According to Ayesha Chaudhary, unlike Hanafi scholars who were more interested in protecting a husband's right to hit his wife for disciplinary purposes, the Malikis tried to stop husbands from abusing this right. The Maliki scholars only allowed striking a rebellious wife with the purpose of rectifying her. They specified that the strike should not be extreme or severe, must not leave marks or cause injuries and that the strike must not be fearsome, cause fractures, break bones, cause disfiguring wounds while punching in general and punching her in the chest were unacceptable and that the strike could not harm the wife. The Malikis held that a husband would be legally liable if the hitting led to the wife's death. They also did not allow a husband to hit his wife if he did not believe the hitting would cause her to stop her arrogance. The Shafi'i scholars upheld the permissibility of wife beating but encouraged avoiding it and did not hold the imperative "wa-ḍribūhunna" to mean an obligatory command. Shafi scholars also restricted what the husband could do in regards to hitting his wife, that he should only hit his wife if he thinks it will be effective in deterring her from her arrogance ; he should hit her in a non-extreme (ghayr mubarrih) manner; he should avoid hitting her face, sensitive places, and places of beauty and not hit her in a manner that causes disfiguration, bleeding, that he should not hit the same place repeatedly, loss of limbs, or death. According to Shafi scholars a husband is permitted to hit his wife with a cloth, sandal and a siwak but not with a whip. The views of the Hanbali scholars are a mix of the positions of the other three schools of law.