Articles

The Phenomenon of Divorce (Talaq)
Author : Ali Al-Fakhir
Date Added : 15-04-2024

 

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

When issuing religious rulings to people regarding divorce, the mufti notices a prevailing culture in our societies manifested in people's urgent question after uttering the word divorce: Is this a valid divorce?

 

The question posed by the person uttering divorce is solely focused on protecting himself from the financial and social consequences of this word. They do not take the Sharia dimension of their actions into consideration; they do not ask themselves: "In the sight of Allah, am I committing a sin?!" How will I answer to the Almighty when I stand before Him on the Day of Reckoning?!

 

Yes, a cultural mindset that says: "I have uttered the divorce word... I need a fatwa (religious edict)... and perhaps it will resolve the matter!" without considering any other aspect. This is to the extent that some people believe that the fatwa is what allows them to continue their marriage or end it!

 

It is not uncommon to find someone who, despite being fully aware and conscious of issuing a clear divorce, reacts with indifference when informed by the mufti that the divorce took place. They might even say, with a calm demeanor: "Consider it not as such, O Sheikh!" Meaning, don`t count it as an instance of divorce.

 

Seriously and alarmingly, this culture indicates that the family is being threatened. This is because the success and protection of the family is fundamentally tied to the mature understanding of the sanctity and importance of the institution of marriage.

 

Perhaps this boldness in uttering divorce for trivial reasons is also linked to the lack of conscience, among Muslim individuals, regarding the fear of Allah. We know that marriage is one of the most serious contracts in our noble religion, and Islam has been keen on safeguarding and building it on solid foundation.

 

Setting material considerations aside, marriage is a contract that binds souls first. It unifies families, expands the circle of relationships and compassion. It also establishes the meanings of peace, love, and mercy. Through marriage, man achieves succession on earth by continuing the human race and multiplying to fulfill the duty of cultivating the earth that Allah has entrusted him with.

 Indeed, the marriage contract is not a business transaction; rather, it is a contract whose fruits are souls, and whose reward, for those who fulfill its requirements, is Paradise.

 

For all of the aforementioned, the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) called the marriage contract "the word of Allah" and "the trust of Allah." In a hadith narrated by Jabir ibn Abdullah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said during his farewell pilgrimage: "Fear Allah regarding women, for you have taken them as a trust from Allah, and intimacy with them has been made lawful by the word of Allah." [Abu Dawood].

 

Understanding the profound meaning and the spiritual aspect of the philosophy of the marriage contract, especially when combined with the fear of Allah, can, Insha`Allah, serve as a powerful deterrent for individuals against hasty utterances of divorce, using expressions forbidding wife to her husband, and engaging in common practices related to divorce oaths that have become prevalent.

 

The person who frequently uses phrases like "I swear by divorce" or "I swear by the forbidden" and others does not appreciate the meaning of "the word of Allah" and does not preserve "the trust of Allah." In other words, it is as if he is mocking this word and this trust. So, what will he answer his Lord when he stands before Him on the Day of Reckoning?!

 

This is what a Muslim should consider when uttering divorce words, rather than focusing on whether they count as a divorce or not.

 

We are indeed facing a serious problem where divorce words are used extensively without considering their significance, turning it into a common occurrence rather than a last resort. This requires us to pause and earnestly search for solutions.

 

Divorce, as a last resort, means that there should be steps and attempts to reconcile marital life, starting with sincere, open, and conscious dialogue about areas of disagreement, followed by advising the wrongdoer. All of this is based on the methods of reconciliation outlined in the Quran where Allah, The Most Exalted, Says (what means): "As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For God is Most High, great (above you all)." [An-Nisaa`/34].

 

After this, neutral and sincere parties intervene with the intention of making reconciliation between the spouses, as indicated in the Quran verse, it states (What means): "And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Acquainted." [An-Nisa/35].

 

All of these steps are accompanied by awareness from both spouses of each other's needs and the psychological and material circumstances they may be experiencing. There is an understanding that achieving harmony between them takes time because it is not reasonable to expect harmony between two individuals who have lived in different environments: different living standards, behaviors, personalities, priorities, and even in the details of everyday life. They may even differ in the taste of food or the amount of salt they prefer, among other things.

