Q. May I ask about the case of a man who, on three different occasions, told his wife that he divorced her. Each time this took place during a heated argument. On the last occasion, the wife tried to stop him reminding him of the previous occasions, but he went ahead and said that he is divorcing his wife three times. Later on, the husband claimed that he did not divorce his wife and that he remembered nothing of what he said. Anyway, he did not intend to divorce her, and therefore, she is not divorced. Also, the way he used the word of divorce on the earlier two occasions is rather vague. He also claims that on neither occasions he had the intention of divorcing his wife. Could you please comment on the status of their marriage.
(Name and address withheld)
A. I have several points to make, but I should point out at the outset that what we are dealing with here is indeed serious.
Divorce is a very serious matter for which Islam has defined a long process which takes anything from two to nine months, depending on the circumstances of the couple concerned. However, people have reduced this process to a word they utter at a moment of distress or anger. This is really very serious, and its consequences could be far reaching.
The man seems to be ready with his words of divorce, but his memory seems suspect. He must be told very clearly and frankly that he cannot overcome the problem by pretending to forget it. This is not something that one forgets easily or conveniently. It is a question of whether his wife is lawful or unlawful to him. If the wife is fully aware that he had divorced her on these three occasions, then he has done so. Being keen to preserve her marriage means that she would not say that he divorced her when he had not. Had she been in doubt and he says that he cannot remember, then we would rule that he had not. But when she is pretty certain that the divorce took place, then it had done so.
Both marriage and divorce are done verbally in Islam. Therefore, the words that a person says in these cases are of utmost importance. When a husband says ‘I will give you divorce’ or even ‘I am giving you a divorce’ then he is expressing an intention which he will be carrying out later, whether ‘later’ means in a minute’s time, or in a few weeks or months, is immaterial. Such declaration of intent is no divorce. But if the words he said mean, in the couple’s own language, that he is actually divorcing her there and then, that is a divorce. To illustrate, people in Pakistan say ‘Talaq’ and they mean ‘I divorce you.’ This is a divorce. But if an Arab says ‘Talaq’, this is not a divorce, because no Arabic speaking person divorces in this way. If an Arab wishes to divorce he says to his wife, ‘I divorce you’, or ‘You are divorced.’ The word used in Pakistan simply means ‘divorce’ and it signifies the process itself. Hence, it takes effect. I hope this is clear.
Your friends need to have a heart search. What did actually happen on the first two occasions? They have to answer this question as if it is put to them by God, not by a friend or a journalist. He cannot say that he does not remember, if he has even a vague idea of the event. She cannot say that she is unsure of the exact wording if she knows what it was. Each of the two occasions should be looked at separately and determined on its own merits.
The third incident is different. The wording you have stated means a full divorce, but the fact that it was done three times has no effect. It remains a single divorce. The problem here is the husband’s claim that he did not say it. If he truly does not remember saying any words that mean divorcing his wife, then we say that in his outrage, he did not know what he was saying and in this case, the divorce did not take place. Again, he has to answer the question of whether it is true or not as a question by God. He should imagine himself standing before God on the Day of Judgment and the Almighty is putting the question to Him. How will he answer? Will he say: Yes, I said but I did not mean it? If so, then he will have to say the same thing to his wife now. In this case, he also needs to answer the question: if he did not mean to divorce her, what did he mean by saying what he said?
My feeling is that the divorce in this third case has taken place, unless the man, at the moment when his wife asked whether he was aware of what he was saying, was in a state of blind rage that meant that he was unaware of the words he uttered. But, as I said, it is a single divorce.
What should happen now is that the couple should have a heart-to-heart talk about what happened on each of the three occasions. They are the ones who know whether they can stay together or they have been permanently divorced. This is not a small matter. It is very serious. It is the difference between a halal, i.e. lawful, or a haram, i.e. unlawaful, relationship. If they determine that on each of the three occasions a divorce had taken place, then they cannot continue their married life at all. They cannot resort to what is known in Pakistan as Halalah, because this is haram. They have to accept that the deed was done and conduct their lives accordingly. But if they determine that on any of the three occasions the divorce did not take place, they can continue their married life if they wish. However, the man should remove the word ‘divorce’ from his lexicon if he does not want to lose his wife permanently.
