Divorce in Menses

Divorce in Menses

16th May 2022


السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: I query regarding talak whilst my wife was on her menses. From what I have read that the divorce doesn’t count as she has to be in a state of purity for the talak to count. What is the view of the Hanafi school of thought regarding this matter?


In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful


Answer: Thank for your query. In reference to your query, a divorce issued whilst the wife is in her menses is valid and effective.[1] However, this is not the correct method of divorcing one’s wife and also a sin.[2] The jurists advise that if the husband issued a revocable divorce (1 r 2 divorces) then to take her back into marriage until her period finishes and then issue a new divorce if he wishes to divorce her again. This was the same advice that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wasallam gave to Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar radhiyallahu anhu who divorced his wife once in her menses and instructed her to retract from the divorce and then issue another divorce in her purity if he so wishes.[3]



[Allāh Knows Best]




Written by:  Mufti Anas Mullah        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] Raddul Muhtar, kitabul talaaq, vol 3, p233/234

قوله وتجب رجعتها) أي الموطوءة المطلقة في الحيض (قوله على الأصح) مقابله قول القدوري إنها مستحبة لأن المعصية وقعت فتعذر ارتفاعها، ووجه الأصح قوله – صلى الله عليه وسلم – لعمر في حديث ابن عمر في الصحيحين «مر ابنك فليراجعها» حين طلقها في حالة الحيض، فإنه يشتمل على وجوبين: صريح وهو الوجوب على عمر أن يأمر وضمني وهو ما يتعلق بابنه عند توجيه الصيغة إليه فإن عمر نائب فيه عن النبي – صلى الله عليه وسلم – فهو كالمبلغ، وتعذر ارتفاع المعصية لا يصلح صارفا للصيغة عن الوجوب لجواز إيجاب رفع أثرها وهو العدة وتطويلها إذ بقاء الشيء بقاء ما هو أثره من وجه فلا تترك الحقيقة، وتمامه في الفتح (قوله رفعا للمعصية) بالراء، وهي أولى من نسخة الدال ط أي لأن الدفع بالدال لما لم يقع والرفع بالراء للواقع والمعصية هنا

وقعت، والمراد رفع أثرها وهو العدة وتطويلها كما علمت لأن رفع الطلاق بعد وقوعه غير ممكن.
(قوله فإذا طهرت طلقها إن شاء) ظاهر عبارته أنه يطلقها في الطهر الذي طلقها في حيضه، وهو موافق لما ذكره الطحاوي، وهو رواية عن الإمام لأن أثر الطلاق انعدم بالمراجعة فكأنه لم يطلقها في هذه الحيضة فيسن تطليقها في طهرها لكن المذكور في الأصل وهو ظاهر الرواية كما في الكافي وظاهر المذهب، وقول الكل كما في فتح القدير إنه إذا راجعها في الحيض أمسك عن طلاقها حتى تطهر ثم تحيض ثم تطهر فيطلقها ثانية. ولا يطلقها في الطهر الذي يطلقها في حيضه لأنه بدعي، كذا في البحر والمنح، وعبارة المصنف تحتمله. اهـ. ح. ويدل لظاهر الرواية حديث الصحيحين «مر ابنك فليراجعها ثم ليمسكها حتى تطهر ثم تحيض فتطهر، فإن بدا له أن يطلقها فليطلقها قبل أن يمسها فتلك العدة كما أمر الله عز وجل» بحر. قال في الفتح: ويظهر من لفظ الحديث تقييد الرجعة بذلك الحيض الذي أوقع فيه، وهو المفهوم من كلام الأصحاب إذا تؤمل.
فلو لم يفعل حتى طهرت تقررت المعصية. اهـ. وقد يقال: هذا ظاهر على رواية الطحاوي، أما على المذهب فينبغي أن لا تقرر المعصية حتى يأتي الطهر الثاني بحر قلت: وفيه نظر، فإنه حيث كان ذلك هو المفهوم من حديث وكلام الأصحاب يحمل المذهب عليه، فتأمل (قوله قيد بالطلاق) أي في قوله أو في حيض موطوءة، والمراد أيضا بالطلاق الرجعي احتراز عن البائن فإنه بدعي في ظاهر الرواية وإن كان في الطهر كما مر

[2]  Kitab ut Talaq, Fatawa Hindiyyah, vol 1, p349

والبدعي) من حيث الوقت أن يطلق المدخول بها وهي من ذوات الأقراء في حالة الحيض أو في طهر جامعها فيه وكان الطلاق واقعا ويستحب له أن يراجعها والأصح أن الرجعة واجبة هكذا في الكافي


[3] Bukhari, No. 5252

بَابُ إِذَا طُلِّقَتِ الحَائِضُ تَعْتَدُّ بِذَلِكَ الطَّلاَقِ

حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ سِيرِينَ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ ابْنَ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: طَلَّقَ ابْنُ عُمَرَ امْرَأَتَهُ وَهِيَ حَائِضٌ، فَذَكَرَ عُمَرُ لِلنَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَ: «لِيُرَاجِعْهَا» قُلْتُ: تُحْتَسَبُ؟ قَالَ: فَمَهْ؟ وَعَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: «مُرْهُ فَلْيُرَاجِعْهَا» قُلْتُ: تُحْتَسَبُ؟ قَالَ: أَرَأَيْتَ إِنْ عَجَزَ وَاسْتَحْمَقَ،

Wife Asking for a Divorce if Her Husband Refuses Intimacy

Wife Asking for a Divorce if Her Husband Refuses Intimacy

21st February 2021


Question: My husband does not sexually satisfy me. He fell asleep on me on our wedding night (the very first time I was intimate with someone). I have spoken to him and claims he tries harder and also exercises. He refuses to come near me and claims I shouldn’t be complaining and I should be grateful. He has no regrets for sleeping on me when I have the urge. I have to go to him for intimacy at least once every 3 to 4 months otherwise he isn’t bothered at all. Can I apply for divorce on this basis? Isn’t intimacy my right also and how often should a couple be intimate?


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your case in question, as a point of principle intimacy in marriage is a shared right between the husband and wife. Just as the husband has natural urges then so does his wife. The Hanafi jurists mention that responding to intimacy when desired is wajib, which suggests that neither can the wife refuse intimacy when her husband demands it except during her menses, post-natal bleeding, during Ramadhān fasts and Ihram, and neither can he refuse when she demands it. The husband otherwise becomes sinful for refusing and will be accountable before Allāh Almighty.[1] Intimacy in marriage, as Imam Nawwawi rahimahullah explains, becomes a form of worship and rewarding when done to fulfil his wife’s needs which falls under kind social treatment towards her just as Allāh Almighty commands it. It is also rewarding with the intention of having pious children and protecting oneself from an unlawful relationship and unlawful gaze.[2] Refusing intimacy with her would inevitably lead to her suffering harm for neglecting her fundamental right.[3]

Thus, in your case if what you have stated is true then he becomes sinful for refusing intimacy with you if approaching once in 3 or 4 months is not sufficient. There is no prescribed period as to how often every couple must engage in intimacy as this varies between the natural urges of every couple. What is important is not to refuse without a valid reason and to engage in intimacy enough to protect themselves from unlawful relationship. Imam Ghazali rahimahullah however recommends every couple to be intimate at least once every four nights but this is not obligatory.[4] What I would initially recommend is consider marriage counselling or request a reliable family member to mediate between you both. Despite that, if he still remains reluctant towards you and expresses no interest in being intimate with you except once every three to four months which is not sufficient for your needs being fulfilled then as a last resort you may ask him to divorce you. If he still refuses then you can approach a reliable Shariah Council to dissolve your marriage.[5]


[Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department




[1] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al-Nikah, vol 2 p. 331

فَصْلٌ بَيَانُ حُكْمِ النِّكَاحِ

وَهَذَا الْحُكْمُ وَهُوَ حِلُّ الِاسْتِمْتَاعِ مُشْتَرَكٌ بَيْنَ الزَّوْجَيْنِ، فَإِنَّ الْمَرْأَةَ كَمَا تَحِلُّ لِزَوْجِهَا، فَزَوْجُهَا يَحِلُّ لَهَا قَالَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {لا هُنَّ حِلٌّ لَهُمْ وَلا هُمْ يَحِلُّونَ لَهُنَّ} [الممتحنة: 10] ، وَلِلزَّوْجِ أَنْ يُطَالِبَهَا بِالْوَطْءِ مَتَى شَاءَ إلَّا عِنْدَ اعْتِرَاضِ أَسْبَابٍ مَانِعَةٍ مِنْ الْوَطْءِ كَالْحَيْضِ وَالنِّفَاسِ وَالظِّهَارِ وَالْإِحْرَامِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ، وَلِلزَّوْجَةِ أَنْ تُطَالِبَ زَوْجَهَا بِالْوَطْءِ؛ لِأَنَّ حِلَّهُ لَهَا حَقُّهَا كَمَا أَنَّ حِلَّهَا لَهُ حَقُّهُ، وَإِذَا طَالَبَتْهُ يَجِبُ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ، وَيُجْبَرُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ مَرَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَالزِّيَادَةُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ تَجِبُ فِيمَا بَيْنَهُ، وَبَيْنَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى مِنْ بَابِ حُسْنِ الْمُعَاشَرَةِ وَاسْتِدَامَةِ النِّكَاحِ، فَلَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ عِنْدَ بَعْضِ أَصْحَابِنَا، وَعِنْدَ بَعْضِهِمْ يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ.

Mowsu’atul Fiqhiyyah Kuwaitiyyah, vol 44, p. 13

وَلِلزَّوْجِ أَنْ يُطَالِبَهَا بِالْوَطْءِ مَتَى شَاءَ إِلاَّ عِنْدَ اعْتِرَاضِ أَسْبَابٍ مَانِعَةٍ مِنَ الْوَطْءِ كَالْحَيْضِ وَالنِّفَاسِ وَالظِّهَارِ وَالإِحْرَامِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ. وَلِلزَّوْجَةِ أَنْ تُطَالِبَ زَوْجَهَا بِالْوَطْءِ، لأَنَّ حِلَّهُ لَهَا حَقُّهَا، كَمَا أَنَّ حِلَّهَا لَهُ حَقُّهُ


Mowsu’atul Fiqhiyyah Kuwaitiyyah, vol 44, p. 36

لِلْحَنَفِيَّةِ وَقَوْلٌ لِبَعْضِ الشَّافِعِيَّةِ، وَهُوَ أَنَّ لِلزَّوْجَةِ مُطَالَبَةَ زَوْجِهَا بِالْوَطْءِ، لأَِنَّ حِلَّهُ لَهَا حَقُّهَا، كَمَا أَنَّ حِلَّهَا لَهُ حَقُّهُ. وَإِذَا طَالَبَتْهُ بِهِ فَإِنَّهُ يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ وَيُجْبَرُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ مَرَّةً وَاحِدَةً، وَالزِّيَادَةُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ تَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ دِيَانَةً فِيمَا بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى مِنْ بَابِ حُسْنِ الْمُعَاشَرَةِ وَاسْتِدَامَةِ النِّكَاحِ، وَلاَ تَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ عِنْدَ بَعْضِ الْحَنَفِيَّةِ، وَعِنْدَ بَعْضِهِمْ يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْحُكْمِ، وَقَالُوا: يَأْثَمُ الزَّوْجُ إِذَا تَرَكَ مَا يَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ دِيَانَةً مُتَعَنِّتًا مَعَ الْقُدْرَةِ عَلَى الْوَطْءِ.


[2] Nawwawi, Sharhul Muslim, vol 7, p. 92

باب بَيَانِ أَنَّ اسْمَ الصَّدَقَةِ يَقَعُ عَلَى كُلِّ نَوْعٍ مِنْ الْمَعْرُوفِ

 وَفِي هَذَا دَلِيلٌ عَلَى إِنَّ الْمُبَاحَاتِ تَصِيرُ طَاعَاتٍ بِالنِّيَّاتِ الصَّادِقَاتِ، فَالْجِمَاعُ يَكُونُ عِبَادَةً إِذَا نَوَى بِهِ قَضَاءَ حَقِّ الزَّوْجَةِ وَمُعَاشَرَتَهَا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ الَّذِي أَمَرَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى بِهِ، أَوْ طَلَبَ وَلَدٍ صَالِحٍ، أَوْ إِعْفَافَ نَفْسِهِ أَوْ إِعْفَافَ الزَّوْجَةِ، وَمَنْعَهُمَا جَمِيعًا مِنَ النَّظَرِ إِلَى حَرَامٍ أَوِ الْفِكْرِ فِيهِ أَوِ الْهَمِّ بِهِ أَوْ غَيْرِ ذَلِكَ مِنَ الْمَقَاصِدِ الصَّالِحَةِ


[3] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al-Nikah, vol 2 p. 334

فَصْلٌ وِلَايَةُ التَّأْدِيبِ لِلزَّوْجِ إذَا لَمْ تُطِعْهُ

قِيلَ يُخَوِّفُهَا بِالْهَجْرِ أَوَّلًا وَالِاعْتِزَالِ عَنْهَا، وَتَرْكِ الْجِمَاعِ وَالْمُضَاجَعَةِ، فَإِنْ تَرَكَتْ وَإِلَّا هَجَرَهَا لَعَلَّ نَفْسَهَا لَا تَحْتَمِلُ الْهَجْرَ، ثُمَّ اُخْتُلِفَ فِي كَيْفِيَّةِ الْهَجْرِ قِيلَ يَهْجُرُهَا بِأَنْ لَا يُجَامِعَهَا، وَلَا يُضَاجِعَهَا عَلَى فِرَاشِهِ، وَقِيلَ يَهْجُرُهَا بِأَنْ لَا يُكَلِّمَهَا فِي حَالِ مُضَاجَعَتِهِ إيَّاهَا لَا أَنْ يَتْرُكَ جِمَاعَهَا وَمُضَاجَعَتَهَا؛ لِأَنَّ ذَلِكَ حَقٌّ مُشْتَرَكٌ بَيْنَهُمَا، فَيَكُونُ فِي ذَلِكَ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ الضَّرَرِ مَا عَلَيْهَا، فَلَا يُؤَدِّبَهَا بِمَا يَضُرُّ بِنَفْسِهِ، وَيُبْطِلُ حَقَّهُ،


[4] Al-Ghazali, Ihya Ulum al-Deen, Kitab Adab Nikah, vol 2, p. 50

وَيَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَأْتِيَهَا فِي كُل أَرْبَعِ لَيَالٍ مَرَّةً، فَهُوَ أَعْدَلُهُ، إِذْ عَدَدُ النِّسَاءِ أَرْبَعَةٌ، فَجَازَ التَّأْخِيرُ إِلَى هَذَا الْحَدِّ. نَعَمْ، يَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَزِيدَ أَوْ يَنْقُصَ بِحَسَبِ حَاجَتِهَا فِي التَّحْصِينِ، فَإِنَّ تَحْصِينَهَا وَاجِبٌ عَلَيْهِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ لاَ يَثْبُتُ الْمُطَالَبَةُ بِالْوَطْءِ، وَذَلِكَ لِعُسْرِ الْمُطَالَبَةِ وَالْوَفَاءِ.


