It is narrated from Ibne Abbas that:
“Pronouncing three divorces in one sitting was counted as one divorce
during the lifetime of Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), during the reign of Abu Bakr
and initial years of Umar’s reign. But Umar said: Verily people have begun to
hasten in a matter, in which they are required to observe respite. So we imposed
this upon them, and he imposed it upon them.”1
Allamah Amini says: Indeed, it is amazing that haste of people should be
an impetus to disregard Book of God and to act according to wish of people. It is
the Holy Quran, which clearly says:
الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّتَنِ فَإِمْسَاكَ مَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحُ بِإِحْسَانٍ
“Divorce may be (pronounced) twice, then keep (them) in good fellowship or let (them) go with kindness.”2
Till it says:
فَإِنْ طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا تَحِلُّ لَهُ مِنْ بَعْدُ حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ
“So if he divorces her she shall not be lawful to him afterwards until she marries another husband.”3
In this verse, Almighty Allah considers pronouncing two divorces necessary
and deemed unlawfulness after third divorce. This cannot be combined by
reconciling the divorces with the term ‘thrice’ (that the man should say: I divorce
you thrice) or recitation of the formula of divorce one after another and without
any gap of marriage contract.
As for the first case: Since one divorce is not more and by getting the term
of ‘three times’ in the formula of divorce; three divorces are not achieved. It is
similar to the case of Prayer, in which it is obligatory to recite Surah Fatiha once
in every unit, now if someone recites it once and after that adds the condition of
‘five times’ or ‘ten times’; it cannot be said that he repeated the recitation and
that he recited the Surah five or ten times.
Every command, in which repetition and number is the condition, is the
same. Like the stoning of satans during Hajj, in which it is necessary to cast seven pebbles and throwing a number of pebbles once won’t be sufficient. Or
four testimonies during cursing, in which one testimony is given and then adding
the condition of ‘four’ is not sufficient. On the contrary, the cursing should be
repeated four times.
Also, in case of Adhan, each part is supposed to be recited twice or four
times: and reciting Allahu Akbar once and saying ‘four’ will not suffice and it
will not be counted as four. Also, like recitation of Allahu Akbar five times in the
Eid Prayer according to us and seven times according to Ahle Sunnat before
Qiraat.4 To say once and then add ‘five times’ or ‘seven times’ is not saying it
five times or seven times.
In case of Tasbih Prayer5, in which glorifications are recited ten or fifty
times. Hence, to recite the glorification once and then say: ‘ten times’ or ‘fifty
times’ will not suffice; and it cannot be said that the worshipper has recited ten or
fifty times. There is no difference in what is mentioned.
As for the second one (recitation of divorce formula in one sitting): Divorce
is achieved by the first word and the formula of marriage is deployed and the
husband and wife are separated from each other. And the contract of marriage
does not remain in force that formula of divorce should be effective upon it.
Thus, recitation of formula of divorce the second and the third time would be
useless.
Because for the woman, who is divorced, it is meaningless for her to be
divorced twice and the tie, which is deployed, is not deployed the second time.
And the repetition which is the conditions here, will not be established in this
manner. On the contrary, when it is repeated after contract of marriage, even
though this contract of marriage took place by reconciling with a stranger male,
otherwise the later divorce will be void
Thus, according to Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.): There is no divorce,
except after marriage. And: There is no divorce before marriage. And: One, who
has no wife, cannot divorce6.7
Till the time there is no contract of marriage, the second divorce would be
meaningless.
Jassas says in Ahkamul Quran:8
The verse of divorce:
الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّتَنِ
“Divorce may be (pronounced) twice.”9
Divorce, in which reconciliation is possible, is two times: Firstly, it is
commanded that there should be a gap between two divorces. And secondly,
while pronouncing the command, reconciliation is in less than three divorces;
because He says:
الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّتَنِ
“Divorce may be (pronounced) twice.”10
And the requirement of:
الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّتَنِ
“Divorce may be (pronounced) twice.”11
…is that there should be a gap between two divorces; because if someone
recites the divorce formula twice without any gap, it is incorrect to say: Divorce
has occurred twice. Just as when two dirhams are given to a person, it is not said
that he is paid two times, except when he is paid twice.
This was the command of Quran and every command and its like other than
that is playing with Book of God. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) has clarified this in
a tradition narrated in Sunan Nasai through Mahmud bin Lubaid:
The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was informed that a person his divorced his wife
through three divorces in a single sitting. His Eminence (s.a.w.a.) was infuriated.
He stood up and said: “Are they playing with the Book of Allah in my presence?”
A person asked: “Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), would you execute this
man?”
Some Ahle Sunnat personalities have daringly and without fear discussed
this matter in detail and more amazing is the statement of Aini, who says in his Umdatul Qari:12
“The divine command mentioned in Quran is abrogated.”
Now, if it is asked: In spite of the fact that Umar cannot abrogate, what is the
reason of this abrogation? And how abrogation took place after the Prophet?
In reply, we say: As Umar mentioned it to companions and they did not
deny, consensus is achieved. And according to some scholars, abrogation of verse
of Quran is possible through consensus of companions; as it is said that
consensus is similar to definite traditional report and it brings certainty; thus
abrogation of Quranic verse is lawful by it.
If you say: This consensus is not valid, because they have themselves fabricated this consensus.
We would say: “There is possibility that they had access to a definite
traditional report abrogating this verse, which has not reached us.”
What reasoning?!
The report of this abrogation has not reached to any of the past scholars till
the arrival of Aini and he came and claimed what no one claimed before him!
He blindly followed a path and played with Book of Allah and does not
believe in any value of Allah’s Book and traditions of Messenger of Allah
(s.a.w.a.)!
If consensus abrogated the verse, then how Abu Hanifah, Malik, Awzai and Laith believe that combining three divorces is heretical?
How Shafei, Ahmad and Abu Thawr say: It is not unlawful, but it is better
not to combine them and keeping them separate is preferable?
How Sanadi says: The apparent connotation of tradition proves that
combining of divorces is unlawful.13
Also, the imagined possibility that perhaps there reliable consensus or
definite traditional report existed, which have not reached us, is just nonsense as
clear cut statements of caliph himself and other companions as well, clearly
falsify that.
In addition to that, the viewpoint of the caliph was his personal opinion and
a political stance.
How apt is the statement of Shaykh Salih Muhammad Umari Fulani (d. 1298
A.H.) in his Humam Ulul Absar:14
“It was well known among the companions, companions of companions and
righteous followers till Judgment Day and among all Muslim scholars that
whenever the judgment of religious judge is opposed to clear injunction of Quran
or statement of Prophet it is obligatory to oppose that order and to resist its
application. And with logical possibilities, selfish thoughts and satanic
prejudices, it is not possible to oppose Quran and traditions and to say: Perhaps
this jurist was having access to this text and with a proof, which was clear to him,
he has abandoned it, or he was aware of some other proof and statements like
this, which some foolish jurists have issued and which their stupid followers have
followed.”