Fatwa ID: 09174
Answered by Muftiyah Maryam Badshah
Question:
Assalamu alaykum,
I am requesting an Islamic legal clarification regarding the validity of talaq in my previous marriage. There were three situations in which the word talaq was used, and I need an honest and qualified assessment of how many of these are Islamically valid.
First talaq:
My husband pronounced talaq while he had consumed alcohol and was not sober.
We later consulted a sheikh who stated that due to intoxication this talaq might be invalid, but this matter remained unclear for us.
Second talaq:
On a later occasion, my husband pronounced talaq once while sober, calm, and without any coercion. After this, he left me.
Third talaq:
After the second talaq, I was emotionally very hurt and unable to accept that he had left me. Out of pride and emotional distress, I insisted strongly on receiving another talaq.
I explicitly asked him to wait approximately two weeks until my menstruation began, in order to ensure that I was not pregnant.
At that time, my husband was under extreme psychological pressure. He was facing serious professional problems and was involved in ongoing legal/criminal proceedings, which caused him severe mental stress and emotional overload.
The third incident occurred in public during a severely escalated argument. There was extreme anger, physical violence, and intense psychological pressure.
My husband repeatedly stated that he did not want to pronounce talaq.
Only under this coercion, in a state of intense anger and psychological distress, he shouted the words of talaq multiple times.
I kindly request your assessment regarding:
How many of these talaq are Islamically valid
Whether remarriage between us is permanently prohibited
Jazakum Allahu khayran for your time and guidance.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
Answer:
To start, words of divorce are of two types: clear/explicit (Ṣariḥ) and ambiguous (Kināyah). The statement “talaq” is clear and explicit, therefore the situation, intention and feelings will not be taken into account. By nature, divorce is said in anger, and as such, anger would not have any effect on the validity of a husband’s statements.[1]
Divorce issued under the state of intoxication remains valid unless the intoxicant was taken due to necessity (i.e. fear of death) or they were forced to consume the intoxicant. If your former husband issued this divorce after consuming alcohol of his own accord, in addition to committing a major sin, his first pronouncement will be valid. As for the second incident, since this divorce was issued without extenuating circumstances, it too will be considered valid.[2]
In regards to the last incident, for a husband to be considered insane or lacking in mental capacity, he would need to say the statement of divorce whilst he was unaware of what he was saying or doing for the divorce to be invalid. If your husband gave his divorces while coherent and able to reason, his statements will not be invalidated. A person is not considered to be insane in divorce unless his mental capacity has been previously proven to be unstable (preferably by a medical professional), or there were witnesses to his insanity during the event.[3]
As for feeling coerced or being forced to give divorce, this does not invalidate the statements of divorce, even if the husband felt his life or limb was under threat. This is because divorce is applied upon its delivery and not the circumstances in which it occurs. You should also keep in mind that multiple pronouncements of divorce which are made in a single sitting are still considered separate valid statements of divorce and not a single pronouncement, and giving divorce in this way is considered a sin.[4]
From the description given, whilst you state your former husband was ‘in a state of intense anger and psychological distress’ during the last incident, it does not seem like he was incoherent or unaware of what he was saying at the time he stated divorce. As such, over three statements of divorce have occurred. Therefore, it will be impermissible for you to remarry your former husband until you (the wife) enter into a genuine marriage with a different husband and then that marriage naturally ends.[5]
Only Allah ﷻ knows best.
