Divorce of three in a single utterance and the effect of anger on divorce
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner:
We have two questions, and we ask the permission of the questioners, as they have just reached us and seem to be pressing. Honorable Shaykh, a man asks: He divorced his wife three times in a single utterance, wrote a paper to that effect which was sent to the wife, and bore witness to it. After a short time, he regretted it and took her back. Is she lawful to him, or what? Knowing that the wife has three children, and that the divorce occurred in a state of anger. Please rule for us, may Allah reward you with good, may Allah reward you.
The Shaykh:
Divorce of three in a single word, such as saying "So-and-so is divorced three times," or "I divorce her three times," or "The divorce of three is upon her," is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. Most of the scholars from the time of 'Umar and after hold that it is carried out and executed, and she does not become lawful to him except after another husband. This is what most of the scholars said. For this reason, some scholars hold that the position of the scholars in the era of al-Khalid (may Allah be pleased with him), or in the early part of 'Umar's caliphate, is the state of affairs in the era of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), namely that the three in a single utterance are considered one, and made a revocable divorce. This is what I have issued a ruling on, that it is one revocable divorce. A group of scholars from the time of Ibn 'Abbas and after have also issued rulings on this. It is established from Ibn 'Abbas in a narration from him (may Allah be pleased with him), and he issued a ruling on it, and he also issued a ruling on the opinion of the majority. It is established from a group of his companions that they issued rulings that it is one. The conclusion of this is Abu al-'Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah, the Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him), and his student, the scholar Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him). His statement is the stronger in terms of evidence that it is one, unless the judge rules to carry it out. The judge's ruling removes the disagreement. If the husband has prayed in the court, and the court ruled that this divorce is carried out, and that she is divorced, then the ruling removes the disagreement, and it becomes a final divorce, unless the judge retracts his ruling and sees that it should be made one, or permits another to do so, in which case there is no harm. The point is that the correct view is that it is one, but if one of the legal judges rules to carry it out, acting on the opinion of the majority and that she does not become lawful except after another husband, this is a view that has a basis. The scholars have mentioned that the judge's ruling removes the disagreement, and he has the right to annul it if he sees that the Shari'ah evidence dictates that, or permits another judge or mufti to annul it if he sees that the evidence dictates that, in which case there is no harm. This is the answer to this issue. Yes.
The questioner:
Anger does not change; anger.
The Shaykh:
There is a distinction regarding anger. Anger is of three types: ordinary anger, which does not prevent the divorce; and severe anger, which changes a person's state and intention, and he is unable to perform the Shari'ah divorce with it, rather his intention is obscured to him, and his path is obscured to him due to the length and intensity of the dispute and the fighting between them, or the cursing and insults between them. This, if the anger becomes severe, the divorce does not take place, according to the correct view as well.
The third state is that anger causes him to lose consciousness, and he is like the other insane and deranged. Anger has thrown him into the corners of his mind, so he does not understand what he says. This divorce does not take place according to all the scholars, and he is included in this state with the deranged and the insane, so his divorce does not take place if the anger has thrown him into this state.
The questioner:
We do not know. There is no right and no expiation.
We have two questions, and we ask the permission of the questioners, as they have just reached us and seem to be pressing. Honorable Shaykh, a man asks: He divorced his wife three times in a single utterance, wrote a paper to that effect which was sent to the wife, and bore witness to it. After a short time, he regretted it and took her back. Is she lawful to him, or what? Knowing that the wife has three children, and that the divorce occurred in a state of anger. Please rule for us, may Allah reward you with good, may Allah reward you.
The Shaykh:
Divorce of three in a single word, such as saying "So-and-so is divorced three times," or "I divorce her three times," or "The divorce of three is upon her," is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. Most of the scholars from the time of 'Umar and after hold that it is carried out and executed, and she does not become lawful to him except after another husband. This is what most of the scholars said. For this reason, some scholars hold that the position of the scholars in the era of al-Khalid (may Allah be pleased with him), or in the early part of 'Umar's caliphate, is the state of affairs in the era of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), namely that the three in a single utterance are considered one, and made a revocable divorce. This is what I have issued a ruling on, that it is one revocable divorce. A group of scholars from the time of Ibn 'Abbas and after have also issued rulings on this. It is established from Ibn 'Abbas in a narration from him (may Allah be pleased with him), and he issued a ruling on it, and he also issued a ruling on the opinion of the majority. It is established from a group of his companions that they issued rulings that it is one. The conclusion of this is Abu al-'Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah, the Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him), and his student, the scholar Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him). His statement is the stronger in terms of evidence that it is one, unless the judge rules to carry it out. The judge's ruling removes the disagreement. If the husband has prayed in the court, and the court ruled that this divorce is carried out, and that she is divorced, then the ruling removes the disagreement, and it becomes a final divorce, unless the judge retracts his ruling and sees that it should be made one, or permits another to do so, in which case there is no harm. The point is that the correct view is that it is one, but if one of the legal judges rules to carry it out, acting on the opinion of the majority and that she does not become lawful except after another husband, this is a view that has a basis. The scholars have mentioned that the judge's ruling removes the disagreement, and he has the right to annul it if he sees that the Shari'ah evidence dictates that, or permits another judge or mufti to annul it if he sees that the evidence dictates that, in which case there is no harm. This is the answer to this issue. Yes.
The questioner:
Anger does not change; anger.
The Shaykh:
There is a distinction regarding anger. Anger is of three types: ordinary anger, which does not prevent the divorce; and severe anger, which changes a person's state and intention, and he is unable to perform the Shari'ah divorce with it, rather his intention is obscured to him, and his path is obscured to him due to the length and intensity of the dispute and the fighting between them, or the cursing and insults between them. This, if the anger becomes severe, the divorce does not take place, according to the correct view as well.
The third state is that anger causes him to lose consciousness, and he is like the other insane and deranged. Anger has thrown him into the corners of his mind, so he does not understand what he says. This divorce does not take place according to all the scholars, and he is included in this state with the deranged and the insane, so his divorce does not take place if the anger has thrown him into this state.
The questioner:
We do not know. There is no right and no expiation.
Source
ندوات الجامع الكبير مع الأسئلة - 35 — archive.org (1:28:26)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.