A reduced Urdu version of this article, written by Dr. Nawab Ahmad, was published in Jasarat (Pakistan) on Nov 8,9,10 of 2019.
For years the Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, has been recommending instant three divorces be punishable. This creates the danger that a punishment will be enacted sooner or later. This threat is further aggravated by the growing trend of the so-called enlightenment in Pakistan and the verdict of the Supreme Court of India. However, in the news that came out in the first week of September 2019, there is a matter of satisfaction in the remark of Dr. Farogh Naseem, the Minister of Law, that if there is any reference to instant triple divorces being punishable, they could legislate on the matter. We pray: May God increase the wisdom of the Law Minister and other lawmakers, and give them the resoluteness that they do not proceed toward any penal legislation unless the Islamic Ideological Council provides evidence from the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
In the beginning, we are going to put our own understanding of the Quranic law of three divorces, which is similar to and not contrary to that of Imam Shafa’i (ʃɑːfəiː), so that the readers may follow our discourse.
NB: This article is from islamreality.org [1], so “I, me, my” have been replaced by “we, us, our”. We write articles by employing “critical thinking” which the Qur’an calls “Tadabbur” (tə-dʌb-bʊr).
In Relation to the Law of Three Divorces
According to the Qur’anic Law (which we will prove later), whenever the moment of divorce comes up after marriage, God has left the decision to divorce once, twice, or thrice, at the discretion of husbands (2:229-230).
However, it is indirectly suggested that if there is no major reason (based on which a man becomes strong-minded that he will not establish the relationship with the same woman again), then it is better to pronounce a revocable divorce so that both the choices (reunification or no reunification) remain available, and if God willed, He could create a compromise between them (65:1).
The URGE to divorce is purely SUBJECTIVE, and may even feel COMPELLING in order to get rid of one’s discomfort with one’s spouse. Therefore, God did not categorically rule when to pronounce one divorce and when to pronounce three divorces, rather advised in an indirect manner and gave people the ultimate handle on divorce.
At this point, three things seem very appropriate to be mentioned:
(i) According to the opinions narrated by Abul ‘Ala Mawdoodi in his exegesis of Surah Al Talaq, Imam Shafa’i also did not consider the number of divorces given at a time to categorize Sunnah (guided way) and Bidah (innovated way) divorces. Rather, he based this categorization merely on the timing of divorce—for example: divorcing during a woman’s period, or divorcing at a time when it is not clear whether the woman is pregnant. In other words, giving an instant triple divorce is Sunnah (lawful way) in the eye of Imam Shafa’i.
(ii) Today, most cases of three divorces at once in Pakistan are the result of lack of knowledge. Therefore, the remedy is to educate people and not to eliminate the law of instant three divorces because in some cases it is required, such as adultery of a woman seen by the husband alone.
(iii) If a man gives three divorces altogether for a minor reason, he does harm his own interest. This is why, in various cases, men run from jurist to jurist, even some people go to the jurists of various sects, in order to receive an edict to save their marriage. As a result, there is no justification for punishing such a man who reacts erratically and harms himself.
It should also be noted that he uses his lawful right to three divorces, so again, he deserves no sentence.
However, today’s Islamic Ideological Council has been persistently asking for punishing all those men who give three divorces instantly. The legitimacy of their recommendation is going to be weighed up in the rest of this article.
The Council’s Ground is Against the Qur’an
The Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, is urging punishment by claiming that it inflicts immense suffering on divorced women. However, this charge conflicts with the Qur’anic disclosure:
فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ … أَوْ فَارِقُوهُنَّ … وَمَن يَتَّقِ اللَّـهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مَخْرَجًا ﴿٢﴾ وَيَرْزُقْهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَحْتَسِبُ … سَيَجْعَلُ اللَّـهُ بَعْدَ عُسْرٍ يُسْرًا
Translation: “Thereafter, when women reach their term, either keep them … or separate them … and whoever fears God, He will make for him a way out. And He will provide him sustenance from where he thinks not … God will soon bring about ease after financial distress.” (The Divorce: 2,3,7)
Above divine assurance of creating a way out, providing sustenance, and ending hardship is for cases of divorce where marriage is not reestablished between the same couple. Therefore, it also applies to situations resulting from instant triple divorces; the Qur’an does not discuss each of similar situations separately.
