one [remaining] divorce; because the two divorces occurred without being prohibitive, so their ruling is not considered by what happens after them, just as the two divorces of a slave, when they occurred as prohibitive, were not considered by emancipation after them.

Issue: He said: "And if he says to his wife: 'You are divorced by three halves of two divorces,' she is divorced by three."

Ahmad explicitly stated this in the narration of Muhanna. Abu Abd Allah ibn Hamid said: "Two divorces take place, because its meaning is three halves of two divorces, which is one and a half, then it is completed to become two." It was also said: "Rather, it is three," because the third half of two divorces is an impossibility. The followers of al-Shafi'i have two views similar to these. Our position is that half of two divorces is one divorce, and he has pronounced it as three, so it occurs as three, just as if he said: "You are divorced by three divorces." Their claim that its meaning is three halves of two divorces is an interpretation contradicted by the literal wording; for based on what they mentioned, it would be three halves of one divorce, and three halves of two divorces should be different from three halves of one divorce. Regarding their statement that it is an impossibility, we say: The occurrence of half of two divorces upon her three times is not an impossibility, so it must occur.

Section: If he says: "You are divorced by the fill of the world," and intends three, then three occur. If he does not intend anything, or intends one, then it is one. Ahmad said, regarding one who says to his wife: "You are divorced by the fill of the house": If he intends intensity against her—meaning he intends that she become irrevocably divorced (ba'in) from him—then it is three. He considered his intention, which proves that if he did not intend [that], one occurs; this is because the description does not necessitate a number. We know of no disagreement regarding this, except that if one occurs, it is revocable (raj'i). Al-Shafi'i held this view. Abu Hanifah and his companions said: It is irrevocable, because he described the divorce with an added attribute that necessitates an increase upon it, which is the irrevocableness.