[5] Majmu’atul Qawaneen Islami, Muslim Personal Law, Husband neglecting his Marital Obligations, Article 327,  p. 242,


This is also the view of Shaykhul Islām ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah, Mowsu’atul Fiqhiyyah Kuwaitiyyah, vol 44, p. 38

ثُمَّ قَال ابْنُ تَيْمِيَّةَ: وَحُصُول الضَّرَرِ لِلزَّوْجَةِ بِتَرْكِ الْوَطْءِ مُقْتَضٍ لِلْفَسْخِ بِكُل حَالٍ، سَوَاءٌ كَانَ بِقَصْدٍ مِنَ الزَّوْجِ أَوْ بِغَيْرِ قَصْدٍ، وَلَوْ مَعَ قُدْرَتِهِ وَعَجْزِهِ، كَالنَّفَقَةِ وَأَوْلَى لِلْفَسْخِ بِتَعَذُّرِهِ فِي الإِيلاَءِ إِجْمَاعًا


Does a Presumably Deceased Husband’s Nikah Still Remain Intact After Discovering He was Alive?

Does a Presumably Deceased Husband’s Nikah Still Remain Intact After Discovering He was Alive?

                       6th January 2022


Question: I need your guidance regarding an urgent matter. The problem is that few years back my brother’s family lived in Canada. My brother had a plane crash and the authorities reported him dead. So, his family returned back to Pakistan. My parents married me to my sister-in-law (after completing her iddah). She had 1 son and 1 daughter from her previous marriage. Now after 1 year the embassy reported that my brother is alive and survived the crash but was in comma since then. Now my question is, what is the legal status of my marriage? Also, she is pregnant with my baby girl so who will be the legal father?



الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful


In reference to your case in question, if what you have said is true to its very nature then due to the complex nature of your query, there are a number of factors that must be addressed namely the announcement of her husband’s death, his right to reclaiming his wife after he is discovered to be alive and the legal father of the new baby girl.

As for the first issue about the announcement of her husband’s death, then the general ruling is that post-death injunctions only apply once a person’s death has been confirmed after thorough investigation of a person’s living status. Such confirmed report must be based on sound evidence that establishes near certainty of their death and not founded on mere assumptions. Near certainty can be established either by reliable witnesses or from the reports of such existential calamities that leave little scope of survival. If the authority’s report of her former husband’s death due to a plane crash was convincing enough to accept then it was reasonable to consider him dead as usually the chances of surviving a plane crash is extremely rare.[1] As of which all post death injunctions such as inheritance distribution, grace period of four months and ten days etc will apply.

The second issue is now that after a year the embassy notified the family that her former husband was alive all this time but was in a coma, most probably in a vegetative state and receiving treatment, if this is confirmed and the report can be trusted after investigation then the scholars of the four madhabs have differed as to which husband does she belong to (see footnote).[2] The standard position in the Hanafi school is that her first Nikah remains intact. Which means that she must return back to her former husband and her second Nikah to his younger brother becomes automatically annulled.[3] This ruling is based on Sayyiduna Umar’s radhiyallahu anhu judgment during his reign of Khilafat where a man was abducted by a group of Jinns and became unknown whether he was alive or not. Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu issued an injunction for his wife to wait for four years during which if he returned then they can reunite and live as married couple otherwise he will be presumed dead. Her husband did not return during that time and so presuming him to be dead, she observed the post-death grace period of four months and ten days and thereafter remarried to someone else. After remarrying, her former husband suddenly  returned and upon seeing his wife with another man, he went to Khalif Umar radhiyallahu anhu and related the entire incident to him. In one narration Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu gave him the choice between returning to his wife or reclaim his mahr back (so she can continue living with her second husband).[4] However, in another version Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu retracted from this view in favour of Sayyiduna Ali radhiyallahu anhu who maintained that her former husband has rights over her so she must return back to him and separate from her second husband. She will be entitled to the mahr of her second husband due to the permissibility of intimacy and also observe a separate waiting period from her second husband before reuniting with her former husband. The underlying rational of this view is that the Quran prohibits men from marrying women in the wedlock of someone else. As her former Nikah was not broken, she is still in her previous marriage.[5]

The underpinning ruling of the above is similar to your situation as in, when her former husband was discovered to be alive then he has more rights over her because their nikah was still intact. As a result, your marriage with her shall be automatically annulled. Remember that to end the marriage, her husband must either divorce her or agree to a Khula – wife returning her mahr in exchange of releasing herself from his marriage – in order to remarry elsewhere otherwise she sill remains in his wedlock.

The third issue is that she must now observe a waiting period before returning back to her former husband as indicated in the fatwa of Sayyiduna Ali radhiyallahu anhu. This is because by her consummating lawfully with another man, the waiting period is so to cleanse her womb which is three menses. But if she is pregnant like in your case, then she must not consummate with him until child birth so not to mix his seminal fluid with the child she is already conceiving.[6] This leads on to the final point as to who is considered to be this new baby’s legitimate father that she is now conceiving. The soundest opinion is that her second husband, which is you, will be considered the child’s legal father Islamically which means that the child’s lineage will be attributed to you.[7]

Having said the above, a final note on this is that such sensitive matters must be treated with wisdom. As she rightfully belongs to her first husband, no one can take that right away from him. She can no longer continue with any conjugal relationship with her second husband. Her second husband however, becomes responsible for financially maintaining his new born child.




[Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department




[1] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 6 p. 462-463

قُلْت: وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ هَذَا غَيْرُ خَارِجٍ عَنْ ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ أَيْضًا، بَلْ هُوَ أَقْرَبُ إلَيْهِ مِنْ الْقَوْلِ بِالتَّقْدِيرِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ فَسَّرَهُ فِي شَرْحِ الْوَهْبَانِيَّةِ بِأَنْ يَنْظُرَ وَيَجْتَهِدَ وَيَفْعَلَ مَا يَغْلِبُ عَلَى ظَنِّهِ فَلَا يَقُولُ بِالتَّقْدِيرِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَرِدْ بِهِ الشَّرْعُ بَلْ يَنْظُرُ فِي الْأَقْرَانِ وَفِي الزَّمَانِ وَالْمَكَانِ وَيَجْتَهِدُ، ثُمَّ نَقَلَ عَنْ مُغْنِي الْحَنَابِلَةِ حِكَايَتَهُ عَنْ الشَّافِعِيِّ وَمُحَمَّدٍ، وَأَنَّهُ الْمَشْهُورُ عَنْ مَالِكٍ وَأَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَأَبِي يُوسُفَ. وَقَالَ الزَّيْلَعِيُّ: لِأَنَّهُ يَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الْبِلَادِ وَكَذَا غَلَبَةُ الظَّنِّ تَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الْأَشْخَاصِ فَإِنَّ الْمِلْكَ الْعَظِيمَ إذَا انْقَطَعَ خَبَرُهُ يَغْلِبُ عَلَى الظَّنِّ فِي أَدْنَى مُدَّةٍ أَنَّهُ قَدْ مَاتَ اهـ وَمُقْتَضَاهُ أَنَّهُ يَجْتَهِدُ وَيُحَكِّمُ الْقَرَائِنَ الظَّاهِرَةَ الدَّالَّةَ عَلَى مَوْتِهِ وَعَلَى هَذَا يُبْتَنَى عَلَى مَا فِي جَامِعِ الْفَتَاوَى حَيْثُ قَالَ: وَإِذَا فُقِدَ فِي الْمُهْلِكَةِ فَمَوْتُهُ غَالِبٌ فَيُحْكَمُ بِهِ، كَمَا إذَا فُقِدَ فِي وَقْتِ الْمُلَاقَاةِ مَعَ الْعَدُوِّ أَوْ مَعَ قُطَّاعِ الطَّرِيقِ، أَوْ سَافَرَ عَلَى الْمَرَضِ الْغَالِبُ هَلَاكُهُ، أَوْ كَانَ سَفَرُهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ وَمَا أَشْبَهَ ذَلِكَ حُكِمَ بِمَوْتِهِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ الْغَالِبُ فِي هَذِهِ الْحَالَاتِ وَإِنْ كَانَ بَيْنَ احْتِمَالَيْنِ، وَاحْتِمَالُ مَوْتِهِ نَاشِئٌ عَنْ دَلِيلٍ لَا احْتِمَالَ حَيَاتِهِ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا الِاحْتِمَالَ كَاحْتِمَالِ مَا إذَا بَلَغَ الْمَفْقُودُ مِقْدَارَ مَا لَا يَعِيشُ عَلَى حَسَبِ مَا اخْتَلَفُوا فِي الْمِقْدَارِ نَقْلٌ مِنْ الْغُنْيَةِ اهـ مَا فِي جَامِعِ الْفَتَاوَى.


[2] According to the famous view of the Maliki school, her first husband cannot claim any rights over her as she now belongs to her second husband. According to the Shafi’ee school, like the Hanafi school, her second Nikah will be automatically annulled and must return back to her former husband after completing a cleansing waiting period from her second husband. According to the soundest opinion of the Hanbali school, her first husband can claim rights over her if her second marriage was not consummated. If she consummated her second marriage then her first husband will be given a choice to either to take her back or release her by reclaiming his mahr in order to remain with her second husband.


Mawsoo’atul Fiqhiyyat Kuwaitiyyah, vol 38, p. 279 – shamila

وَعِنْدَ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ أَنَّ الْمَفْقُودَ إِنْ عَادَ قَبْل نِكَاحِ زَوْجَتِهِ غَيْرَهُ، فَهِيَ زَوْجَتُهُ، وَهَذَا هُوَ الْقَوْل الْمَشْهُورُ الْمَعْمُول بِهِ، فَإِنْ عَادَ بَعْدَ النِّكَاحِ، فَعَنْ مَالِكٍ فِي ذَلِكَ رِوَايَتَانِ: الأْولَى: إِنْ عَادَ قَبْل الدُّخُول، فَهُوَ أَحَقُّ بِهَا، وَيُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ زَوْجِهَا الثَّانِي، وَأَمَّا إِنْ عَادَ بَعْدَ الدُّخُول، فَالثَّانِي عَلَى نِكَاحِهِ، وَلاَ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهُ، وَبَيْنَ زَوْجَتِهِ. الثَّانِيَةُ: إِنْ عَادَ الْمَفْقُودُ، فَوَجَدَ زَوْجَتَهُ قَدْ تَزَوَّجَتْ فَلاَ سَبِيل لَهُ عَلَيْهَا، وَلَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ دُخُولٌ. وَقَدْ أَخَذَ بِكُلٍّ مِنَ الرِّوَايَتَيْنِ طَائِفَةٌ مِنَ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ، وَقَال ابْنُ الْقَاسِمِ، وَأَشْهَبُ بِأَنَّ أَقْوَى الْقَوْلَيْنِ مَا جَاءَ فِي الرِّوَايَةِ الثَّانِيَةِ  وَهِيَ مَذْكُورَةٌ فِي الْمُوَطَّأِ

وَقَوْل الشَّافِعِيَّةِ يَخْتَلِفُ بَيْنَ الْقَدِيمِ وَالْجَدِيدِ: فَفِي الْقَوْل الْقَدِيمِ: إِنْ قَدِمَ الْمَفْقُودُ بَعْدَ زَوَاجِ امْرَأَتِهِ، فَفِي عَوْدَتِهَا إِلَيْهِ قَوْلاَنِ، وَقِيل يُخَيَّرُ الأَْوَّل بَيْنَ أَخْذِهَا مِنَ الثَّانِي، وَتَرْكِهَا لَهُ وَأَخْذِ مَهْرِ الْمِثْل مِنْهُ. وَفِي الْقَوْل الْجَدِيدِ: هِيَ بَاقِيَةٌ عَلَى نِكَاحِ الْمَفْقُودِ، فَإِنْ تَزَوَّجَتْ غَيْرَهُ فَنِكَاحُهَا بَاطِلٌ، تَعُودُ لِلأْوَّل بَعْدَ انْتِهَاءِ عِدَّتِهَا مِنَ الثَّانِي.

وَذَهَبَ الْحَنَابِلَةُ إِلَى أَنَّ الْمَفْقُودَ إِنْ قَدِمَ قَبْل أَنْ تَتَزَوَّجَ امْرَأَتُهُ، فَهِيَ عَلَى عِصْمَتِهِ. فَإِنْ تَزَوَّجَتْ غَيْرَهُ، وَلَمْ يَدْخُل بِهَا، فَهِيَ زَوْجَةُ الأْوَّل فِي رِوَايَةٍ، وَهِيَ الصَّحِيحُ، وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ أَنَّهُ يُخَيَّرُ.فَإِنْ دَخَل بِهَا الثَّانِي، كَانَ الأْوَّل بِالْخِيَارِ، إِنْ شَاءَ أَخَذَ زَوْجَتَهُ بِالْعَقْدِ الأْوَّل، وَإِنْ شَاءَ أَخَذَ مَهْرَهَا وَبَقِيَتْ عَلَى نِكَاحِ الثَّانِي.


