Instant Triple Talaq Is Un-Islamic
As an Islamic scholar, i would say that the Supreme Court's judgment delivered on August 22 striking down instant triple talaq as eking unconstitutional-is totally right. "riple tale is not a principle of Islam, ut is rather a ruling of certain Muslim rests, adopted in the later period of slam. In this matter, Muslim jurists need to correct themselves instead of ronglyjustifyingtriple tale. In Islam, tale is seen as an undesirable practice. But in rare cases, couple may feel that their marriage is ot working, and inthis situation, divorce is allowed. However, there is a prescribed method laid down by the uran (2:229). That is, a divorce is nailed over a period of three months. 1 the first month, the husband tells his ife that he has given her one tale. oath then wait for a month during which they could reconcile. After the first month, he may either take back the tale or pronounce it a second time. Both wait for another month, at the end of which, if he pronounces a third tale, the divorce becomes final. This pattern was adhered to during the time of the Prophet and the first caliph Abu Bakr. There were rare cases, when a man would come to the Prophet or Abu Bakr, saying that he had divorced his wife by saying tale three times in one go. Then the Prophet and Abu Bakr would consider this an instance of tale being said in anger and so would not finalise the divorce. Rather, they said his uttering 'tales' three times in one instance would be regarded as only one pronouncement of tales During the time of the second caliph Umar, the number of people who began to pronounce tales in one sitting increased. Umar, in a few cases, ruled the saying of tales three times in one go as final and annulled the marriage. But he would also flog such men as deterrent punishment. This helped in curbing instances of saying tales at one go. Certainly, Umar's practice was not a Sharia law. His step was rather an example of hukm al-hakim, or an executive order. His annulment of marriage in cases where men said tales three times in one go was an exercise of the discretionary power of a ruler. Such executive orders are applicable to particular cases and do not have the status of Sharia law. In the British period, men again began to divorce their wives in one sitting. Now Muslim jurists belonging to the Hanafi school of law revived Umar’s order and made instant tripletalaq valid. The Hanafi jurists cited Umar's precedent, but this reference was unwarranted, because Umar haddone so by way of an executive order while, in the later period, Hanafi jurisdid so by issuing a fatwa. Moreover, Umar would also flog men as deterrenpunishment, while Hanafi jurist’s wernot in a position to flog anyone. In such a scenario, my advice to Hanafi Muslims is to take the SupremCourt's verdict as areminder and revietheir practice. They should consider triple talaq in one go as a case of a decision having been taken in anger atake it as only one talaq-as had been done during the time of the Prophet.
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy: Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and Speaking Tree,Times of India
Instant Triple Talaq Is Un-Islamic
As an Islamic scholar, i would say that the Supreme Court's judgment delivered on August 22 striking down instant triple talaq as eking unconstitutional-is totally right. "riple tale is not a principle of Islam, ut is rather a ruling of certain Muslim rests, adopted in the later period of slam. In this matter, Muslim jurists need to correct themselves instead of ronglyjustifyingtriple tale. In Islam, tale is seen as an undesirable practice. But in rare cases, couple may feel that their marriage is ot working, and inthis situation, divorce is allowed. However, there is a prescribed method laid down by the uran (2:229). That is, a divorce is nailed over a period of three months. 1 the first month, the husband tells his ife that he has given her one tale. oath then wait for a month during which they could reconcile. After the first month, he may either take back the tale or pronounce it a second time. Both wait for another month, at the end of which, if he pronounces a third tale, the divorce becomes final. This pattern was adhered to during the time of the Prophet and the first caliph Abu Bakr. There were rare cases, when a man would come to the Prophet or Abu Bakr, saying that he had divorced his wife by saying tale three times in one go. Then the Prophet and Abu Bakr would consider this an instance of tale being said in anger and so would not finalise the divorce. Rather, they said his uttering 'tales' three times in one instance would be regarded as only one pronouncement of tales During the time of the second caliph Umar, the number of people who began to pronounce tales in one sitting increased. Umar, in a few cases, ruled the saying of tales three times in one go as final and annulled the marriage. But he would also flog such men as deterrent punishment. This helped in curbing instances of saying tales at one go. Certainly, Umar's practice was not a Sharia law. His step was rather an example of hukm al-hakim, or an executive order. His annulment of marriage in cases where men said tales three times in one go was an exercise of the discretionary power of a ruler. Such executive orders are applicable to particular cases and do not have the status of Sharia law. In the British period, men again began to divorce their wives in one sitting. Now Muslim jurists belonging to the Hanafi school of law revived Umar’s order and made instant tripletalaq valid. The Hanafi jurists cited Umar's precedent, but this reference was unwarranted, because Umar haddone so by way of an executive order while, in the later period, Hanafi jurisdid so by issuing a fatwa. Moreover, Umar would also flog men as deterrenpunishment, while Hanafi jurist’s wernot in a position to flog anyone. In such a scenario, my advice to Hanafi Muslims is to take the SupremCourt's verdict as areminder and revietheir practice. They should consider triple talaq in one go as a case of a decision having been taken in anger atake it as only one talaq-as had been done during the time of the Prophet.
DISCLAIMER:
The views expressed in the Article above are Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it.
Courtesy: Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and Speaking Tree,Times of India