I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, what if I had divorced her three times; would it have been permissible for me to take her back?' He replied: 'No, she would have become irrevocably separated from you, and it would have been an act of disobedience.' Nafi' said: 'Abd Allah had divorced her with one pronouncement, so it was counted as one of his divorces, and he took her back as the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) commanded him' (14). And from the narration of Yunus ibn Jubayr from Ibn Umar, he said: I said to Ibn Umar: 'Is it counted against him, or is it reckoned against him?' He said: 'Yes, what do you think if he acts helplessly and foolishly?' (15). These are all authentic hadiths. Furthermore, it is a divorce from one legally accountable (mukallaf) regarding a valid subject of divorce, so it takes effect, like the divorce of a pregnant woman. It is not an act of worship (qurba), such that one must consider compliance with the Sunnah for it to take effect; rather, it is the removal of a marriage bond and the termination of a possessory right. Therefore, its occurrence during a time of bid'ah (innovation) is even more fitting, as a severity upon him and a punishment for him. As for someone other than the husband, they do not possess the right to divorce, and the husband possesses it by virtue of his ownership of the subject matter.
Section: It is recommended that he takes her back due to the Prophet's (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) command to take her back; the minimum implication of a command is recommendation, and because by reconciliation (raj'ah), he removes the element that rendered the divorce prohibited. This is not obligatory according to the manifest view (zahir) of the school, which is the opinion of Al-Thawri, Al-Awza'i, Al-Shafi'i, Ibn Abi Layla, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). Ibn Abi Musa narrated another position from Ahmad, that reconciliation is obligatory, and he chose it. This is the opinion of Malik and Dawud, based on the literal sense of the command implying obligation, and because reconciliation serves to maintain...
= It is also recorded by Al-Bayhaqi in: Chapter on what has come regarding the execution of triple divorce even if they were combined, from the Book of Khul' and Divorce. Al-Sunan al-Kubra 7/334. And Imam Ahmad in: Al-Musnad 2/6. (14) We did not find this wording from Nafi', but it was recorded by Muslim from Salim in: Chapter on the prohibition of divorcing a menstruating woman without her consent... from the Book of Divorce. Sahih Muslim 2/1095. And by Al-Bayhaqi from Salim as well in: Chapter on what has come regarding Sunnah divorce and Bid'ah divorce, from the Book of Khul' and Divorce. Al-Sunan al-Kubra 7/324. (15) In the original [manuscript], B, and M: "wa-istahmaqa" (and he acted foolishly). It is a rhetorical question of disapproval, and its interpretation is: Yes, it is reckoned; its being reckoned is not prevented by his helplessness and foolishness. It was recorded by Al-Bukhari in: Chapter on if a menstruating woman is divorced, he reckons that divorce, from the Book of Divorce. Sahih al-Bukhari 7/52, 53. And by Muslim in: Chapter on the prohibition of divorcing a menstruating woman without her consent, from the Book of Divorce. Sahih Muslim 2/1096, 1097. It was also recorded by Abu Dawud in: Chapter on Sunnah divorce, from the Book of Divorce. Sunan Abi Dawud 1/504. And by Al-Tirmidhi in: Chapter on what has come regarding Sunnah divorce, from the Book of Divorce. 'Aridat al-Ahwadhi 5/123, 124. And by Ibn Majah in: Chapter on Sunnah divorce, from the Book of Divorce. Sunan Ibn Majah 1/651. (16) In B and M: "hiya" (she/it).