[3] Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Hiylatun Najizah, p. 68-69

[4] Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah, No: 16720

ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ، أَنَّ رَجُلًا اسْتَهُوَتْهُ الْجِنُّ عَلَى عَهْدِ عُمَرَ، فَأَتَتِ امْرَأَتُهُ عُمَرَ، فَأَمَرَهَا «أَنْ تَرَبَّصَ أَرْبَعَ سِنِينَ، ثُمَّ أَمَرَ وَلِيَّهُ بَعْدَ أَرْبَعِ سِنِينَ أَنْ يُطَلِّقَهَا، ثُمَّ أَمَرَهَا أَنْ تَعْتَدَّ، فَإِذَا انْقَضَتْ عِدَّتُهَا تَزَوَّجَتْ، فَإِنْ جَاءَ زَوْجُهَا خُيِّرَ بَيْنَ امْرَأَتِهِ وَالصَّدَاقِ»


Sarakhsi, Kitāb al-Mabsoot, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 11 p. 39-40

عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى رَحِمَهُمَا اللَّهُ قَالَ لَقِيتُ: الْمَفْقُودَ نَفْسَهُ فَحَدَّثَنِي حَدِيثَهُ قَالَ: أَكَلْت حَرِيرًا فِي أَهْلِي ثُمَّ خَرَجْتُ فَأَخَذَنِي نَفَرٌ مِنْ الْجِنِّ فَمَكَثْتُ فِيهِمْ ثُمَّ بَدَا لَهُمْ فِي عِتْقِي فَأَعْتَقُونِي، ثُمَّ أَتَوْا بِي قَرِيبًا مِنْ الْمَدِينَةِ فَقَالُوا أَتَعْرِفُ النَّخْلَ فَقُلْتُ: نَعَمْ فَخَلُّوا عَنِّي فَجِئْتُ، فَإِذَا عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – قَدْ أَبَانَ امْرَأَتِي بَعْدَ أَرْبَعِ سِنِينَ وَحَاضَتْ وَانْقَضَتْ عِدَّتُهَا وَتَزَوَّجَتْ فَخَيَّرَنِي عُمَرُ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – بَيْنَ أَنْ يَرُدَّهَا عَلَيَّ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ. وَأَهْلُ الْحَدِيثِ – رَحِمَهُمُ اللَّهُ – يَرَوْنَ فِي هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ أَنَّهُ هَمَّ بِتَأْدِيبِهِ حِينَ رَآهُ، وَجَعَلَ يَقُولُ: يَغِيبُ أَحَدُكُمْ عَنْ زَوْجَتِهِ هَذِهِ الْمُدَّةَ الطَّوِيلَةَ، وَلَا يَبْعَثُ بِخَبَرِهِ فَقَالَ: لَا تَعْجَلْ يَا أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَذَكَرَ لَهُ قِصَّتَهُ.


[5] Sarakhsi, Kitāb al-Mabsoot, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 11 p. 39-40

وَهَذَا الْحَدِيثُ دَلِيلٌ لَنَا أَيْضًا فَنَتَّبِعُ الْآثَارَ، وَلَا نَشْتَغِلُ بِكَيْفِيَّةِ ذَلِكَ، وَكَأَنَّ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – إنَّمَا رَجَعَ عَنْ قَوْلِهِ فِي امْرَأَةِ الْمَفْقُودِ لَمَّا تَبَيَّنَ مِنْ حَالِ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ، وَأَمَّا تَخْيِيرُهُ إيَّاهُ بَيْنَ أَنْ يَرُدَّهَا عَلَيْهِ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ فَهُوَ بِنَاءٌ عَلَى مَذْهَبِ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – فِي الْمَرْأَةِ إذَا نُعِيَ إلَيْهَا زَوْجُهَا فَاعْتَدَّتْ، وَتَزَوَّجَتْ ثُمَّ أَتَى الزَّوْجُ الْأَوَّلُ حَيًّا إنَّهُ يُخَيَّرُ بَيْنَ أَنْ تُرَدَّ عَلَيْهِ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ، وَقَدْ صَحَّ رُجُوعُهُ عَنْهُ إلَى قَوْلِ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُفَإِنَّهُ كَانَ يَقُولُ تُرَدُّ إلَى زَوْجِهَا الْأَوَّلِ، وَيُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْآخَرِ، وَلَهَا الْمَهْرُ بِمَا اسْتَحَلَّ مِنْ فَرْجِهَا، وَلَا يَقْرَبُهَا الْأَوَّلُ حَتَّى تَنْقَضِيَ عِدَّتُهَا مِنْ الْآخَرِ وَبِهَذَا كَانَ يَأْخُذُ إبْرَاهِيمُ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – فَيَقُولُ: قَوْلُ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – أَحَبُّ إلَيَّ مِنْ قَوْلِ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ -، وَبِهِ نَأْخُذُ أَيْضًا؛ لِأَنَّهُ تَبَيَّنَ أَنَّهَا تَزَوَّجَتْ، وَهِيَ مَنْكُوحَةٌ وَمَنْكُوحَةُ الْغَيْرِ لَيْسَتْ مِنْ الْمُحَلَّلَاتِ بَلْ هِيَ مِنْ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ فِي حَقِّ سَائِرِ النَّاسِ كَمَا قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنْ النِّسَاءِ} [النساء: 24] فَكَيْفَ يَسْتَقِيمُ تَرْكُهَا مَعَ الثَّانِي، وَإِذَا اخْتَارَ الْأَوَّلُ الْمَهْرَ، وَلَكِنْ يَكُونُ النِّكَاحُ مُنْعَقِدًا بَيْنَهُمَا فَكَيْفَ يَسْتَقِيمُ دَفْعُ الْمَهْرِ إلَى الْأَوَّلِ، وَهُوَ بَدَلُ بُضْعِهَا فَيَكُون مَمْلُوكًا لَهَا دُونَ زَوْجِهَا كَالْمَنْكُوحَةِ إذَا وُطِئَتْ بِشُبْهَةٍ، فَعَرَفْنَا أَنَّ الصَّحِيحَ أَنَّهَا زَوْجَةُ الْأَوَّلِ، وَلَكِنْ لَا يَقْرَبُهَا لِكَوْنِهَا مُعْتَدَّةً لِغَيْرِهِ كَالْمَنْكُوحَةِ إذَا وُطِئَتْ بِالشُّبْهَةِ. وَذُكِرَ عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – أَنَّ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – رَجَعَ عَنْ ثَلَاثِ قَضِيَّاتٍ إلَى قَوْلِ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ -، عَنْ امْرَأَةِ أَبِي كَنَفٍ، وَالْمَفْقُودِ زَوْجُهَا، وَالْمَرْأَةِ الَّتِي تَزَوَّجَتْ فِي عِدَّتِهَا. أَمَّا حُكْمُ الْمَفْقُودِ وَالْمُعْتَدَّةِ فَقَدْ بَيَّنَّا.


[6] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 5 p. 189

مطلب فِي عدة الْمَوْت

(قَوْلُهُ: وَفِي حَقِّ الْحَامِلِ) أَيْ مِنْ نِكَاحٍ وَلَوْ فَاسِدًا، فَلَا عِدَّةَ عَلَى الْحَامِلِ مِنْ زِنًا أَصْلًا بَحْرٌ (قَوْلُهُ: مُطْلَقًا) أَيْ سَوَاءً كَانَ عَنْ طَلَاقٍ، أَوْ وَفَاةٍ، أَوْ مُتَارَكَةٍ، أَوْ وَطْءٍ بِشُبْهَةٍ نَهْرٌ


Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 1, p. 554

الْبَابُ الثَّالِثَ عَشَرَ فِي الْعِدَّةِ

وَعِدَّةُ الْحَامِلِ أَنْ تَضَعَ حَمْلَهَا كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي. سَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ حَامِلًا وَقْتَ وُجُوبِ الْعِدَّةِ أَوْ حَبِلَتْ بَعْدَ الْوُجُوبِ كَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ. وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ حُرَّةً أَوْ مَمْلُوكَةً قِنَّةً أَوْ مُدَبَّرَةً أَوْ مُكَاتَبَةً أَوْ أُمَّ وَلَدٍ أَوْ مُسْتَسْعَاةً مُسْلِمَةً أَوْ كِتَابِيَّةً كَذَا فِي الْبَدَائِعِ.

وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ عَنْ طَلَاقٍ أَوْ وَفَاةٍ أَوْ مُتَارَكَةٍ أَوْ وَطْءٍ بِشُبْهَةٍ كَذَا فِي النَّهْرِ الْفَائِقِ. وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَ الْحَمْلُ ثَابِتَ النَّسَبِ أَمْ لَا وَيُتَصَوَّرُ ذَلِكَ فِيمَنْ تَزَوَّجَ حَامِلًا بِالزِّنَا كَذَا فِي السِّرَاجِ الْوَهَّاجِ.


[7] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Talāq, Bab al-Iddat, vol 5 p. 247-248

فَصْلٌ فِي ثُبُوتِ النَّسَبِ

(غَابَ عَنْ امْرَأَتِهِ فَتَزَوَّجَتْ بِآخَرَ وَوَلَدَتْ أَوْلَادًا) ثُمَّ جَاءَ الزَّوْجُ الْأَوَّلُ (فَالْأَوْلَادُ لِلثَّانِي عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ) الَّذِي رَجَعَ إلَيْهِ الْإِمَامُ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى كَمَا فِي الْخَانِيَّةِ وَالْجَوْهَرَةِ وَالْكَافِي وَغَيْرِهَا. وَفِي حَاشِيَةِ شَرْحِ الْمَنَارِ لِابْنِ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ. وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى إنْ احْتَمَلَهُ الْحَالُ، لَكِنْ فِي آخِرِ دَعْوَى الْجَمْعِ حَكَى أَرْبَعَةَ أَقْوَالٍ ثُمَّ أَفْتَى بِمَا اعْتَمَدَهُ الْمُصَنِّفُ، وَعَلَّلَهُ ابْنُ مَالِكٍ بِأَنَّهُ الْمُسْتَفْرِشُ حَقِيقَةً، فَالْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ الْحَقِيقِيِّ وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِدًا وَتَمَامُهُ فِيهِ فَرَاجِعْهُ.

(قَوْلُهُ: غَابَ عَنْ امْرَأَتِهِ إلَخْ) شَامِلٌ لِمَا إذَا بَلَغَهَا مَوْتُهُ أَوْ طَلَاقُهُ فَاعْتَدَّتْ وَتَزَوَّجَتْ ثُمَّ بَانَ خِلَافُهُ، وَلِمَا إذَا ادَّعَتْ ذَلِكَ ثُمَّ بَانَ خِلَافُهُ اهـ ح. (قَوْلُهُ: وَفِي حَاشِيَةِ شَرْحِ الْمَنَارِ إلَخْ) قَالَ الشَّارِحُ فِي شَرْحِهِ عَلَى الْمَنَارِ: لَكِنَّ الصَّحِيحَ مَا أَوْرَدَهُ الْجُرْجَانِيُّ أَنَّ الْأَوْلَادَ مِنْ الثَّانِي إنْ احْتَمَلَهُ الْحَالُ، وَأَنَّ الْإِمَامَ رَجَعَ إلَى هَذَا الْقَوْلِ، وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى كَمَا فِي حَاشِيَةِ ابْنِ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ عَنْ [الْوَاقِعَاتِ وَالْأَسْرَارِ] وَنَقَلَهُ ابْنُ نُجَيْمٍ عَنْ الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ اهـ وَاحْتِمَالُ الْحَالِ بِأَنْ تَلِدَهُ لِسِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ فَأَكْثَرَ مِنْ وَقْتِ النِّكَاحِ. (قَوْلُهُ: حَكَى أَرْبَعَةَ أَقْوَالٍ) حَاصِلُ عِبَارَتِهِ مَعَ شَرْحِهِ لِابْنِ مَالِكٍ أَنَّ الْأَوْلَادَ لِلْأَوَّلِ عِنْدَ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ مُطْلَقًا: أَيْ سَوَاءٌ أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ، أَوْ لَا، لِأَنَّ نِكَاحَ الْأُولَى صَحِيحٌ فَاعْتِبَارُهُ أَوْلَى. وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ لِلثَّانِي وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى لِأَنَّ الْوَلَدَ لِلْفِرَاشِ الْحَقِيقِيِّ وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِدًا. وَعِنْدَ أَبِي يُوسُفَ لِلْأَوَّلِ إنْ أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مِنْ عَقْدِ الثَّانِي لِتَيَقُّنِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ، وَإِنْ لِأَكْثَرَ فَلِلثَّانِي. وَعِنْدَ مُحَمَّدٍ لِلْأَوَّلِ إنْ كَانَ بَيْنَ وَطْءِ الثَّانِي وَالْوِلَادَةِ أَقَلُّ مِنْ سَنَتَيْنِ، فَلَوْ أَكْثَرَ مِنْهُمَا فَلِلثَّانِي لِتَيَقُّنِ أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ، وَالنِّكَاحُ الصَّحِيحُ مَعَ احْتِمَالِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْهُ أَوْلَى بِالِاعْتِبَارِ، وَإِنَّمَا وَضْعُ الْمَسْأَلَةِ فِي الْوَلَدِ إذْ الْمَرْأَةُ تُرَدُّ إلَى الْأَوَّلِ إجْمَاعًا. اهـ.

قُلْت: وَظَاهِرُهُ أَنَّهُ عَلَى الْمُفْتَى بِهِ يَكُونُ الْوَلَدُ لِلثَّانِي مُطْلَقًا وَإِنْ جَاءَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مِنْ وَقْتِ الْعَقْدِ كَمَا يَدُلُّ عَلَيْهِ ذِكْرُ الْإِطْلَاقِ قَبْلَهُ، وَالِاقْتِصَارُ عَلَى التَّفْصِيلِ بَعْدَهُ، وَهَذَا خِلَافُ مَا قَالَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَهَذَا وَجْهُ الِاسْتِدْرَاكِ لَكِنْ لَا يَخْفَى مَا فِيهِ، فَقَدْ ذَكَرْنَا قَرِيبًا أَنَّ الْمَنْكُوحَةَ لَوْ وَلَدَتْ لِدُونِ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهُ مِنْ زَوْجٍ وَيَفْسُدُ النِّكَاحُ أَيْ لِأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ تَصَوُّرِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْهُ وَفِيمَا دُونَ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ لَا يُتَصَوَّرُ ذَلِكَ، وَهَذَا إذَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ بِأَنَّ لَهَا زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ فَكَيْفَ إذَا ظَهَرَ زَوْجٌ غَيْرُهُ فَلَا شَكَّ فِي عَدَمِ ثُبُوتِهِ مِنْ الثَّانِي، وَلِهَذَا قَالَ فِي شَرْحِ دُرَرِ الْبِحَارِ: إنَّ هَذَا مُشْكِلٌ فِيمَا إذَا أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مُذْ تَزَوَّجَهَا. اهـ.