 

Accompanied by awareness of these facts, time is indeed sufficient to fix marital life and achieve harmony. Over the years, couples can reach an advanced stage of harmony, even to the point of near-complete resemblance as far as behaviors and feelings are concerned.

 

If we examine divorce cases, we find that very few of them go through these steps or follow this process. In our time, divorce has become a quick emotional word that spreads rapidly amongst men.

 

The above constitutes a description of a problem that requires a solution, starting with serious efforts to repair people's conscience and sense of morality. The driving force behind human behavior and actions, as well as the words and positions they express, is their internal content or, in other words, their faith-filled conscience. Those whose conscience is filled with faith in all its aspects tend to have disciplined behavior. Conversely, as faith diminishes within, behavior becomes erratic. Therefore, every issue in life is somehow connected to faith, especially the matter we are discussing here: divorce and the words of divorce used by people. What we often find in reality, with this enormous number of divorce cases, is closely connected to a lack of religious conviction and a diminishing sense of God-consciousness among people.

 

How can we repair people's conscience and increase their sense of fearing Allah?!

This is not just a question I claim to have the answer to; rather, it is a general concern that requires a comprehensive project where the efforts of multiple institutions come together. And Allah The Almighty Knows Best.

 

The published article reflects the opinion of its author

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

I bought an apartment, and I am saving money to pay the remaining balance of its price — is zakāh obligatory on this money?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh is obligatory on all saved/hoarded wealth. Once the total wealth reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah— equivalent to the value of 85 grams of pure 24-karat gold) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it, zakāh becomes obligatory at a rate of (2.5%) — even if the wealth is earmarked for basic future needs, and even if the wealth's owner is in debt. Debt does not prevent the obligation of zakāh, nor is it deducted when calculating the zakāh due, based on the general and unrestricted wording of all the Qur'anic verses commanding zakāh, which draw no distinction between someone in debt and anyone else.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone possesses exactly the niṣāb, and owes an equivalent amount in debt, zakāh remains obligatory on what is in his possession, and the debt does not prevent this obligation" — meaning, the obligation of zakāh on what is presently in his possession.
The ḥawl (annual cycle) recognized for zakāh, as well as for the other sharī‘ah obligations that Allah, the Exalted, has imposed upon Muslims, is the Hijrī (lunar) year. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.

A man led the people in prayer as imam, and at the end of the prayer he performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because he had omitted a short *sūrah* after al-Fātiḥah. What is the ruling on his prayer and that of those praying behind him?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to the Shāfiʿī school, it is sunnah to recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah in the prayer. One who omits it has a valid prayer, and no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is prescribed for omitting it. If someone performs sujūd al-sahw for its omission while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. But one who is ignorant of the ruling, or who did so out of forgetfulness, his prayer is not invalidated, because this is among the matters that are obscure to people, and ignorance of it is not restricted to those who recently entered Islam.
Shaykh al-Islām al-Shams al-Ramlī said in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol.2/p.70): “The remaining sunnahs are not compensated for by prostration, such as the remembrances (adhkār) of bowing and prostration, that is, the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-iftitāḥ) and the sūrah, in accordance with the base rule, because they are not of the same nature as what has been reported [as compensable]. If one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to ignorance. As for the objection raised that the ignorant person does not know that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed, and whoever knows it knows its place, this is refuted by denying such a necessary connection, for the ignorant person may hear only that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed before the salām, and so assume that it applies to every sunnah and is not restricted to its prescribed place.”
This is among the matters that are obscure, in which the mukallaf is excused for ignorance, as stated by al-Shabrāmallisī in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.70).
However, if the imam prostrates, and the follower (maʾmūm) presumes that his imam’s prostration is for a reason for which one does not prostrate, it is not permissible to follow him in it, so long as the follower knows the ruling.
Accordingly, the prayer of one who did not recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah is valid, and sujūd al-sahw is not prescribed for it. Whoever prostrates out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his prayer is valid, because this is among the issues hidden from the general public. But whoever prostrates while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.