Written by Muftiyah Maryam Badshah
Checked and approved by Mufti Mohammed Tosir Miah
Darul Ifta Birmingham
References:
[1]
مِنْ أَنَّ الصَّرِيحَ مَا لَا يَحْتَاجُ إلَى نِيَّةٍ بَائِنًا كَانَ الْوَاقِعُ بِهِ أَوْ رَجْعِيًّا خَاصٌّ بِالصَّرِيحِ فِي الْجُمْلَةِ الْأُولَى: أَعْنِي قَوْلَهُمْ الصَّرِيحُ يَلْحَقُ الصَّرِيحَ وَالْبَائِنَ
Raddul Muhtār (Vol.3, pg.308, Dār Al-Fiqr)
فَصْلٌ فِيمَنْ يَقَعُ طَلَاقُهُ وَفِيمَنْ لَا يَقَعُ طَلَاقُهُ) يَقَعُ طَلَاقُ كُلِّ زَوْجٍ إذَا كَانَ بَالِغًا عَاقِلًا سَوَاءٌ كَانَ حُرًّا أَوْ عَبْدًا طَائِعًا أَوْ مُكْرَهًا
Al-Fatāwa al-Hindiyyah (Vol.1, pg.353, Dār Al-Fiqr)
[2]
قَوْلُهُ أَوْ سَكْرَانَ) السُّكْرُ :.. وَأَمَّا تَعْرِيفُهُ عِنْدَهُ فِي غَيْرِ وُجُوبِ الْحَدِّ مِنْ الْأَحْكَامِ فَالْمُعْتَبَرُ فِيهِ عِنْدَهُ اخْتِلَاطُ الْكَلَامِ وَالْهَذَيَانِ كَقَوْلِهِمَا. وَنَقَلَ شَارِحُهُ ابْنُ أَمِيرٍ حَاجٍّ عَنْهُ أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ أَنْ يَكُونَ غَالِبُ كَلَامِهِ هَذَيَانًا، فَلَوْ نَصْفُهُ مُسْتَقِيمًا فَلَيْسَ بِسُكْرٍ فَيَكُونُ حُكْمُهُ حُكْمَ الصُّحَاةِ فِي إقْرَارِهِ بِالْحُدُودِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ لِأَنَّ السَّكْرَانَ فِي الْعُرْفِ مَنْ اخْتَلَطَ جَدُّهُ بِهَزْلِهِ فَلَا يَسْتَقِرُّ عَلَى شَيْءٍ، وَمَالَ أَكْثَرُ الْمَشَايِخِ إلَى قَوْلِهِمَا…
… وَبَيَّنَ فِي التَّحْرِيرِ حُكْمَهُ أَنَّهُ إنْ كَانَ سُكْرُهُ بِطَرِيقٍ مُحَرَّمٍ لَا يُبْطِلُ تَكْلِيفَهُ فَتَلْزَمُهُ الْأَحْكَامُ وَتَصِحُّ عِبَارَتُهُ مِنْ الطَّلَاقِ… لِأَنَّ الْعَقْلَ قَائِمٌ، وَإِنَّمَا عَرَضَ فَوَاتُ فَهْمِ الْخِطَابِ بِمَعْصِيَتِهِ، فَبَقِيَ فِي حَقِّ الْإِثْمِ وَوُجُوبِ الْقَضَاءِ…
Raddul Muhtār (Vol.3, pg.239, Dār Al-Fiqr)
وَطَلَاقُ السَّكْرَانِ وَاقِعٌ إذَا سَكِرَ مِنْ الْخَمْرِ أَوْ النَّبِيذِ. وَهُوَ مَذْهَبُ أَصْحَابِنَا رَحِمَهُمْ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ
وَلَوْ أُكْرِهَ عَلَى شُرْبِ الْخَمْرِ أَوْ شَرِبَ الْخَمْرَ لِضَرُورَةٍ وَسَكِرَ وَطَلَّقَ امْرَأَتَهُ اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ وَالصَّحِيحُ أَنَّهُ كَمَا لَا يَلْزَمُهُ الْحَدُّ لَا يَقَعُ طَلَاقُهُ وَلَا يَنْفُذُ تَصَرُّفُهُ كَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ
Al-Fatāwa al-Hindiyyah (Vol.1, pg.353, Dār Al-Fiqr)
[3]
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
Raddul Muhtār (Vol.3, pg.243, Dār Al-Fiqr)
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
Raddul Muhtār (Vol.3, pg.244, Dār Al-Fiqr)