وَالْحَقُّ أَنَّ الْإِطْلَاقَ غَيْرُ مُرَادٍ وَأَنَّ الصَّوَابَ مَا نَقَلَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَبِهِ يَظْهَرُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةَ عَنْ الْإِمَامِ الْمُفْتَى بِهَا هِيَ الَّتِي أَخَذَ بِهَا أَبُو يُوسُفَ، وَأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ تَقْيِيدِ كَلَامِ الْمُصَنِّفِ وَالْمَجْمَعِ بِمَا نَقَلَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَأَنَّهُ لَا وَجْهَ لِلِاسْتِدْرَاكِ. عَلَيْهِ بِمَا فِي الْمَجْمَعِ، وَاَللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ.


Ambiguous Terms for Divorce

Ambiguous Terms for Divorce

7th October 2021


Question: The man said the following to his wife in a heated argument. Here is his full statement. “Gosh I still tried to make this so-called relationship work because of nikaah I was so stupid I should have left u when I found out about your bad habits. Your mother who is a divorcee knows about her life but she still chose a divorce for u as well – where is the shame in that. You don’t know the value of nikah or the importance of it. A woman like you who ruined her marriage without the blink of eye. U don’t know what marriage is? What nikah is? Now you have ruined your marriage after using me you have started a relationship with someone else. How can you value nikah? I am well rid of u now, good riddance to bad rubbish and that’s the end of it. Don’t ever contact me again.” What type of Talaq has taken place?


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your query by uttering such words constitute one irrevocable divorce. From the above statement, there is no clear mention of the word divorce. However, looking at the context of the full conversation we can deduce that statements such as “I am well rid of u now…that’s the end of it”[1] and “Now you have ruined your marriage after using me” within such a context are ambiguously[2] referring to divorce[3], hence an irrevocable divorce would imply from the use of these sentences even if he later on denies it. [4]

[Allāh Knows Best]



Written by:  Mufti Anas Mullah        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam  

JKN Fatawa Department


[1]Ibn Ābideen, Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Talaaq, Bāb Alkinayaat, vol 3 p. 298

 وَأَمَّا حَالَةُ الْمُذَاكَرَةِ فَتُصَدَّقُ مَعَ كُلٍّ مِنْهُمَا بَلْ لَا يُتَصَوَّرُ سُؤَالُهَا الطَّلَاقَ إلَّا فِي إحْدَى الْحَالَتَيْنِ لِأَنَّهُمَا ضِدَّانِ لَا وَاسِطَةَ بَيْنَهُمَا(قَوْلُهُ انْتَقِلِي) مِثْلُ اُخْرُجِي وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ


[2] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talaaq, Bāb fi Eeqaa’ al talaaq, Fasl fil Kinaayat  vol 1, p. 375

وَالْأَحْوَالُ ثَلَاثَةٌ (حَالَةُ) الرِّضَا (وَحَالَةُ) مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ بِأَنْ تَسْأَلَ هِيَ طَلَاقَهَا أَوْ غَيْرُهَا يَسْأَلُ طَلَاقَهَا (وَحَالَةُ) الْغَضَبِ فَفِي حَالَةِ الرِّضَا لَا يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ فِي الْأَلْفَاظِ كُلِّهَا إلَّا بِالنِّيَّةِ وَالْقَوْلُ قَوْلُ الزَّوْجِ فِي تَرْكِ النِّيَّةِ مَعَ الْيَمِينِ وَفِي حَالَةِ مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ فِي سَائِرِ الْأَقْسَامِ قَضَاءً إلَّا فِيمَا يَصْلُحُ جَوَابًا وَرَدَّا فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُجْعَلُ طَلَاقًا كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي

[3]  Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talaaq, Bāb fi Eeqaa’ al talaaq, Fasl fil Kinaayat  vol 1, p. 375

وَلَوْ قَالَ فِي حَالِ مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ بَايَنْتُك أَوْ أَبَنْتُك أَوْ أَبَنْت مِنْك أَوْ لَا سُلْطَانَ لِي عَلَيْك أَوْ سَرَّحْتُك أَوْ وَهَبْتُك لِنَفْسِك أَوْ خَلَّيْت سَبِيلَك أَوْ أَنْتِ سَائِبَةٌ أَوْ أَنْتِ حُرَّةٌ أَوْ أَنْتِ أَعْلَمُ بِشَأْنِك. فَقَالَتْ: اخْتَرْت نَفْسِي. يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ وَإِنْ قَالَ لَمْ أَنْوِ الطَّلَاقَ لَا يُصَدَّقُ قَضَاءً


[4] Usool al-shashi,Fasl fi Al Sareeh wal Kinaayah, pg 68

وَالْكِنَايَة هِيَ مَا استتر مَعْنَاهُ وَحكم الْكِنَايَة ثُبُوت الحكم بهَا عِنْد وجود النِّيَّة أَو بِدلَالَة الْحَال إِذْ لَا بُد لَهُ من دَلِيل يَزُول بِهِ التَّرَدُّد

Waiting Period and Demanding Half of Husband’s Assets

Waiting Period and Demanding Half of Husband’s Assets

28th September 2021


Question: I wanted to ask a few questions about iddah, specifically in the case of faskh-e-nikkah, as in what would be the length of a woman’s iddah? And also if the woman is of an old age, how should she go about counting the days of her iddah if she doesn’t menstruate? In the UK, when a couple divorces, all the assets and properties are split between the pair. Is this permissible in Islām? My final question would be that if the father of my children is agreeing to pay the expenses of my children, if I was to ever use the money for my personal needs would this be permissible in Islam?



الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your case scenario, iddah or known as grace period is mandatory upon a woman who has been separated from her husband after her marriage was consummated whether it was a talaq or a faskh – dissolved through an Islamic court. Her waiting period as prescribed in the Quran is three complete menstrual cycles.[1] Though the Quran references to a divorced woman, the similar rule applies to faskh also.[2] This is because both a talaq and faskh bear the same cause of marriage separation as of which iddah will be also prescribed for her in the case of faskh.[3]  The reason behind the iddah is to cleanse her womb before she moves on with another marital relationship with someone else. The underlying reason exists both with talaq and with faskh which is why the same iddah is necessary for faskh as well. If she reached the age of menopause then her iddah according to the Quran will change to three months.[4] In both cases, she is eligible for maintenance and living accommodation until her waiting period expires.[5]

As for demanding half of her ex-husband’s property and assets after divorce through the court, then this will not be permissible Islamically. The only assets she can demand from him is either her outstanding mahr, outstanding debt owed to her that she previously lent or basic maintenance during her waiting period.[6] The court’s decision to divide the property into half will not valid Islamically for a number of reasons;

Firstly, just as her personal property belongs to her, so does his personal property belong to him. Demanding what is rightfully not hers is an injustice against him. And injustice is a punishable offense in the Hereafter.

Secondly, many have sought to justify her right to half of his assets claiming that it is to compensate for his shortcomings in fulfilling his financial obligations towards her during marriage. This is not justifiable however. Classical jurists have elaborated on the legal status of non-paid expenses towards one’s wife. To summarise, the legal default status of expenses – nafaqah – as the jurists explain equates to hadyah – gift. Albeit he becomes sinful for his failure, default expenses of the past are not considered a debt and hence not binding on him. They become binding in two exceptional instances only namely; mutual agreement between couple or a Muslim judge stipulates allowance for her in the court. If the husband made a binding agreement that he will grant specific monthly allowance or she presented her case to a Muslim court where he stipulated monthly allowances for her from her husband and thereafter, he fails, only then she can demand the default payments of the past.[7] Even in this case however, she can only demand the agreed amount payable to her in either of these two instances and that is only during the marriage or her waiting period. Contrarily, demanding half of his assets is an injustice on her part for taking that which does not rightfully belong to her after they marriage has ended. Moreover, a non-Muslim judge’s decree in marital issues is not valid when it conflicts with the fundamentals of Islām which is the case here.  In short, it would not be valid Islamically to reclaim half of his assets and in doing so, she becomes sinful.

Your final question is whether she can use some of the child’s expenses after divorce then as alluded earlier, the wife is Islamically entitled to expenses during her grace period. After it expires, he has no obligation towards her because they are no longer married. His financial obligation remains towards his biological child only. So, taking a share of the child’s expenses for herself will not be permissible without his consent. In the case she does, she incurs a debt on herself.



[Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] Quran [Surah Baqarah 2:228]

وَالْمُطَلَّقَاتُ يَتَرَبَّصْنَ بِأَنْفُسِهِنَّ ثَلَاثَةَ قُرُوءٍ

“And divorced women will wait for themselves (a grace period of) three menses.”


[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābus Salāh vol 3 p. 504-5 – shamila

وَأَنْوَاعُهَا حَيْضٌ، وَأَشْهُرٌ، وَوَضْعُ حَمْلٍ كَمَا أَفَادَهُ بِقَوْلِهِ (وَهِيَ فِي) حَقِّ (حُرَّةٍ) وَلَوْ كِتَابِيَّةً تَحْتَ مُسْلِمٍ (تَحِيضُ لِطَلَاقٍ) وَلَوْ رَجْعِيًّا (أَوْ فَسْخٍ بِجَمِيعِ أَسْبَابِهِ).

(قَوْلُهُ: لِطَلَاقٍ، أَوْ فَسْخٍ) تَقَدَّمَ فِي بَابِ الْوَلِيِّ نَظْمًا فِرَقُ النِّكَاحِ الَّتِي تَكُونُ فَسْخًا وَاَلَّتِي تَكُونُ طَلَاقًا (قَوْلُهُ: بِجَمِيعِ أَسْبَابِهِ) مِثْلُ الِانْفِسَاخِ بِخِيَارِ الْبُلُوغِ، وَالْعِتْقِ، وَعَدَمِ الْكَفَاءَةِ، وَمِلْكِ أَحَدِ الزَّوْجَيْنِ الْآخَرَ، وَالرِّدَّةِ فِي بَعْضِ الصُّوَرِ، وَالِافْتِرَاقِ عَنْ النِّكَاحِ الْفَاسِدِ، وَالْوَطْءِ بِشُبْهَةٍ فَتْحٌ؛ لَكِنَّ الْأَخِيرَ لَيْسَ فَسْخًا.


[3] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al–Talāq, vol 3 p. 190

وَعَلَى هَذَا يُبْنَى وَقْتُ وُجُوبِ الْعِدَّةِ أَنَّهَا تَجِبُ مِنْ وَقْتِ وُجُودِ سَبَبِ الْوُجُوبِ مِنْ الطَّلَاقِ، وَالْوَفَاةِ، وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ حَتَّى لَوْ بَلَغَ الْمَرْأَةَ طَلَاقُ زَوْجِهَا أَوْ مَوْتُهُ فَعَلَيْهَا الْعِدَّةُ مِنْ يَوْمِ طَلَّقَ أَوْ مَاتَ عِنْدَ عَامَّةِ الْعُلَمَاءِ،

[4] Quran [Surah Talaq 65:4]


وَاللَّائِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِنْ نِسَائِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللَّائِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ

“And those women amongst you who have despaired from menstruation if you doubt then they waiting period is three months, and those that do not menstruate.”

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābus Salāh vol 3 p. 507

(قَوْلُهُ: وَالْعِدَّةُ فِي حَقِّ مَنْ لَمْ تَحِضْ) شُرُوعٌ فِي النَّوْعِ الثَّانِي مِنْ أَنْوَاعِ الْعِدَّةِ وَهُوَ الْعِدَّةُ بِالْأَشْهُرِ وَهُوَ مَعْطُوفٌ عَلَى قَوْلِهِ وَهِيَ فِي حَقِّ حُرَّةٍ تَحِيضُ (قَوْلُهُ: حُرَّةً أَمْ أُمَّ وَلَدٍ) أَيْ لَا فَرْقَ بَيْنَهُمَا فِيمَا سَيَأْتِي مِنْ أَنَّ عِدَّةَ كُلٍّ مِنْهُمَا ثَلَاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ


Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al–Talāq, vol 3 p. 192

وَأَمَّا عِدَّةُ الْأَشْهُرِ فَنَوْعَانِ: نَوْعٌ يَجِبُ بَدَلًا عَنْ الْحَيْضِ، وَنَوْعٌ يَجِبُ أَصْلًا بِنَفْسِهِ أَمَّا الَّذِي يَجِبُ بَدَلًا عَنْ الْحَيْضِ فَهُوَ عِدَّةُ الصَّغِيرَةِ وَالْآيِسَةِ وَالْمَرْأَةِ الَّتِي لَمْ تَحِضْ رَأْسًا فِي الطَّلَاقِ، وَسَبَبُ وُجُوبِهَا هُوَ الطَّلَاقُ، وَهُوَ سَبَبُ وُجُوبِ عِدَّةِ الْأَقْرَاءِ، وَأَنَّهَا تَجِبُ قَضَاءً لِحَقِّ النِّكَاحِ الَّذِي اُسْتُوْفِيَ فِيهِ الْمَقْصُودُ، وَشَرْطُ وُجُوبِهَا شَيْئَانِ: أَحَدُهُمَا – أَحَدُ الْأَشْيَاءِ الثَّلَاثَةِ: الصِّغَرُ أَوْ الْكِبَرُ، أَوْ فَقْدُ الْحَيْضِ أَصْلًا مَعَ عَدَمِ الصِّغَرِ، وَالْكِبَرِ، وَالْأَصْلُ فِيهِ قَوْله تَعَالَى {وَاللائِي يَئِسْنَ مِنَ الْمَحِيضِ مِنْ نِسَائِكُمْ إِنِ ارْتَبْتُمْ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلاثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ وَاللائِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ} [الطلاق: 4]


[5] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 1, p. 558

[الْفَصْلُ الثَّالِثُ فِي نَفَقَةِ الْمُعْتَدَّةِ]

وَإِنْ حَاضَتْ فِي الْأَشْهُرِ الثَّلَاثَةِ وَاسْتَقْبَلَتْ عِدَّتَهَا بِالْحَيْضِ فَلَهَا النَّفَقَةُ، وَكَذَلِكَ لَوْ كَانَتْ صَغِيرَةً يُجَامَعُ مِثْلُهَا فَطَلَّقَهَا بَعْدَ مَا دَخَلَ بِهَا أَنْفَقَ عَلَيْهَا ثَلَاثَةَ أَشْهُرٍ، فَإِنْ حَاضَتْ فِيهَا وَاسْتَقْبَلَتْ عِدَّةَ الْأَقْرَاءِ أَنْفَقَ عَلَيْهَا حَتَّى تَنْقَضِيَ عِدَّتُهَا كَذَا فِي الْبَدَائِعِ.