On top of it, if divorce causes immense suffering to the women, why is God giving men the liberty of separating them without any obligation toward them in the future?
Similarly, in 4:130 the Qur’an says:
وَإِن يَتَفَرَّقَا يُغْنِ اللَّـهُ كُلًّا مِّن سَعَتِهِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ وَاسِعًا حَكِيمًا
Translation: “And if both of them separate [by divorce], God will make each of them financially independent from His immensity. And God is All-Embracing, Wise.”
Here again, God is saying about the divorce where reunification does not happen. And He is assuring that He would make both the man and woman self-sufficient in finances after separation.
Now, many people may question: why do these women keep suffering then?
First of all, please do not twist the matter around. This article is a rebuttal to the Islamic Ideological Council (Pakistan) and a great many people who claim that permanent divorces put the life of women and children into miseries. And their claim turns out to be untrue in light of the Qur’an. So please be honest: either admit your false criminalization, or say loudly that the Qur’an is wrong.
Secondly, those who accept this Qur’anic disclosure without any reservation and want to understand the reason behind these sufferings should see the full picture in order to recognize the REAL CAUSE or, say, an apparent COINCIDENCE. In brief, it is because of the wrongs committed by these women, their families, Muftis and judges, the Islamic Ideological Council, and the officials responsible for the welfare of citizens. And God is not going to right the wrongs of all these people; He has made this world to test our acts (67:2). This is why, for divine help, verse 65:2 (quoted above) puts the condition: “whoever fears God.”
There is another angle to get it: when you behave contrary to God’s directives, how is He responsible for solving your problems?
A Question Based on the Qur’an
God has mentioned injustices related to divorce such as: interfering with women’s withholding period or Iddat (65:1), forcing them out during this period (65:1), revoking divorce with an intent to mistreat wife (2:231), preventing a divorced woman from marrying the man of her choice (2:232), taking back the asset given to a wife (2:229, 4:20), not giving any Mahr if it was not mentioned at the time of marriage service (2:236). But there is no mention of any injustice due to three divorces given altogether. What do you make of it all?
Do you believe God has mentioned small injustices and concealed the big one?
The Irony of Today
Understanding the Qur’an directly, the easiest way to comprehend Islam, has become a rare practice nowadays. Even scholars do not take pains to understand Qur’anic principles in clear terms. On top of it, everyone has arrogance and believes that he or she knows the correct interpretation. Both people and scholars claim principles on the name of the Qur’an, which are not in there.
Regarding the Violation of Women’s Rights
Today, a punishment is warranted on the claim that instant triple divorces violate women’s rights. Recall the five Muslim women who got instant three divorces filed the case of infringement of their legal rights in the Supreme Court of India. They filed separately at various times; however, the apex court considered their petitions altogether in 2017. Let us examine the truth behind the violation of women’s rights.
(A) Please consider the following questions:
Q 1) Does the Qur’an say that it is the right of a woman
that her husband cannot divorce (separate) her forever
when the relationship becomes unbearable after marriage?
Q 2) Does this right of a woman has been mentioned
in any Hadith?
Q 3) Does any human (or women’s) rights charter
claim this right to a woman today?
Q 4) Does the constitution or law of any country
guarantee this right to a woman?
Q 5) Do the people of any country accept that
a man cannot divorce his wife permanently
when the time for divorce comes up after marriage?
Everyone knows that the answer to each of the above questions is in the negative. When it is the right of a woman that she cannot be divorced permanently at the first occasion of separation, how does an instant triple divorce violate a woman’s rights?
(B) The presence of two Raja’ee (rəjəiː) or revocable divorces in Islam has led many Muslims and non-Muslims, including Indian Supreme Court justices, to conclude that when the moment of divorce comes up for the first or second time after marriage, the man cannot dissolve the relationship without leaving any room for reversing it.
But this line of thinking is wrong because reunification either by revoking the divorce within the prescribed term or by remarrying the woman after this term is not obligatory in a reversible divorce; it is just an alternative choice. And an alternative choice has no binding either to carry it out or to reserve a room for it. In other words, a husband can take out the choice of reunification anytime.
When a husband can take out the choice of reunification after a single divorce, how can a triple divorce which legally expresses this resolve encroach upon a woman’s rights?
(C) You can also look at this issue from the prevailing principle of an agreement. Assume that you start a business in partnership with your brother hoping to continue it always, then can’t you or your brother get out of this contract permanently when some discord or necessity comes up? Surely, you or your brother can.
