cramped, and she is not accompanied by her unmarriageable relative (mahram), or she cannot stay in it except by intermixing with men, then it is obligatory for her to move from it (79) to another location.
1364 - Issue: He (Ibn Qudama) said: "And the woman divorced three times (al-mutallaqa thalathan) shall refrain from perfume, adornment, and kohl made of antimony."
There is a difference of opinion in the narration from Ahmad regarding the obligation of mourning (ihdad) for a woman who is irrevocably divorced (ba'in). According to one narration, it is obligatory upon her. This is the view of Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, Abu 'Ubayd, Abu Thawr, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). The second (narration) is that it is not obligatory upon her. This is the view of 'Ata', Rabi'ah, Malik, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Similar to this is the view of al-Shafi'i, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "It is not lawful for a woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day to mourn for a deceased person for more than three nights, except for a husband (for whom she mourns) four months and ten days" (1). This is the waiting period for death, which indicates that mourning is only obligatory during the waiting period for death. Furthermore, because she is a woman observing a waiting period for a cause other than death, mourning is not obligatory upon her, just as in the case of a revocably divorced woman (raj'iyyah) or a woman who has had intercourse due to a misconception (shubhah). Also, mourning in the waiting period for death is to manifest grief over the separation from her husband and his death. As for divorce, he separated from her by his own choice and severed their marriage; thus, there is no meaning in tasking her with mourning for him. Furthermore, if a widow were to give birth to a child, it would be attributed to the husband, and he has no one to negate its lineage; thus, precaution is taken regarding her through mourning, lest someone who is not from him be attributed to the deceased. This is unlike the divorced woman, for her husband remains, and he takes precautions regarding her himself, and he negates the lineage of her child if it is from someone else. The reasoning for the first narration is that she is a woman observing a waiting period (mu'taddah) who is irrevocably separated (ba'in) from a marriage, so mourning is binding upon her, just like one whose husband has died. This is because the waiting period prohibits marriage, so it prohibits (2) its inducements. The revocably divorced woman may be derived from this; for she is a wife, while the one who has had intercourse due to a misconception is not observing a waiting period from a marriage, so the prohibition is not complete. As for the Hadith, its meaning is only the prohibition of mourning for a deceased person other than the husband, and we say
(79) In B and M: "from it". (1) Its authentication (takhrij) was provided previously on page 193. (2) In the original: "fa-tuharrim" (so it prohibits).
ضَيِّقةً، وليس معها مَحْرَمُها، أو لا يُمْكِنُها الإِقامةُ فيها إلَّا بحيثُ تَخْتَلِطُ بالرِّجالِ، لَزِمَها الانْتِقالُ عنها (٧٩) إلى موضعٍ سِوَاها.
١٣٦٤ - مسألة؛ قال: (والْمُطَلَّقَةُ ثَلَاثًا، تَتَوَقَّى الطِّيبَ، والزِّينَةَ، والكُحْلَ بالْإِثْمِدِ)
اخْتَلفَتِ الرِّواية عن أحمدَ، في وُجُوبِ الإِحْدادِ على المُطلَّقةِ البائِنِ؛ فعنه، يجبُ عليها. وهو قولُ سعيد بن المُسَيَّبِ، وأبي عُبَيْدٍ، وأبي ثَوْرٍ، وأصْحابِ الرَّأْىِ. والثانية، لا يجبُ عليها. وهو قولُ عَطاءٍ، ورَبِيعةَ، ومالكٍ، وابنِ المُنْذِرِ. ونحوُه قولُ الشافعيِّ؛ لأنَّ النَّبِيَّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- قال: "لَا يَحِلُّ لِامْرأَةٍ تُؤْمِنُ بِاللهِ والْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ، أنْ تَحِدَّ عَلَى مَيِّتٍ فَوْقَ ثَلَاثِ لَيَالٍ، إلَّا عَلَى زَوْجٍ، أرْبَعَةَ أشْهُرٍ وعَشْرًا" (١). وهذه عِدَّةُ الوَفاةِ، فيَدُلُّ على أنَّ الإِحْدادَ إنَّما يَجِبُ في عِدَّةِ الوَفاةِ، ولأنَّها مُعْتَدَّةٌ عن غيرِ وَفاةٍ، فلم يَجِبْ عليها الإِحْدادُ، كالرَّجْعِيّةِ، والمَوْطُوءةِ بشُبْهةٍ، ولأنَّ الإِحْدادَ في عِدَّةِ الوفاةِ لإِظْهارِ الأسَفِ على فِرَاقِ زَوْجِها ومَوْتِه، فأمَّا الطَّلاقُ فإنَّه فارَقَها باخْتيارِ نَفْسِه، وقَطَعَ نِكاحَها، فلا معنى لتَكْلِيفها الحُزْنَ عليه، ولأنَّ المُتَوَفَّى عنها لو أتَتْ بوَلَدٍ، لَحِقَ الزَّوجَ، وليس له مَنْ يَنْفِيه، فاحْتِيطَ عليها بالإِحْدادِ، لئلَّا يَلْحَقَ بالميِّتِ مَنْ ليس منه، بخلافِ المُطَلَّقةِ، فإنَّ زَوْجَها باقٍ، فهو يحْتاطُ عليها بنَفْسِه، ويَنْفِى وَلَدَها إذا كان من غيرِه. ووَجْهُ الرِّوايةِ الأُولَى، أنَّها مُعْتَدَّةٌ بائنٌ من نكاحٍ، فلَزِمَها الإِحْدادُ، كالمُتَوَفَّى عنها زَوْجُها؛ وذلك لأنَّ العِدَّةَ تُحَرِّمُ النِّكاحَ، فحَرَّمَتْ (٢) دَوَاعِيَه. ويُخَرَّجُ على هذا الرجْعِيَّةُ، فإنَّها زَوْجَةٌ، والمَوْطوءةُ بشُبْهةٍ ليست مُعتّدةً من نِكاحٍ، فلم تَكْمُلِ الحُرْمَةُ. فأمَّا الحديثُ، فإنَّما مَدْلُولُه تحريمُ الإِحْدادِ على مَيِّتٍ غيرِ الزَّوجِ، ونحنُ نَقُولُ
(٧٩) في ب، م: "منها".(١) تقدم تخريجه في صفحة ١٩٣.(٢) في الأصل: "فتحرم".