Muheetul Burhani, Kitāb al-Talāq vol 3, p. 553

الفصل الثاني في نفقة المطلقات

اجتمع على المطلقة طلاقاً رجعياً تستحق النفقة والسكنى ما دامت العدة قائمة سواء كانت حاملاً أو حائلاً، وهذا لأن بعد الطلاق الرجعي النكاح قائم وإنما أشرف على الزوال عند انقضاء العدة وذلك غير مسقط للنفقة، كما إذا أو علق طلاقها بمضي شهر، وأما المبتوتة فلها النفقة والسكنى أيضاً ما دامت في العدة حائلاً كانت أو حاملاً، وهذا مذهبنا.


[6] Mufti Ismail Kacholvi, Fatawa Deeniyyah, Ch. Divorce, vol 3, pp. 577-579


[7] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābus Salāh vol 3 p. 594

(وَالنَّفَقَةُ لَا تَصِيرُ دَيْنًا إلَّا بِالْقَضَاءِ أَوْ الرِّضَا) أَيْ اصْطِلَاحِهِمَا عَلَى قَدْرٍ مُعَيَّنٍ أَصْنَافًا أَوْ دَرَاهِمَ، فَقَبْلَ ذَلِكَ لَا يَلْزَمُ شَيْءٌ، وَبَعْدَهُ تَرْجِعُ بِمَا أَنْفَقَتْ وَلَوْ مِنْ مَالِ نَفْسِهَا بِلَا أَمْرِ قَاضٍ.

[مَطْلَبٌ لَا تَصِيرُ النَّفَقَةُ دَيْنًا إلَّا بِالْقَضَاءِ أَوْ الرِّضَا]

(قَوْلُهُ وَالنَّفَقَةُ لَا تَصِيرُ دَيْنًا إلَخْ) أَيْ إذَا لَمْ يُنْفِقْ عَلَيْهَا بِأَنْ غَابَ عَنْهَا أَوْ كَانَ حَاضِرًا فَامْتَنَعَ فَلَا يُطَالَبُ بِهَا بَلْ تَسْقُطُ بِمُضِيِّ الْمُدَّةِ. قَالَ فِي الْفَتْحِ: وَذُكِرَ فِي الْغَايَةِ مَعْزُوًّا إلَى الذَّخِيرَةِ أَنَّ نَفَقَةَ مَا دُونَ الشَّهْرِ لَا تَسْقُطُ فَكَأَنَّهُ جَعَلَ الْقَلِيلَ مِمَّا لَا يُمْكِنُ الِاحْتِرَازُ عَنْهُ، إذْ لَوْ سَقَطَتْ بِمُضِيِّ يَسِيرٍ مِنْ الزَّمَانِ لَمَا تَمَكَّنَتْ مِنْ الْأَخْذِ أَصْلًا. اهـ وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ، وَكَذَا فِي الشُّرُنْبُلَالِيَّةِ عَنْ الْبُرْهَانِ وَوَجْهُهُ فِي غَايَةِ الظُّهُورِ لِمَنْ تَدَبَّرْ فَافْهَمْ.

ثُمَّ اعْلَمْ أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِالنَّفَقَةِ نَفَقَةُ الزَّوْجَةِ، بِخِلَافِ نَفَقَةِ الْقَرِيبِ فَإِنَّهَا لَا تَصِيرُ دَيْنًا وَلَوْ بَعْدَ الْقَضَاءِ وَالرِّضَا، حَتَّى لَوْ مَضَتْ مُدَّةٌ بَعْدَهُمَا تَسْقُطُ كَمَا يَأْتِي وَسَيَأْتِي أَنَّ الزَّيْلَعِيَّ اسْتَثْنَى نَفَقَةَ الصَّغِيرِ وَيَأْتِي تَمَامُ الْكَلَامِ عَلَيْهِ عِنْدَ قَوْلِ الْمُصَنِّفِ قَضَى بِنَفَقَةِ غَيْرِ الزَّوْجَةِ إلَخْ (قَوْلُهُ إلَّا بِالْقَضَاءِ) بِأَنْ يَفْرِضَهَا الْقَاضِي عَلَيْهِ أَصْنَافًا أَوْ دَرَاهِمَ أَوْ دَنَانِيرَ نَهْرٌ (قَوْلُهُ فَقَبْلَ ذَلِكَ لَا يَلْزَمُهُ شَيْءٌ) أَيْ لَا يَلْزَمُهُ عَمَّا مَضَى قَبْلَ الْقَرْضِ بِالْقَضَاءِ أَوْ الرِّضَا وَلَا عَمَّا يَسْتَقْبِلُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَجِبْ بَعْدُ،

أَطْلَقَ النَّفَقَةَ فَشَمِلَ نَفَقَةَ الْعِدَّةِ إذَا لَمْ تَقْبِضْهَا حَتَّى انْقَضَتْ الْعِدَّةُ: فَفِي الْفَتْحِ أَنَّ الْمُخْتَارَ عِنْدَ الْحَلْوَانِيِّ أَنَّهَا لَا تَسْقُطُ، وَسَنَذْكُرُ عَنْ الْبَحْرِ أَنَّ الصَّحِيحَ  السُّقُوطُ وَأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ إصْلَاحِ الْمُتُونِ هُنَا لِإِطْلَاقِهَا عَدَمَ السُّقُوطِ، وَأَنَّ هَذَا كُلَّهُ فِي غَيْرِ الْمُسْتَدَانَةِ وَسَيَأْتِي تَمَامُ الْكَلَامِ فِيهِ


Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 1, p. 551

[الْفَصْلُ الْأَوَّلُ فِي نَفَقَةِ الزَّوْجَةِ]

إذَا خَاصَمَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ زَوْجَهَا فِي نَفَقَةِ مَا مَضَى مِنْ الزَّمَانِ قَبْلَ أَنْ يَفْرِضَ الْقَاضِي لَهَا النَّفَقَةَ وَقَبْلَ أَنْ يَتَرَاضَيَا عَنْ شَيْءٍ فَإِنَّ الْقَاضِيَ لَا يَقْضِي لَهَا نَفَقَةَ مَا مَضَى عِنْدَنَا كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ


Husband Issues Three Divorces and Becomes an Apostate

Husband Issues Three Divorces and Becomes an Apostate

13th September 2021


Question: If a man divorces his wife thrice and then commits kufr. Then he repents and becomes Muslim again. Can he marry the woman after her Iddah period without the woman getting married again?



الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your query, despite him committing kufr after three divorces and then repenting, she still does not become Halāl for him until she marries someone else, consummates the marriage and then he divorces her. The reason as the renowned Hanafi jurist Allamah Kasani rahimahullah explains is that the statement of Almighty Allāh, “She is not halal for him until she marries a man other than him” [2:230] negates any form of permissibility of marriage to her former husband prior to marrying another man.  Three divorces are the maximum limit a husband can issue which can only be renewed after her second marriage. Furthermore, the verse suggest that a ruling is attached to its extreme point, in this case until she marries another man, which indicates that before this, her former husband is still not Halāl.[1] Apostasy therefore does not invalidate divorce rulings.[2] From this, the jurists explain that even if the wife (God forbid) becomes an apostate after receiving three divorces and later on she returns to him (after renewing her faith) without marrying someone else, she still does not become Halāl for him.[3]


In light of the above, despite the husband apostatising after pronouncing three divorces and then renewing his faith thereafter, she still doesn’t become Halāl for him until she marries another man, consummates the second marriage and then he divorces her.



 [Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al-Hajj, vol 3 p. 187

وَإِنَّمَا تَنْتَهِي الْحُرْمَةُ وَتَحِلُّ لِلزَّوْجِ الْأَوَّلِ بِشَرَائِطَ مِنْهَا النِّكَاحُ، وَهُوَ أَنْ تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى {حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ} [البقرة: 230] نَفَى الْحِلَّ، وَحَدَّ النَّفْيَ إلَى غَايَةِ التَّزَوُّجِ بِزَوْجٍ آخَرَ، وَالْحُكْمُ الْمَمْدُودُ إلَى غَايَةٍ لَا يَنْتَهِي قَبْلَ وُجُودِ الْغَايَةِ، فَلَا تَنْتَهِي الْحُرْمَةُ قَبْلَ التَّزَوُّجِ، فَلَا يَحِلُّ لِلزَّوْجِ الْأَوَّلِ قَبْلَهُ ضَرُورَةً،


Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Manāsik, Bāb al-Jinayat, vol 1, p. 473

وَإِنْ كَانَ الطَّلَاقُ ثَلَاثًا فِي الْحُرَّةِ وَثِنْتَيْنِ فِي الْأَمَةِ لَمْ تَحِلَّ لَهُ حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ نِكَاحًا صَحِيحًا وَيَدْخُلَ بِهَا ثُمَّ يُطَلِّقَهَا أَوْ يَمُوتَ عَنْهَا كَذَا فِي الْهِدَايَةِ وَلَا فَرْقَ فِي ذَلِكَ بَيْنَ كَوْنِ الْمُطَلَّقَةِ مَدْخُولًا بِهَا أَوْ غَيْرَ مَدْخُولٍ بِهَا كَذَا فِي فَتْحِ الْقَدِيرِ وَيُشْتَرَطُ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْإِيلَاجُ مُوجِبًا لِلْغُسْلِ وَهُوَ الْتِقَاءُ الْخِتَانَيْنِ هَكَذَا فِي الْعَيْنِيِّ شَرْحِ الْكَنْزِ.


[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābus Salāh, Bāb Shurootus Salāh, vol 2 p. 73

بَابُ الرَّجْعَةِ

[مَطْلَبٌ فِي حِيلَةُ إسْقَاطِ عِدَّةِ الْمُحَلِّلِ]

فَلَا يُحِلُّهَا وَطْءُ الْمَوْلَى وَلَا مِلْكُ أَمَةٍ بَعْدَ طَلْقَتَيْنِ، أَوْ حُرَّةٍ بَعْدَ ثَلَاثٍ وَرِدَّةٌ وَسَبْيٌ وَنَظِيرُهُ مَنْ فُرِّقَ بَيْنَهُمَا بِظِهَارٍ، أَوْ لِعَانٍ ثُمَّ ارْتَدَّتْ وَسُبِيَتْ ثُمَّ مَلَكَهَا لَمْ تَحِلَّ لَهُ أَبَدًا

أَنَّ الرِّدَّةَ وَاللَّحَاقَ وَالسَّبْيَ لَمْ تُبْطِلْ حُكْمَ الظِّهَارِ وَاللِّعَانِ كَمَا لَمْ تُبْطِلْ حُكْمَ الطَّلَاقِ


[3] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Manāsik, Bāb al-Jinayat, vol 1, p. 473

وَلَوْ ارْتَدَّتْ الْمُطَلَّقَةُ ثَلَاثًا وَلَحِقَتْ بِدَارِ الْحَرْبِ ثُمَّ اسْتَرَقَّهَا أَوْ طَلَّقَ زَوْجَتَهُ الْأَمَةَ ثِنْتَيْنِ ثُمَّ مَلَكَهَا فَفِي هَاتَيْنِ لَا يَحِلُّ لَهُ الْوَطْءُ إلَّا بَعْدَ زَوْجٍ آخَرَ كَذَا فِي النَّهْرِ الْفَائِقِ.


Divorce During Pregnancy

Divorce During Pregnancy

22nd February 2021


Question: My husband and I have been married since 2015 and have faced many problems between us which led to me leaving him when I was pregnant with my 2nd child with him in 2017 and have just lived separately since. He has uttered talaq once when I was pregnant in 2017. Once a while ago when I was on my menses and he used the word talaq 4 times just a week ago now. He says he has said it in anger and he regrets it.  Are the divorces valid?


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your case, if what you have said is true to its very nature then all divorces have taken into effect even if he issued them in anger. Regardless if he divorced you during pregnancy or menstruation, the divorce is valid though sinful.  You mentioned that he issued a divorce whilst you were pregnant and during your menses. If he issued a single divorce on each of these two occasions then the husband usually has the right to withdraw from them until it reaches to a third divorce. The effectiveness of the divorces following a single divorce depends on whether he took them back or not. So, if he divorced you once during pregnancy and then took it back then the other divorces, he gave you during your menses and after that take into effect. If, however he didn’t withdraw from his divorce until you gave birth then the marriage officially dissolves and the divorces issued thereafter are not counted because by then, you both were no longer considered his wife. But assuming that he did withdraw from the first divorce (during pregnancy) before child birth then this means only two divorces remain and the divorce he issued during your menses was now your second divorce. Again, assuming that he took you back thereafter within three menses, then from the four divorces he issued only one of them constitutes to the third and the remaining three are invalid because now you have received the maximum three including the previous two divorces. According to the Islamic principles, a non-pregnant woman must observe a waiting period of three menses at her husband’s accommodation during which she is still entitle to basic financial maintenance. After completing her waiting period, the marriage officially dissolves and is free to marry elsewhere.



[Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

Divorce in the State of Anger

Divorce in the State of Anger

17th February 2021


Question: What is the ruling on a man divorcing his wife in the state of anger. Does it occur or not?


