is his wife, and a wife must be provided for. If she took what she was accused of stealing, and so on, what is the status of the cause? It is the marital right. Likewise, a guest: a man stayed with a people as their guest, and they provided for him. He found some of their food and took it, and satisfied his hunger. Yes. Is it permissible or not? It is permissible, because the cause is apparent; he is entitled to this food, for example, by virtue of hospitality. But if the cause is hidden, it is not permissible. For example, if you were asking Zayd for one hundred dirhams and he denied it, saying, “I have nothing for you,” and you have no proof, is it permissible for you to take from his money the amount you are asking for? Yes.
No, because the cause is hidden and not apparent. This is a transaction between you and him, and we do not know that there is a cause between you and him that requires you to take from his money. And this opinion is the middle position.
And the evidence for this opinion: if the cause is apparent, the evidence is the hadith of Hind bint 'Utbah. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) the cause is apparent, so its evidence is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) Thank you. By analogy with the wife, because the cause is apparent.