Likewise, marriage is a social contract between a man and a woman, of which any party can pull out permanently when he or she realizes that living with this person would ever be very uncomfortable. Therefore, to say that it kills a woman’s rights is baseless.
(D) Today in the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, mostly a no-fault divorce is petitioned for and granted through a court of law. And even after a no-fault divorce, the same ex-spouses rarely remarry each other. When these Western men who take great pride in upholding women’s rights break the marital bond forever by a single divorce in which there is no legal declaration of no-reunification in the future, why would it be violative to permanently break the relationship in Islam by an instant triple divorce which legally expresses this intention?
(E) This point is also vividly present in the Islamic law in the context of pronouncing a triple divorce versus a single divorce.
It should be recalled that while pronouncing a single divorce, a man has the choice to hold the idea of a probable reunification or no reunification at all.
Now let us assume that Jameel firmly decided for no reunification while pronouncing a single divorce. As a result, he never got ready for a marital reunion. In another case, Iqbal had expressed this resolve by pronouncing three divorces instantly. As a result, he also never got ready for a marital reunion. In these two cases, the commonalities are: a strong resolve for no reunification at the time of divorcing, and subsequently never getting ready for it. And the only difference is that Jameel did not legally express this resolve at the time of divorcing, while Iqbal did. So the questions are:
Q 1) How can being CANDID about no reunification be called the violation of women’s rights?
Does it make any sense that hiding this intent is to uphold women rights, and expressing this intent is to violate women rights?
Q 2) Is it not a BETTER way to legally express this intent so that the woman may not waste any time in a false hope?
Real Offence Removed from the Process of Justice
Think about it: I want to punish you for violating my right, but I do not tell the court what right you have violated. And if the court punishes you, will it be justice?
You may not call it justice, but the same kind of justice is being sought by the Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, against a man giving three divorces instantly. The council is the national body for working on religious issues and making recommendations. Taking advantage of this position, it wants the National Assembly to enact a law that will punish men for giving three divorces altogether, merely on its recommendation which does not contain the proof of the offense. As a result, when a case would land in a court of law, the judge will simply look at the act of instant three divorces and will punish the man according to the law.In this way what right of a woman is violated, which is the actual basis of the case, will not come to notice all along.
Do you see any fairness of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, in this process of justice?
Twisting Matter for Punishment
The Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, sometimes justifies punishment by claiming that giving three divorces at once is against the Qur’an—just like Indian Supreme Court did.
To begin with, they have never produced any Quranic injunction that is against this mode of divorcing. This claim is just the word of their mouth.
Secondly, suppose a man pronounces ONE divorce, then he neither revokes it within the due term nor does he remarry the same woman after this term. In this case the problem of the woman and children would be exactly the same as in the case of an instant TRIPLE divorce. Therefore, punishing a man only in the case of an instant triple divorce is nothing but a double standard.
Thirdly, Prophet (peace be upon him) never punished anyone for giving three divorces at one occasion. So, did the prophet violate the Islamic rule, or, is the Council of Islamic Ideology (Pakistan) violating it today?
The Council is Covering Women’s Faults
The Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, is all the time blaming men as if women are just innocent in cases of instant triple divorces.
The fact of the matter is that, in most cases, it is their angering behavior that leads to it. These women keep defying silently, or by being argumentative, or by taunting and aggravating, or by showing a power struggle—instead of trying to resolve the conflict or adjust accordingly.
They sideline the rule of the Qur’an that man and wife are not equal but the former is in charge of the family. And angering the head of any institution every now and then is very disturbing. From this perspective, a good many women are themselves responsible for getting triple divorces and the suffering—if the suffering scenario is right.
Suffering on Children is Entirely Invented
The Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, is also making an outcry that instant triple divorces cause immense suffering to the children; this charge is without any base too. The entire body of the Qur’an and Hadith does not mention suffering of the children due to divorce. Look at the aforementioned verses 65.2-7:
فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ … أَوْ فَارِقُوهُنَّ … وَمَن يَتَّقِ اللَّـهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مَخْرَجًا ﴿٢﴾ وَيَرْزُقْهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَحْتَسِبُ … سَيَجْعَلُ اللَّـهُ بَعْدَ عُسْرٍ يُسْرًا
Translation: “Thereafter, when women reach their term, either keep them … or separate them … and whoever fears God, He will make for him a way out. And He will provide him sustenance from where he thinks not … God will soon bring about ease after financial distress.”