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful


It is seldom the case for a man to divorce his wife without anger as normally, a divorce is pronounced during an intense altercation between a couple due to an underlying existing problem. Any couple experiencing marital problems must initially seek reconciliation through a third-party intervention; be it a family member, professional Muslim marriage counsellor or a local experienced scholar. Divorce should be left as a last resort after exhausting all avenues of reconciliation and should divorce be the final solution, then to pronounce it just once to end the marriage.[1] Divorce is very delicate and should never be trivialized as it can take place without even intending to do so. In other words, if a husband utters the word ‘talaq’ or ‘divorce’ addressing his wife, it instantly takes into effect regardless if he was serious about it or not.[2]  The Messenger of Allāh said, “Three matters whose seriousness are taken seriously and their joke are (also taken) seriously; nikah, talaq and ruju’.[3]  Many quote the below Hadīth wrongfully assuming that divorce in the state of anger does not take into effect. Sayyidah Aisha radhiyallahu anha reports that the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “There is no divorce and no emancipation during ghilaq.” Imām Abu Dāwood rahimahullah states that I assume ghilaq to mean anger.[4] According to Imām Abu Dāwood rahimahullah, the Hadīth negates the occurrence of divorce in the state of anger. Many scholars however have rejected this position arguing that ghilaq in this context instead refers to compulsion and force otherwise, no divorce will ever take place because divorce only happens during anger.[5]

It is not uncommon that the husband who is triggered into an angry mode during an argument and ends up swearing or even in some instances becomes physically violent against his wife to thereafter regret over his actions and impulsive behavior. He still remains responsible for his own actions and unless his mental faculty is affected to the degree that his actions have been corrupted and completely lost his senses of right from wrong, the ruling of takleef (legal responsibility) is not uplifted from him. But reaching to such state of insanity during anger is extremely rare. It is agreed upon that if an angry person renounces his religion by uttering clear kufr statements, kills someone or steals someone else’s property, then he is still legally liable for his own actions and not pardoned. Similarly, an angry husband pronouncing divorce to his wife makes him responsible for his actions because unlike an insane person, he maintains some form of control over himself.[6]

Not surprisingly though, many commonly assert that he had mental issues at the time and so didn’t mean to divorce her in anger and nor could he remember what he said.  Again, this is seldom the true nature of the reality but supposedly if this was the case then this requires further exploration.  It is important to note that due to the delicacy of the matter, each case must be treated independently by its own merit. It is therefore strongly recommended to consult an experienced qualified Mufti on such matters.

Anger could be of one of three possible stages. Ibn Abideen Shami rahimahullah citing Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzi’s rahimahullah lists them as follows;[7]

  1. The first stage is the ordinary state of anger whereby the husband’s mental states is still intact, knows what he is saying and intended the divorce.
  2. Or his mental state was such that he could not genuinely recall nor comprehend his previous words or actions nor intended to divorce due to insanity.
  3. Or was in an intermediary state between these two whereby he is not mentally stable in one sense but retains some level of sanity.

In the first state all of the scholars agree to the effectiveness of the divorce. In the second state, all of the scholars agree that divorce does not take place. This stage is the junun state – insanity – which the jurists such as Ibn Abideen Shami rahimahullah and others describe it to be the impairment of the mental state whereby the faculty of being able to distinguish between right from wrong is inhibited and no control of actions. This can happen either due to a particular accident affecting the brain or the over powering of a Jinn that takes them out of their state of moderation.[8] During this stage, the victim due to his mental impairment loses comprehension over his past actions and statements because of their abnormal behavior. It is this state where the ruling of takleef is uplifted and hence, no divorce takes into effect. This is based on a prophet narration wherein the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “The pen has been uplifted from three people; a sleeping person until he wakes up, a child until he reaches puberty and an insane person until he recovers.”[9]

Another term used in conjunction with junun is the state of madhosh in which the sanity of fear and shame is depreciated significantly that a person loses complete consciousness of what they are doing. It can also include that individual with overwhelming anxiety who genuinely struggles with self-control over their actions and statements.[10] Even in this state, divorce is not effective.

The third category above is however vague leading to scholars differing whether divorce takes into effect or not in this instance. For divorce to be effective or not at this stage would depend on the individual’s mental state at the time.  One state that jurists do discuss that is arguably intermediate between junun and a non-junun person is a ma’tooh – a person with a disrupted mind who understands very little and muddles his speech and at times raves without realizing what he is saying. He is not completely like a majnun who can spin out of control by inflicting harm upon himself (or completely forgets his actions) but at the same time he is not considered normal either amongst people. He has been equated to a minor child in ruling as this is a (minor) form of insanity that legally absolves him from all responsibilities which means that his divorce is not effective.[11] This is evident from a prophetic narration reported from Sayyidunā Abu Hurairah radhiyallahu anhu that the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “All types of divorces are valid (effective) except for a ma’tooh and whose sanity has been clouded.”[12]

A ma’tooh person albeit is not fully insane behaves immaturely who not necessarily forgets what he says but lacks comprehension over his actions. Like with a junun and madhosh, he is abnormal except to a lesser degree. Such a state must be established through strong evidence either through medical experts or genuine testimony of people around him. It is necessary to point out that not remembering anything is not a binding condition for divorce not to be effective. Ibn Abideen Shami rahimahullah comments that customarily, a mentally unstable person whether madhosh or otherwise who raves and muddles his words with both seriousness and jokes can at times recall past actions but not know why they are doing it. It is the disruption of their mental state that is mainly taken into account. He states’

“It is therefore necessary to underscore the ruling of a madhosh or otherwise with the overpowering of impairment (mentally) affecting their statements and action that takes them out of normality in their conduct and likewise anyone whose sanity is impaired due to old age, illness or a calamity that has struct him. Therefore, so long as during the overwhelming impairment (of their mental state affecting their) actions and statements, their statements are not considered even though they know what they are saying and intend it because their recognition of anything is not counted due to them not having the ability to grasp (what they are saying).”[13]

It is clear that not being able to recollect the past is not essential for divorce not to occur when their sanity has been corrupted.[14] This is not the same as forgetfulness as forgetting is a human trait. The difference between the two is that an insane person lacks mental capacity to think and comprehend due to a mental illness that has struck him whereas an angry person during the heated moment may forget, such as by overthinking.[15]


To summarize and conclude the above, an angry person divorcing his wife claiming to be mentally unstable at the time must be diagnosed with one of the following conditions for divorce not to take into effect;

  1. Either he was in a majnun state whereby the faculty of differentiating between right from wrong is inhibited and cannot recollect his previous actions. This maybe due to a calamity that has afflicted him affecting his state either permanently or during that specific moment.
  2. Or he was in the state of madhosh which is a type of junun except that the faculty of recognizing fear and shame is depreciated and not able to fully comprehend what they are saying or doing.
  3. Or in a ma’tooh state who raves by muddling words without the ability to comprehend in what he is saying. In both the second and third category, they may at times recall their previous actions or words but lack the capacity of self-control and clear sense of meaning in what they do.

The common underpinning principle is that their mental state has significantly deteriorated to the degree that it negatively impacts their actions and statements. A common sign is their abnormal behaviour towards others and raving by saying unusual things that a normal person would not generally say. This must be established with evidence either by an expert such as a medical psychiatric report or by the testimony of his associates who can genuinely testify to his abnormal condition.  So, any man who divorces his wife in the state of anger takes into immediate effect under normal circumstances regardless if he forgets or not. If he has been diagnosed with some of the above-mentioned symptoms of mental instability then divorce does not take into effect.



 [Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] It must be noted that three divorces are not necessary for the marriage to end. It is strongly discouraged to give three simultaneously otherwise reconciliation thereafter is not possible.


[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 241 – shamila

(أَوْ مُخْطِئًا) بِأَنْ أَرَادَ التَّكَلُّمَ بِغَيْرِ الطَّلَاقِ فَجَرَى عَلَى لِسَانِهِ الطَّلَاقُ أَوْ تَلَفَّظَ بِهِ غَيْرَ عَالِمٍ بِمَعْنَاهُ

(قَوْلُهُ بِأَنْ أَرَادَ التَّكَلُّمَ بِغَيْرِ الطَّلَاقِ) بِأَنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يَقُولَ: سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ فَجَرَى عَلَى لِسَانِهِ أَنْتِ طَالِقٌ تَطْلُقُ لِأَنَّهُ صَرِيحٌ لَا يَحْتَاجُ إلَى النِّيَّةِ، لَكِنْ فِي الْقَضَاءِ كَطَلَاقِ الْهَازِلِ وَاللَّاعِبِ ط عَنْ الْمِنَحِ، وَقَوْلُهُ كَطَلَاقِ الْهَازِلِ وَاللَّاعِبِ مُخَالِفٌ لِمَا قَدَّمْنَاهُ وَلِمَا يَأْتِي قَرِيبًا.

وَفِي الْفَتْحِ الْقَدِيرِ عَنْ الْحَاوِي مَعْزِيًّا إلَى الْجَامِعِ الْأَصْغَرِ أَنَّ أَسَدًا سَأَلَ عَمَّنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يَقُولَ زَيْنَبُ طَالِقٌ فَجَرَى عَلَى لِسَانِهِ عَمْرَةُ عَلَى أَيِّهِمَا يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ؟ فَقَالَ: فِي الْقَضَاءِ تَطْلُقُ الَّتِي سَمَّى وَفِيمَا بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى لَا تَطْلُقُ وَاحِدَةٌ مِنْهُمَا، أَمَّا الَّتِي سَمَّى فَلِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يُرِدْهَا، وَأَمَّا غَيْرُهَا فَلِأَنَّهَا لَوْ طَلُقَتْ طَلُقَتْ بِمُجَرَّدِ النِّيَّةِ (قَوْلُهُ غَيْرَ عَالِمٍ بِمَعْنَاهُ) كَمَا لَوْ قَالَتْ لِزَوْجِهَا: اقْرَأْ عَلَيَّ اعْتَدِّي أَنْتِ طَالِقٌ ثَلَاثًا فَفَعَلَ طَلُقَتْ ثَلَاثًا فِي الْقَضَاءِ لَا فِيمَا بَيْنَهُ وَبَيْنَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى إذَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ الزَّوْجُ وَلَمْ يَنْوِ بَحْرٌ عَنْ الْخُلَاصَة


[3] Sunnan Abu Dawood No: 2194

باب في الطلاق على الهزل

عن أبي هريرة أن رسولَ اللهِ – صلَّى الله عليه وسلم – قال: ” ثلاث جدُّهنَّ جَدٌّ وهَزْلُهُنَّ جدٌّ: النكَاحُ، والطَلاقُ، والرَّجْعَة”


[4] Sunnan Abu Dawood No: 2193

بَابٌ فِي الطَّلَاقِ عَلَى غَلَطٍ

عَائِشَةَ، قَالَتْ: سَمِعْتُ عَائِشَةَ تَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: «لَا طَلَاقَ، وَلَا عَتَاقَ فِي غِلَاقٍ»، قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ: ” الْغِلَاقُ: أَظُنُّهُ فِي الْغَضَبِ


[5] Awnul-Ma’bood vol 6, p. 187

ثُمَّ الطَّلَاقُ فِي غَيْظٍ وَاقِعٌ عِنْدَ الْجُمْهُورِ وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ عَنِ الْحَنَابِلَةِ أَنَّهُ لَا يَقَعُ وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّهُ مُخْتَارُ الْمُصَنِّفِ رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى انْتَهَى قُلْتُ وَفِي بَعْضِ النُّسَخِ الْمَوْجُودَةِ عِنْدِي عَلَى غَضَبٍ بَدَلُ قَوْلِهِ عَلَى غَلَطٍ وَفِي نُسْخَةِ الْخَطَّابِيِّ عَلَى إِغْلَاقٍ (كَانَ يَسْكُنُ إِيلِيَّا) قَالَ فِي الْمَجْمَعِ هُوَ بَالْمَدِّ وَالْقَصْرِ مَدِينَةُ بَيْتِ الْمَقْدِسِ (لَا طَلَاقَ وَلَا عِتَاقَ فِي إِغْلَاقٍ) وَفِي بَعْضِ النُّسَخِ فِي غِلَاقٍ

(قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ الْغِلَاقُ أَظُنُّهُ فِي الْغَضَبِ) فَعِنْدَ الْمُصَنِّفِ رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ مَعْنَى الْإِغْلَاقِ الْغَضَبُ وَفَسَّرَهُ عُلَمَاءُ الغريب بالإكراه وهو قول بن قتيبة والخطابي وبن السَّيِّدِ وَغَيْرِهِمْ وَقِيلَ الْجُنُونُ وَاسْتَبْعَدَهُ الْمُطَرِّزِيُّ وَقِيلَ الغضب وكذا فسره أحمد ورده بن السَّيِّدِ فَقَالَ لَوْ كَانَ كَذَلِكَ لَمْ يَقَعْ عَلَى أَحَدٍ طَلَاقٌ لِأَنَّ أَحَدًا لَا يُطَلِّقُ حَتَّى يَغْضَبَ


[6] Zuhayli, Fiqhul Islami wa adillatihu, inhilal al-zawaj wa atharihi, vol 7 p. 352

طلاق الغضبان: يفهم مما ذكر أن طلاق الغضبان لا يقع إذا اشتد الغضب، بأن وصل إلى درجة لا يدري فيها ما يقول ويفعل ولا يقصده. أو وصل به الغضب إلى درجة يغلب عليه فيها الخلل والاضطراب في أقواله وأفعاله، وهذه حالة نادرة. فإن ظل الشخص في حالة وعي وإدراك لما يقول فيقع طلاقه، وهذا هو الغالب في كل طلاق يصدر عن الرجل؛ لأن الغضبان مكلف في حال غضبه بما يصدر منه من كفر وقتل نفس وأخذ مال بغير حق وطلاق وغيرها


Ibn Humām, Fathul Qadeer, Kitāb al-talaq vol 3, p. 487

لَكِنْ مَعْلُومٌ مِنْ كُلِّيَّاتِ الشَّرِيعَةِ أَنَّ التَّصَرُّفَاتِ لَا تَنْفُذُ إلَّا مِمَّنْ لَهُ أَهْلِيَّةُ التَّصَرُّفِ وَأَدَرْنَاهَا بِالْعَقْلِ وَالْبُلُوغِ خُصُوصًا مَا هُوَ دَائِرٌ بَيْنَ الضَّرَرِ وَالنَّفْعِ خُصُوصًا مَا لَا يَحِلُّ إلَّا لِانْتِفَاءِ مَصْلَحَةِ ضِدِّهِ الْقَائِمِ كَالطَّلَاقِ فَإِنَّهُ يَسْتَدْعِي تَمَامَ الْعَقْلِ لِيُحْكِمَ بِهِ التَّمْيِيزَ فِي ذَلِكَ الْأَمْرِ


[7] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 243

قُلْت: وَلِلْحَافِظِ ابْنِ الْقَيِّمِ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ رِسَالَةٌ فِي طَلَاقِ الْغَضْبَانِ قَالَ فِيهَا: إنَّهُ عَلَى ثَلَاثَةِ أَقْسَامٍ:

أَحَدُهَا أَنْ يَحْصُلَ لَهُ مَبَادِئُ الْغَضَبِ بِحَيْثُ لَا يَتَغَيَّرُ عَقْلُهُ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا يَقُولُ وَيَقْصِدُهُ، وَهَذَا لَا إشْكَالَ فِيهِ.

