What is the ruling on a wife who gives her husband the choice between traveling for leisure or divorce, accusing him of injustice or stinginess, even though the husband does not fall short in providing her basic and recreational needs according to his ability?

If a husband spends on his wife and treats her with kindness, he has fulfilled his obligations. If the wife requests to travel abroad for tourism, this is not obligatory upon the husband. If he fulfills her request, it is an act of good companionship. However, if he does not fulfill it, she does not have the right to demand a divorce for that reason. Otherwise, she would expose herself to a severe warning: "Any woman who asks her husband for divorce without any compelling reason, the scent of Paradise will be forbidden to her."