وَأَمَّا الْبِدْعِيُّ) فَنَوْعَانِ بِدْعِيٌّ لِمَعْنًى يَعُودُ إلَى الْعَدَدِ وَبِدْعِيٌّ لِمَعْنًى يَعُودُ إلَى الْوَقْتِ (فَاَلَّذِي) يَعُودُ إلَى الْعَدَدِ أَنْ يُطَلِّقَهَا ثَلَاثًا فِي طُهْرٍ وَاحِدٍ أَوْ بِكَلِمَاتٍ مُتَفَرِّقَةٍ أَوْ يَجْمَعُ بَيْنَ التَّطْلِيقَتَيْنِ فِي طُهْرٍ وَاحِدٍ بِكَلِمَةٍ وَاحِدَةٍ أَوْ بِكَلِمَتَيْنِ مُتَفَرِّقَتَيْنِ فَإِذَا فَعَلَ ذَلِكَ وَقَعَ الطَّلَاقُ وَكَانَ عَاصِيًا. (وَالْبِدْعِيُّ) مِنْ حَيْثُ الْوَقْتُ أَنْ يُطَلِّقَ الْمَدْخُولَ بِهَا وَهِيَ مِنْ ذَوَاتِ الْأَقْرَاءِ فِي حَالَةِ الْحَيْضِ أَوْ فِي طُهْرٍ جَامَعَهَا فِيهِ وَكَانَ الطَّلَاقُ وَاقِعًا وَيُسْتَحَبُّ لَهُ أَنْ يُرَاجِعَهَا وَالْأَصَحُّ أَنَّ الرَّجْعَةَ وَاجِبَةٌ
Al-Fatāwa al-Hindiyyah (Vol.1, pg.349, Dār Al-Fiqr)
[4]
(وَأَمَّا) (أَنْوَاعُهُ) فَالْإِكْرَاهُ فِي أَصْلِهِ عَلَى نَوْعَيْنِ إمَّا إنْ كَانَ مُلْجِئًا أَوْ غَيْرَ مُلْجِئٍ فَالْإِكْرَاهُ الْمُلْجِئُ هُوَ الْإِكْرَاهُ بِوَعِيدِ تَلَفِ النَّفْسِ أَوْ بِوَعِيدِ تَلَفِ عُضْوٍ مِنْ الْأَعْضَاءِ وَالْإِكْرَاهُ الَّذِي هُوَ غَيْرُ مُلْجِئٍ هُوَ الْإِكْرَاهُ بِالْحَبْسِ وَالتَّقْيِيدِ
(وَأَمَّا) (حُكْمُهُ) وَهُوَ الرُّخْصَةُ أَوْ الْإِبَاحَةُ أَوْ غَيْرُهُمَا فَيَثْبُتُ عِنْدَ وُجُودِ شَرْطِهِ، وَالْأَصْلُ أَنَّ تَصَرُّفَاتِ الْمُكْرِهِ كُلَّهَا قَوْلًا مُنْعَقِدَةٌ عِنْدَنَا إلَّا أَنَّ مَا يَحْتَمِلُ الْفَسْخَ مِنْهُ كَالْبَيْعِ وَالْإِجَارَةِ يُفْسَخُ، وَمَا لَا يَحْتَمِلُ الْفَسْخَ مِنْهُ كَالطَّلَاقِ وَالْعَتَاقِ وَالنِّكَاحِ وَالتَّدْبِيرِ وَالِاسْتِيلَادِ وَالنَّذْرِ فَهُوَ لَازِمٌ…
Al-Fatāwa al-Hindiyyah (Vol.5, pg.35, Dār Al-Fiqr)
[5]
الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّتَانِ ۖ فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ … فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا تَحِلُّ لَهُ مِن بَعْدُ حَتَّىٰ تَنكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ ۗ فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا أَن يَتَرَاجَعَا إِن ظَنَّا أَن يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَتِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ يُبَيِّنُهَا لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ
Qur’an (2:229-230)
قَوْله تَعَالَى: ﴿فَلا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا أَنْ يَتَرَاجَعَا﴾ [البقرة: ٢٣٠] أَيْ يَتَنَاكَحَا بَعْدَ طَلَاقِ الزَّوْجِ الثَّانِي وَذَا فِي الْحُرِّ وَالْحُرَّةِ
Badā’i’ Al-Ṣanā’i’ (Vol.3, pg.97, Dār Al-Kutub Al-’Ilmiyyah)