وَالثَّانِي أَنْ يَبْلُغَ النِّهَايَةَ فَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَا يَقُولُ وَلَا يُرِيدُهُ، فَهَذَا لَا رَيْبَ أَنَّهُ لَا يَنْفُذُ شَيْءٌ مِنْ أَقْوَالِهِ.

الثَّالِثُ مَنْ تَوَسَّطَ بَيْنَ الْمَرْتَبَتَيْنِ بِحَيْثُ لَمْ يَصِرْ كَالْمَجْنُونِ فَهَذَا مَحَلُّ النَّظَرِ، وَالْأَدِلَّةُ عَلَى عَدَمِ نُفُوذِ أَقْوَالِهِ. اهـ. مُلَخَّصًا مِنْ شَرْحِ الْغَايَةِ الْحَنْبَلِيَّةِ، لَكِنْ أَشَارَ فِي الْغَايَةِ إلَى مُخَالَفَتِهِ فِي الثَّالِثِ حَيْثُ قَالَ: وَيَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ مِنْ غَضَبٍ خِلَافًا لِابْنِ الْقَيِّمِ اهـ


[8] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 241

(لَا يَقَعُ طَلَاقُ الْمَوْلَى عَلَى امْرَأَةِ عَبْدِهِ)۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ (وَالْمَجْنُونُ) إلَّا إذَا عَلَّقَ عَاقِلًا ثُمَّ جُنَّ فَوُجِدَ الشَّرْطُ

(قَوْلُهُ وَالْمَجْنُونُ) قَالَ فِي التَّلْوِيحِ: الْجُنُونُ اخْتِلَالُ الْقُوَّةِ الْمُمَيِّزَةِ بَيْنَ الْأُمُورِ الْحَسَنَةِ وَالْقَبِيحَةِ الْمُدْرِكَةِ لِلْعَوَاقِبِ، بِأَنْ لَا تَظْهَرَ آثَارُهُ وَتَتَعَطَّلُ أَفْعَالُهَا، إمَّا لِنُقْصَانِ جَبَلٍ عَلَيْهِ دِمَاغُهُ فِي أَصْلِ الْخِلْقَةِ، وَإِمَّا لِخُرُوجِ مِزَاجِ الدِّمَاغِ عَنْ الِاعْتِدَالِ بِسَبَبِ خَلْطٍ أَوْ آفَةٍ، وَإِمَّا لِاسْتِيلَاءِ الشَّيْطَانِ عَلَيْهِ وَإِلْقَاءِ الْخَيَالَاتِ الْفَاسِدَةِ إلَيْهِ بِحَيْثُ يَفْرَحُ وَيَفْزَعُ مِنْ غَيْرِ مَا يَصْلُحُ سَبَبًا. اهـ. وَفِي الْبَحْرِ عَنْ الْخَانِيَّةِ: رَجُلٌ عَرَفَ أَنَّهُ كَانَ مَجْنُونًا فَقَالَتْ لَهُ امْرَأَتُهُ: طَلَّقْتَنِي الْبَارِحَةَ فَقَالَ: أَصَابَنِي الْجُنُونُ وَلَا يَعْرِفُ ذَلِكَ إلَّا بِقَوْلِهِ كَانَ الْقَوْلُ قَوْلَهُ. اهـ.


[9] Ma’rifatus Sunnan, No: 8881

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «رُفَعَ الْقَلَمُ، عَنْ ثَلَاثَةٍ، النَّائِمِ حَتَّى يَسْتَيْقِظَ، وَالصَّبِيِّ حَتَّى يَبْلُغَ، وَالْمَجْنُونِ حَتَّى يُفِيقَ»،

[10] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 244

(وَالْمُدْهَشُ) فَتْحٌ. وَفِي الْقَامُوسِ: دَهَشَ الرَّجُلُ تَحَيَّرَ وَدُهِشَ بِالْبِنَاءِ لِلْمَفْعُولِ فَهُوَ مَدْهُوشٌ وَأَدْهَشَهُ اللَّهُ

(قَوْلُهُ وَفِي الْقَامُوسِ دَهِشَ) أَيْ بِالْكَسْرِ كَفَرِحَ. ثُمَّ إنَّ اقْتِصَارَهُ عَلَى ذِكْرِ التَّحَيُّرِ غَيْرُ صَحِيحٍ، فَإِنَّهُ فِي الْقَامُوسِ قَالَ بَعْدَهُ أَوْ: ذَهَبَ عَقْلُهُ حَيَاءً أَوْ خَوْفًا اهـ وَهَذَا هُوَ الْمُرَادُ هُنَا، وَلِذَا جَعَلَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ دَاخِلًا فِي الْمَجْنُونِ.

مَطْلَبٌ فِي طَلَاقِ الْمَدْهُوشِ وَقَالَ فِي الْخَيْرِيَّةِ: غَلِطَ مَنْ فَسَّرَهُ هُنَا بِالتَّحَيُّرِ، إذْ لَا يَلْزَمُ مِنْ التَّحَيُّرِ وَهُوَ التَّرَدُّدُ فِي الْأَمْرِ ذَهَابُ الْعَقْلِ. وَسُئِلَ نَظْمًا فِيمَنْ طَلَّقَ زَوْجَتَهُ ثَلَاثًا فِي مَجْلِسِ الْقَاضِي وَهُوَ مُغْتَاظٌ مَدْهُوشٌ، أَجَابَ نَظْمًا أَيْضًا بِأَنَّ الدَّهْشَ مِنْ أَقْسَامِ الْجُنُونِ فَلَا يَقَعُ، وَإِذَا كَانَ يَعْتَادُهُ بِأَنْ عُرِفَ مِنْهُ الدَّهَشُ مَرَّةً يُصَدَّقُ بِلَا بُرْهَانٍ


Zuhayli, Fiqhul Islami wa adillatihu, inhilal al-zawaj wa atharihi, vol 7 p. 352

طلاق المجنون والمدهوش: ولا يصح طلاق المجنون، ومثله المغمى عليه، والمدهوش: وهو الذي اعترته حال انفعال لا يدري فيها ما يقول أو يفعل، أو يصل به الانفعال إلى درجة يغلب معها الخلل في أقواله وأفعاله، بسبب فرط الخوف أو الحزن أو الغضب، لقوله صلّى الله عليه وسلم: «لا طلاق في إغلاق» (1) والإغلاق: كل ما يسد باب الإدراك والقصد والوعي، لجنون أو شدة غضب أو شدة حزن ونحوها.


[11] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 243

(وَالْمَعْتُوهُ) مِنْ الْعَتَهِ، وَهُوَ اخْتِلَالٌ فِي الْعَقْلِ

(قَوْلُهُ مِنْ الْعَتَهِ) بِالتَّحْرِيكِ مِنْ بَابِ تَعِبَ مِصْبَاحٌ (قَوْلُهُ وَهُوَ اخْتِلَالٌ فِي الْعَقْلِ) هَذَا ذَكَرَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ تَعْرِيفًا لِلْجُنُونِ وَقَالَ وَيَدْخُلُ فِيهِ الْمَعْتُوهُ. وَأَحْسَنُ الْأَقْوَالِ فِي الْفَرْقِ بَيْنَهُمَا أَنَّ الْمَعْتُوهَ هُوَ الْقَلِيلُ الْفَهْمِ الْمُخْتَلِطُ الْكَلَامِ الْفَاسِدِ التَّدْبِيرِ، لَكِنْ لَا يَضْرِبُ وَلَا يَشْتُمُ بِخِلَافِ الْمَجْنُونِ اهـ وَصَرَّحَ الْأُصُولِيُّونَ بِأَنَّ حُكْمَهُ كَالصَّبِيِّ إلَّا أَنَّ الدَّبُوسِيَّ قَالَ تَجِبُ عَلَيْهِ الْعِبَادَاتُ احْتِيَاطًا. وَرَدَّهُ صَدْرُ الْإِسْلَامِ بِأَنَّ الْعَتَهَ نَوْعُ جُنُونٍ فَيَمْنَعُ وُجُوبَ أَدَاءِ الْحُقُوقِ جَمِيعًا كَمَا بَسَطَهُ فِي شَرْحِ التَّحْرِيرِ


Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb al-Talaq, vol 3 p. 268

وَأَرَادَ بِالْمَجْنُونِ مَنْ فِي عَقْلِهِ اخْتِلَالٌ فَيَدْخُلُ الْمَعْتُوهُ وَأَحْسَنُ الْأَقْوَالِ فِي الْفَرْقِ بَيْنَهُمَا أَنَّ الْمَعْتُوهَ هُوَ الْقَلِيلُ الْفَهْمِ الْمُخْتَلِطُ الْكَلَامِ الْفَاسِدُ التَّدْبِيرِ لَكِنْ لَا يَضْرِبُ وَلَا يَشْتُمُ بِخِلَافِ الْمَجْنُونِ وَيَدْخُلُ الْمُبَرْسَمُ، وَالْمُغْمَى عَلَيْهِ، وَالْمَدْهُوشُ، وَفِي الصِّحَاحِ الْبَرْسَامُ دَاءٌ مَعْرُوفٌ، وَفِي بَعْضِ كُتُبِ الطِّبِّ أَنَّهُ وَرَمٌ حَارٌّ يَعْرِضُ لِلْحِجَابِ الَّذِي بَيْنَ الْكَبِدِ، وَالْمَعَاثِمِ يَتَّصِلُ بِالدِّمَاغِ وَهُوَ مُعَرَّبٌ وَبُرْسِمَ الرَّجُلُ بِالْبِنَاءِ لِلْمَفْعُولِ يُقَالُ بَرْسَامٌ وَبِلْسَامٌ وَهُوَ مُبَرْسَمٌ وَمُبَلْسَمٌ


[12] Sunnan Tirmidhi No: 1191

بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِي طَلَاقِ المَعْتُوهِ

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «كُلُّ طَلَاقٍ جَائِزٌ، إِلَّا طَلَاقَ المَعْتُوهِ المَغْلُوبِ عَلَى عَقْلِهِ»


[13] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 244 – shamila

هَذَا الْمُوَافِقُ عِنْدَنَا لِمَا مَرَّ فِي الْمَدْهُوشِ، لَكِنْ يَرِدُ عَلَيْهِ أَنَّا لَمْ نَعْتَبِرْ أَقْوَالَ الْمَعْتُوهِ مَعَ أَنَّهُ لَا يَلْزَمُ فِيهِ أَنْ يَصِلَ إلَى حَالَةٍ لَا يَعْلَمُ فِيهَا مَا يَقُولُ وَلَا يُرِيدُهُ وَقَدْ يُجَابُ بِأَنَّ الْمَعْتُوهَ لَمَّا كَانَ مُسْتَمِرًّا عَلَى حَالَةٍ وَاحِدَةٍ يُمْكِنُ ضَبْطُهَا اُعْتُبِرَتْ فِيهِ وَاكْتُفِيَ فِيهِ بِمُجَرَّدِ نَقْصِ الْعَقْلِ، بِخِلَافِ الْغَضَبِ فَإِنَّهُ عَارِضٌ فِي بَعْضِ الْأَحْوَالِ، لَكِنْ يَرِدُ عَلَيْهِ الدَّهَشُ فَإِنَّهُ كَذَلِكَ. وَاَلَّذِي يَظْهَرُ لِي أَنَّ كُلًّا مِنْ الْمَدْهُوشِ وَالْغَضْبَانِ لَا يَلْزَمُ فِيهِ أَنْ يَكُونَ بِحَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُ مَا يَقُولُ بَلْ يُكْتَفَى فِيهِ بِغَلَبَةِ الْهَذَيَانِ وَاخْتِلَاطِ الْجَدِّ بِالْهَزْلِ كَمَا هُوَ الْمُفْتَى بِهِ فِي السَّكْرَانِ عَلَى مَا مَرَّ، وَلَا يُنَافِيهِ تَعْرِيفُ الدَّهَشِ بِذَهَابِ الْعَقْلِ فَإِنَّ الْجُنُونَ فُنُونٌ، وَلِذَا فَسَّرَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ بِاخْتِلَالِ الْعَقْلِ وَأَدْخَلَ فِيهِ الْعَتَهَ وَالْبِرْسَامَ وَالْإِغْمَاءَ وَالدَّهَشَ. وَيُؤَيِّدُهُ مَا قُلْنَا قَوْلُ بَعْضِهِمْ: الْعَاقِلُ مَنْ يَسْتَقِيمُ كَلَامُهُ وَأَفْعَالُهُ إلَّا نَادِرًا، وَالْمَجْنُونُ ضِدُّهُ. وَأَيْضًا فَإِنَّ بَعْضَ الْمَجَانِينِ يَعْرِفُ مَا يَقُولُ وَيُرِيدُهُ وَيَذْكُرُ مَا يَشْهَدُ الْجَاهِلُ بِهِ بِأَنَّهُ عَاقِلٌ ثُمَّ يَظْهَرُ مِنْهُ فِي مَجْلِسِهِ مَا يُنَافِيهِ، فَإِذَا كَانَ الْمَجْنُونُ حَقِيقَةً قَدْ يَعْرِفُ مَا يَقُولُ وَيَقْصِدُهُ فَغَيْرُهُ بِالْأَوْلَى، فَاَلَّذِي يَنْبَغِي التَّعْوِيلُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الْمَدْهُوشِ وَنَحْوِهِ إنَاطَةُ الْحُكْمِ بِغَلَبَةِ الْخَلَلِ فِي أَقْوَالِهِ وَأَفْعَالِهِ الْخَارِجَةِ عَنْ عَادَتِهِ، وَكَذَا يُقَالُ فِيمَنْ اخْتَلَّ عَقْلُهُ لِكِبَرٍ أَوْ لِمَرَضٍ أَوْ لِمُصِيبَةٍ فَاجَأَتْهُ: فَمَا دَامَ فِي حَالِ غَلَبَةِ الْخَلَلِ فِي الْأَقْوَالِ وَالْأَفْعَالِ لَا تُعْتَبَرُ أَقْوَالُهُ وَإِنْ كَانَ يَعْلَمُهَا وَيُرِيدُهَا لِأَنَّ هَذِهِ الْمَعْرِفَةَ وَالْإِرَادَةَ غَيْرُ مُعْتَبَرَةٍ لِعَدَمِ حُصُولِهَا عَنْ الْإِدْرَاكِ صَحِيحٌ كَمَا لَا تُعْتَبَرُ مِنْ الصَّبِيِّ الْعَاقِلِ،


[14] See Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, Kitab Fatawa vol 5, p. 35 & 45


[15] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq vol 3, p. 369

قُلْت: وَمُقْتَضَى هَذَا الْفَرْعِ أَنَّ مَنْ وَصَلَ فِي الْغَضَبِ إلَى حَالَةٍ لَا يَدْرِي فِيهَا مَا يَقُولُ يَقَعُ طَلَاقُهُ وَإِلَّا لَمْ يَحْتَجْ إلَى اعْتِمَادِ قَوْلِ الشَّاهِدَيْنِ أَنَّهُ اسْتَثْنَى مَعَ أَنَّهُ مَرَّ أَوَّلَ الطَّلَاقِ أَنَّهُ لَا يَقَعُ طَلَاقُ الْمَدْهُوشِ.