فقلتُ: يا رسولَ اللَّهِ، أفرأيتَ لو أنِّى طلَّقْتُها ثلاثًا، أكانَ يَحِلُّ لى أن أُراجعَها؟ قال: "لَا، كَانَتْ تَبِينُ مِنْكَ، وَتَكُونُ مَعْصِيَةً". وقال نافعٌ: وكان عبدُ اللَّه طلَّقَها تطليقةً، فحُسِبَتْ من طَلاقِه، وراجعَها كما أمرَه رسولُ اللَّهِ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- (١٤). ومن روايةِ يُونُسَ بنِ جُبَيْرٍ، عن ابنِ عمرَ، قال: قلتُ لابنِ عمرَ: أفتُعْتَدُّ عليه، أو تُحتسَبُ عليه؟ قال: نعم، أرأيتَ إن عَجَزَ واسْتَحْمَقَ (١٥)! كلها أحاديثُ صحاحٌ. ولأنَّه طلاقٌ مِن مُكَلَّفٍ فى مَحَلِّ الطَّلاقِ، فوقَعَ، كطلاقِ الحاملِ، ولأنَّه ليس بِقُرْبَةٍ، فيُعتَبَرُ لوقوعِه مُوافقةُ السُّنَّةِ، بل هو (١٦) إزالةُ عِصْمَةٍ، وقَطْعُ مِلْكٍ، فإيقاعُه فى زمنِ البدْعةِ أوْلَى، تغْليظًا عليه، وعُقوبةً له، أمَّا غيرُ الزَّوجِ، فلا يَمْلِكُ الطَّلاقَ، والزَّوجُ يَمْلِكُه بمِلْكِه مَحَلَّه.
فصل: ويُسْتحَبُّ أن يُراجعَها، لأمرِ النَّبِىِّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- بمُراجعتِها، وأقلُّ أحوالِ الأمرِ الاسْتِحْبابُ، ولأنَّه بالرَّجْعَةِ يُزيلُ المعنى الذى حَرَّمَ الطَّلاقَ. ولا يَجبُ ذلك فى ظاهرِ المذهبِ. وهو قولُ الثَّورِى، والأوْزَاعِىِّ، والشَّافعىِّ، وابنِ أبى لَيْلَى، وأصْحابِ الرَّأْىِ. وحَكَى ابنُ أبى موسى، عن أحمدَ، روايةً أُخْرَى، أَنَّ الرَّجْعةَ تَجبُ. واختارَها. وهو قولُ مالكٍ، وداودَ؛ لظاهرِ الأمرِ فى الوجوبِ، ولأنَّ الرَّجْعةَ تَجرى مَجْرَى اسْتِبْقاءِ
= كما أخرجه البيهقى، فى: باب ما جاء فى إمضاء الطلاق الثلاث وإن كن مجموعات، من كتاب الخلع والطلاق. السنن الكبرى ٧/ ٣٣٤. والإمام أحمد، فى: المسند ٢/ ٦.(١٤) لم نجد هذا اللفظ عن نافع، وإنما أخرجه مسلم عن سالم، فى: باب تحريم طلاق الحائض بغير رضاها. . .، من كتاب الطلاق. صحيح مسلم ٢/ ١٠٩٥. والبيهقى، عن سالم أيضًا، فى: باب ما جاء فى طلاق السنة وطلاق البدعة، من كتاب الخلع والطلاق. السنن الكبرى ٧/ ٣٢٤.(١٥) فى الأصل، ب، م: "واستحق". وهو استفهام إنكار، وتقديره: نعم تحتسب، ولا يمتنع احتسابها لعجزه وحماقته. وأخرجه البخارى، فى: باب إذا طلقت الحائض تعتد بذلك الطلاق، من كتاب الطلاق. صحيح البخارى ٧/ ٥٢، ٥٣. ومسلم، فى: باب تحريم طلاق الحائض بغير رضاها، من كتاب الطلاق. صحيح مسلم ٢/ ١٠٩٦، ١٠٩٧.كما أخرجه أبو داود، فى: باب فى طلاق السنة، من كتاب الطلاق. سنن أبى داود ١/ ٥٠٤. والترمذى، فى: باب ما جاء فى طلاق السنة، من كتاب الطلاق. عارضة الأحوذى ٥/ ١٢٣، ١٢٤. وابن ماجه، فى: باب طلاق السنة، من كتاب الطلاق. سنن ابن ماجه ١/ ٦٥١.(١٦) فى ب، م: "هى".