It should be noted above that the verse is allowing to separate the divorced women, not the children. Therefore, there is no question of neglecting children at home by their fathers.
For the sake of argument, if it is accepted that the children go along with their mothers, God is assuring these women to get out of financial distress. When mothers are not in financial difficulty, how are children going to be impacted?
Similarly, look at the other verse 4.130:
وَإِن يَتَفَرَّقَا يُغْنِ اللَّـهُ كُلًّا مِّن سَعَتِهِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ وَاسِعًا حَكِيمًا
Translation: “And if both of them separate [by divorce], God will make each of them financially independent from His immensity. And God is All-Embracing, Wise.”
The context of divorce in the above verse is the discomfort of a wife as her husband has taken another wife, and she does not want to live as a co-wife. It means the verse is covering the cases of couples having children. Even then, the Qur’an is not mentioning any suffering of children due to divorce between their parents. Is it acceptable that God concealed the suffering of these children?
In addition, if her children are going to suffer immensely after divorce, why is the woman heading to divorce?
Her opting for divorce, instead of staying as a co-wife, does show that divorce does not cause suffering to the children.
Furthermore: Where is the right of children in the Qur’an and Hadith, which entails that parents must endure an unbearable marriage so that they can be reared under the same roof by both of their biological parents? If no where, how does a divorce violate children’s right? Did God and the Prophet commit mistake in realizing it?
On top of it, according to the stance of the Council scholars, children’s right is violated only if a marriage is permanently terminated by a triple divorce, and it is not violated if a marriage is permanently terminated by a single divorce. Does it make any sense?
The truth of the matter is that the alluded suffering to these children is due to breaking the Qur’anic law of child custody. This violation of Qur’anic law is done by women, women’s relatives, Muftis, and judges. It will be discussed later on.
Council’s Penal Recommendation is even Deficient
The council claims that instantaneous triple divorces cause immense suffering to the women and children. And on this alleged ground, they are urging legislation to punish these men. But, they have not formulated as yet any punishment per child. That is: If a man has no child, the other man has one child, and the third man has four children; will they all be given the same punishment? Or, how is justice going to be appropriated?
Moreover, if this is a real problem, there has to be either its solution or punishment for these fathers in the Qur’an and the Sunnah—which the council has failed to produce so far.
These inconsistencies clearly show that the council is just voicing laymen’s rhetoric.
In Relation to Human Rights
If a man has reached the point of discomfort where he does not want to live with his woman today and in future as well, is it not illogical to FORCE the man to leave the door open for her in the near future?
Other than being senseless, it is also against the HUMAN RIGHTS. And to deny this is to blame God that He has given men no right to get rid of the unrest with their wives, rather compelled them to serve the interest of their wives at any cost.
It is very ironic that the sense of human rights has not developed among Muslims in general, including the scholars of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan. And it is very troubling that these scholars keep posing as perfect in Islamic knowledge and comprehension.
These people must understand that God is very truthful; when He has given the RIGHT to divorce, He has given the right to divorce of any kind, revocable or irrevocable.
Quranic Command to Resolve Conflicts
The Qur’an commands that any conflict be resolved by returning it to God and the Messenger in some bipartisan way.
إِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّـهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّـهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ
Verse 4.59: “If you people dispute in anything, [you all] return it to God and the Prophet if you really believe in God and the other day (the incoming Day of Judgment).”
In a digital age, this guided MECHANISM is easy to implement for a vast number of people. The council can open its website, detail its understanding of the related verses and Hadith on a topic, then invite criticisms from the nation.
But it looks like the scholars of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Pakistan, consider it insulting for themselves. How can OBEYING a commandment of God be insulting?
Also, if they are confident that they are very GOOD scholars, their work will stand counter arguments. So what are they afraid of?
There is no denying that God and Prophet have nowhere allowed any group of scholars to impose their OWN BRAND of Islam on people, rather Islam is the name of the Qur’an and the Sunnah.
It is very strange that an instant triple divorce has turned out to be cruel and violative today, but it remained not so for the last 14 centuries.
To be continued.
**************
All of our writings are open to criticisms.
Please post them to our forum
for open discussion and resolution.
**************
***************