What is your opinion of an imam who preaches on Friday and has sworn by Allah three times that if a man swears to divorce his wife and then has intercourse with her, he has the right to

The Shaykh : What is your opinion of an imam who preaches on Friday and has sworn by Allah three times that if a man swears to divorce his wife and then has intercourse with her, he has the right to marry the daughter his wife bore after the oath?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Ah, he means, well, to the maximum extent... with the three.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : He said: He swore by Allah three times; he swore to divorce his wife, but the type of divorce is not specified, whether it is revocable or the triple divorce.

The questioner : He swore by Allah.

Another questioner: Yes.

The questioner : Yes, the preacher swore by Allah.

The Shaykh : Yes, my brother, but what type of divorce is it?

The questioner : Three times.

The Shaykh : Yes, it is not mentioned here, it is not mentioned in the question. The questioner intends, and although his pen may have been brief in explanation, that a man divorced his wife three times; that is: ; this wife became a stranger to him. Now, after that, this woman was blessed with a daughter.

The questioner : That is not what he intended.

The Shaykh : Be patient, my brother, who is the questioner? You? Be patient, he is going to explain now; because here, now that we forgot to close, and the divorce is three, not one, we need to understand now that he swears that he can marry the daughter his wife bore after the oath; meaning she was pregnant with his child when she was his wife, is that what you mean?

The questioner : No, after he swore to divorce her, he did not divorce her... according to the Shari'ah, but she remained under his protection, so he had intercourse with her, and she bore him a daughter, so according to the one who says: he has the right to marry that daughter.

The Shaykh : Meaning, after he divorced her three times, he kept her, meaning he committed adultery with her. This issue is known among the Shafi'is; there is an opinion—unfortunately—very problematic; and they say explicitly: it is permissible for the adulterer to marry his daughter from the adultery. So this case has some difficulty; its summary is that this man who divorced his wife three times kept her and did not release her, considering, as He—Exalted is He—said in the previous verse: , yet he kept her. So she is not his wife after being divorced three times, so he is an adulterer with her. So she went away pregnant with his child, and she gave him a daughter. So this daughter is a daughter from adultery. When the Shafi'is say it is permissible to marry one's daughter from adultery, this person came based on his own madhhab, which is that the Shafi'i madhhab permits marrying one's daughter from adultery. This is a madhhab in this issue that is opposed by the Hanafi madhhab, which is the truth with no doubt or ambiguity; and that is that his daughter from adultery is not lawful for him, and even if the water from which this person or this daughter was formed, it does not permit the man to approach this daughter and marry her.
And among the arguments of the Hanafis and those who followed them, such as the Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, and other investigators, is that the Wise Lawgiver forbade the daughter through breastfeeding who was breastfed by a woman five times; because the cause that produced this milk for this wet nurse is her husband. It became forbidden for this husband to marry that daughter through breastfeeding; meaning, despite the distance of the intermediary in that this daughter is his daughter through breastfeeding, the Wise Lawgiver still forbade her to him. So how would He not forbid her to him when she is from his loins and from his water? And this water did not appear without Allah's permission, but in any case, it is his water. So he is marrying himself with himself. And what concerns us now is that he disobeyed his Lord in that. And its example in the matter of breastfeeding is that a woman is not permitted to breastfeed anyone except with the permission of the owner of the milk, who is the husband. So if this wife disobeyed her husband and breastfed a son or daughter of a neighbor of hers; would this daughter become the daughter of her husband? Of course; because the path for this milk to reach that daughter through breastfeeding was contrary to the Shari'ah, which makes this daughter not the daughter of the owner of the milk, who is the husband.
Therefore, this one who swore this oath, in our opinion, the truth is that he has broken his oath. As for us, we cannot hold people accountable when they grew up on madhhabs and opinions that are impossible to change just because al-Albani or a hundred thousand al-Albanis say that this is a broken oath; because there are millions of imams who said that this daughter is lawful for him, correctly; because opposite this—also—is another madhhab—also—extremely deviant from the truth, as deviant from the truth as this deviation. A man files a false claim against a chaste woman in the protection of a man by the Book and the Sunnah, filing a claim that she is his wife and that she was raped by him, and the Shari'ah judge rules based on what was established for him from witnesses, and he does not know that they are liars and fabricators; so based on their testimony, he ruled that this is the wife of this claimant. So every person would rule that this judgment is invalid, even if no one knows its invalidity; at least this forger, this liar, knows, he knows that he brought false witnesses and confused the judge, making him rule other than what Allah revealed, but the judge does not know, he is caught up and his head and his head... but the one who brought the witnesses and bribed them, does he not know that this is so-and-so's wife, and that he did not marry her in the past? He knows this truth, yet this madhhab says: the judge's ruling regarding this judgment is executed in appearance and in reality.
As for in appearance, it is clear; meaning, now when the judge rules to cut off so-and-so's head, he cut it off. Do you think revelation came down to him from the sky that this is the actual killer? No, but he ruled based on the witnesses; they may be truthful, they may be lying, so he executed the Shari'ah ruling in what appeared to him and was evident. But with Allah, who knows the secret and what is even more hidden, if this judgment is wrong, then the criminal is not held accountable by the judge, he is not a criminal with the Lord—Glorified and Exalted is He—... because He knows the truth, but the judge has no choice but to rule by the appearance. But this forger, does he not know that he is a forger? Does he not know that he is a liar? Yes, and yet that madhhab says: it became lawful for him; just because the judge said: I ruled for you that she is your wife, it became lawful for him as if he had taken her by the Book and the Sunnah; so they say on one hand: it is forbidden for him to lie, but on the other hand, it became lawful for him; because the Shari'ah judge ruled for him thus.
These are issues that exist in some madhhabs that are dangerous, but no matter how much we raise our voice to explain their error and danger, it will go to waste, except with a few people, and few are those who understand!