وَأَفْتَى بِهِ الْخَيْرُ الرَّمْلِيُّ فِيمَنْ طَلَّقَ وَهُوَ مُغْتَاظٌ مَدْهُوشٌ لِأَنَّ الدَّهَشَ مِنْ أَقْسَامِ الْجُنُونِ. وَلَا يَخْفَى أَنَّ مَنْ وَصَلَ إلَى حَالَةٍ لَا يَدْرِي فِيهَا مَا يَقُولُ كَانَ فِي حُكْمِ الْمَجْنُونِ، وَقَدَّمْنَا الْجَوَابَ هُنَاكَ بِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ الْمُرَادُ بِمَا هُنَا أَنَّهُ وَصَلَ إلَى حَالَةٍ لَا يَدْرِي مَا يَقُولُ بِأَنْ لَا يَقْصِدَهُ وَلَا يَفْهَمَ مَعْنَاهُ بِحَيْثُ يَكُونُ كَالنَّائِمِ وَالسَّكْرَانِ، بَلْ الْمُرَادُ أَنَّهُ قَدْ يَنْسَى مَا يَقُولُ لِاشْتِغَالِ فِكْرِهِ بِاسْتِيلَاءِ الْغَضَبِ، وَاَللَّهُ تَعَالَى أَعْلَمُ

مُقْتَضَاهُ أَنَّهُ إذَا كَانَ لَا يَدْرِي مَا يَقُولُ يَقَعُ طَلَاقُهُ وَإِلَّا فَلَا حَاجَةَ إلَى الْأَخْذِ بِقَوْلِهِمَا إنَّك اسْتَثْنَيْت، وَهَذَا مُشْكِلٌ جِدًّا، وَإِلَّا أَنْ يُجَابَ بِأَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِكَوْنِهِ لَا يَدْرِي مَا يَقُولُ أَنَّهُ لِقُوَّةِ غَضَبِهِ قَدْ يَنْسَى مَا يَقُولُ وَلَا يَتَذَكَّرُهُ بَعْدُ، وَلَيْسَ الْمُرَادُ أَنَّهُ صَارَ يَجْرِي عَلَى لِسَانِهِ مَا لَا يَفْهَمُهُ أَوْ لَا يَقْصِدُهُ إذْ لَا شَكَّ أَنَّهُ حِينَئِذٍ يَكُونُ فِي أَعْلَى مَرَاتِبِ الْجُنُونِ، وَيُؤَيِّدُهُ هَذَا الْحَمْلُ أَنَّهُ فِي هَذَا الْفَرْعِ عَالِمٌ بِأَنَّهُ طَلَّقَ وَهُوَ قَاصِدٌ لَهُ، لَكِنَّهُ لَمْ يَتَذَكَّرْ الِاسْتِثْنَاءَ لِشِدَّةِ غَضَبِهِ، هَذَا مَا ظَهَرَ لِي فِي تَحْرِيرِ هَذَا الْمَقَامِ، وَاَللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِحَقِيقَةِ الْمَرَامِ ثُمَّ رَأَيْت مَا يُؤَيِّدُ ذَلِكَ الْجَوَابَ، وَهُوَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ فِي الْوَلْوَالِجيَّةِ: إنْ كَانَ بِحَالٍ لَوْ غَضِبَ يَجْرِي عَلَى لِسَانِهِ مَا لَا يَحْفَظُهُ بَعْدَهُ جَازَ لَهُ الِاعْتِمَادُ عَلَى قَوْلِ الشَّاهِدَيْنِ، فَقَوْلُهُ لَا يَحْفَظُهُ بَعْدَهُ صَرِيحٌ فِيمَا قُلْنَا وَاَللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ.




Iddah of a Woman Divorced Once

Iddah of a Woman Divorced Once

                              21st January 2021

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: Is there any Iddah for that women whose husband only gave one Talaq? The Talaq is of such nature that he has made his mind not to take her back.


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



In reference to your query if a woman was given one talaq (after consummation) with the husband maintaining his intention of not taking her back she is required to sit in her iddah.[1] This is due the waiting period being stipulated previously when a woman is given a talaq regardless if he intends on taking her back or not. She thus remains in his Nikah until her Iddah of three menses expires.[2]

The above only applies if the marriage was consummated before divorcing her. If for some reason they are unable to consummate (e.g. due to an illness) and the wife receives one divorce before that then she is not required to sit her iddah.[3]


[Allāh Knows Best]



Written by:  Apa Gul-e-Maryam         Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] Tabyeen Haqaiq, Kitab Haidh, Vol 2, Pg 251

الله – (هي استدامة القائم في العدة) أي الرجعة إبقاء النكاح على ما كان ما دامت في العدة؛ لأن النكاح قائم لقوله تعالى {وبعولتهن أحق بردهن} [البقرة: ٢٢٨] أي لهم حق الرجعة لا أن يكون لها أو للأجنبي حق فيكون البعل أولى



[2] Inayah Sharah Hidaya, Kitab Haidh, Vol 4, Pg 158

وإذا طلق الرجل امرأته تطليقة رجعية أو تطليقتين فله أن يراجعها في عدتها رضيت بذلك أو لم ترض) لقوله تعالى {فأمسكوهن بمعروف} [البقرة: ٢٣١] من غير فصل



[3] Muheet Al Burbani,Kitab Talaq, Vol 2, Pg 244


وإن كان لا يمكنه الوطء مع المانع حسا كالمريض أو المريضة التي لا يقدر الوطء منهما أو الصغير أو الصغيرة التي لا يتصور الجماع منهما فلا عدة لأنهما لا يتهمان ولم يوجد التسليم الذي أوجب العدة


Muheet Al Burbani,Kitab Talaq, Vol 2, Pg 244

ولا تجب عدة الطلاق قبل الدخول


Intrusive Thoughts on Divorce

Intrusive Thoughts on Divorce

24th December 2020


Question: Do intrusive thoughts of divorce result in Talaq?


الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful



The question about whether intrusive thoughts of divorce constitute a divorce or not, then firstly note that all types of intrusive thoughts – by this we mean waswasas – are pardoned and forgiven so long as the individual does not bring them into action nor utter them clearly. The Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “Very Allāh has pardoned my nation of the whisperings (waswasa) coming into the heart so long as (people) do not act according to it or utter it.”[1] Thoughts like misgivings come and go and most of the times are beyond our natural control. For this reason, Shariah rulings are not determined by such thoughts that constantly occur in one’s mind or heart. Scholars and jurists have therefore ruled that misgivings or thoughts about divorce without uttering them do not take into effect at all.[2] By uttering does not mean mere movements of the lips either, rather clear enough whereby one can hear the words himself.[3] As a point of principle about divorce, verbal utterance (or written) of specific words of divorce is an integral condition (rukn) for divorce to take place.[4] Mere contemplating about divorce, thinking over it, misgivings or using words that are not connected to divorce do not constitute divorce at all.

To give some examples, if during a conversation a specific word was mentioned that has no relevance to divorce at all yet divorce just crossed his mind then no divorce takes place. Likewise, if during a non-related divorce conversation with someone, a person mentions a word that can be used for divorce triggers a thought of divorce in the mind, even so no divorce takes place. Divorce only takes into effect by clearly uttering the words of divorce addressed to his wife.

As this is a commonly occurring problem amongst many individuals, below is a list of some practical steps to overcome such intrusive thoughts and misgivings;

  1. Not to overthink by dwelling deeply into the intricate details. The problem lies in analyzing the thoughts deeply. Investigating is not the solution to the problem, otherwise you will overwhelm yourself which is not what the Shariah aims to do.  As Muslims we are not responsible for dwelling into that degree of scrutiny.
  2. Refrain from reaching out towards that which you cannot attain. By delving into the intricate details, you are attempting to reach to that which you have no control over. Learn to let go and move on with your life.
  3. Judge according to what is apparent to you. In this case, divorce only takes into effect once it is pronounced in clear words. If not pronounced then no divorce takes place. If you are in doubt whether divorce took place or not then leave it aside in favour of what is apparent to you.
  4. Learn to be positive about Allāh Almighty. Do not fear that He will hold you into account. Allāh Almighty is very Merciful to us and never punishes for that which we have no natural control over. So cast a side doubtful matters and learn to put your trust in Him.
  5. Each time the thought of divorce comes to your mind then recite the ta’awwudh. Engage in dhikr of Allāh Almighty throughout the day. Keep your mind constantly occupied as much as possible with other beneficial things. This will help alleviate your misgivings.
  6. Lastly, make Dua to Allāh Almighty to alleviate the burden from you as He has ultimate power over everything.


The following Dua I would recommend you to constantly recite daily;

رَبِّ أَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ هَمَزَاتِ الشَّيَاطِينِ وَأَعُوذُ بِكَ رَبِّ أَنْ يَحْضُرُونِ

My Lord! I take refuge in you from whisperings of the devils and I seek refuge with you my Lord that they be present. [Surah Mu’min 23:97-98]



[Allãh Knows Best]



Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department



[1] Sunnan Abu Dawood, Kitab al-Talaq, No. 2209

بَابٌ فِي الْوَسْوَسَةِ بِالطَّلَاقِ

حَدَّثَنَا مُسْلِمُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامٌ، عَنْ قَتَادَةَ، عَنْ زُرَارَةَ بْنِ أَوْفَى، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ -: ” «إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَجَاوَزَ عَنْ أُمَّتِي مَا وَسْوَسَتْ بِهِ صُدُورُهَا، مَا لَمْ تَعْمَلْ بِهِ، أَوْ تَتَكَلَّمْ»


[2] Al-Abidi, Awn al-Ma’bood, Kitab Talaq, vol 6, p. 210

بَابٌ فِي الْوَسْوَسَةِ بِالطَّلَاقِ

(إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَجَاوَزَ لِأُمَّتِي) وَفِي رِوَايَةِ الْبُخَارِيِّ عَنْ أُمَّتِي أَيْ عَفَا عَنْهُمْ (عَمَّا لَمْ تَتَكَلَّمْ بِهِ) إِنْ كَانَ قَوْلِيًّا (أَوْ تَعْمَلْ بِهِ) إِنْ كَانَ فِعْلِيًّا (وَبِمَا حَدَّثَتْ بِهِ أَنْفُسَهَا) بَالنَّصْبِ عَلَى الْمَفْعُولِيَّةِ يُقَالُ حَدَّثْتُ نَفْسِي بِكَذَا أَوْ بَالرَّفْعِ عَلَى الْفَاعِلِيَّةِ يُقَالُ حَدَّثَتْنِي نَفْسِي بِكَذَا

قَالَ الْخَطَّابِيُّ وَفِيهِ أَنَّهُ إِذَا طَلَّقَ امْرَأَتَهُ بِقَلْبِهِ وَلَمْ يَتَكَلَّمْ بِهِ بِلِسَانِهِ فَإِنَّ الطَّلَاقَ غَيْرُ وَاقِعٍ وَبِهِ قَالَ عَطَاءُ بْنُ رَبَاحٍ وَسَعِيدُ بْنُ جُبَيْرٍ وَالشَّعْبِيُّ وَقَتَادَةُ وَالثَّوْرِيُّ وَأَصْحَابُ الرَّأْيِ وَهُوَ قَوْلُ الشَّافِعِيِّ وَأَحْمَدَ وَإِسْحَاقَ

[3] Maraqi alal Falah p. 219

باب شروط الصلاة وأركانها

وقال الهندواني لا تجزئه ما لم تسمع أذناه ومن بقربه بالسماع شرط فيما يتعلق بالنطق باللسان التحريمة والقراءة السرية والتشهد والأذكار والتسمية على الذبيحة ووجوب سجود التلاوة والعتاق والطلاق والاستثناء واليمين والنذر والإسلام والإيمان حتى لو أجرى الطلاق على قلبه وحرك لسانه من غير تلفظ يسمع لا يقع


[4] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Talāq, vol 4 p. 431

[رُكْن الطَّلَاق]

وَرُكْنُهُ لَفْظٌ مَخْصُوصٌ

(قَوْلُهُ وَرُكْنُهُ لَفْظٌ مَخْصُوصٌ) هُوَ مَا جُعِلَ دَلَالَةً عَلَى مَعْنَى الطَّلَاقِ مِنْ صَرِيحٍ أَوْ كِنَايَةٍ فَخَرَجَ الْفُسُوخُ عَلَى مَا مَرَّ

وَبِهِ ظَهَرَ أَنَّ مَنْ تَشَاجَرَ مَعَ زَوْجَتِهِ فَأَعْطَاهَا ثَلَاثَةَ أَحْجَارٍ يَنْوِي الطَّلَاقَ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ لَفْظًا لَا صَرِيحًا وَلَا كِنَايَةً لَا يَقَعُ عَلَيْهِ كَمَا أَفْتَى بِهِ الْخَيْرُ الرَّمْلِيُّ وَغَيْرُهُ


Ibn Humām, Fathul Qadeer, Kitāb Talaq, vol 3 p. 443

وَرُكْنُهُ نَفْسُ اللَّفْظِ.