Indexed OCR Text

Answer
This is an ambiguous statement. If he made it with the intention of
divorce then one talaq-e-ba'in takes place. If he had no intention, then
no divorce takes place. Nonetheless, he should desist from making
such utterances.
فتاوى الشامى:
إن نوى بأنت علي مثل أي أو أي أو كأي، وكذا لو حذف "علي" خانية، براً أو
ظهاراً أو طلاقاً صحت نيته ووقع ما نواه لأنه كناية. وفى الشامية: قوله لأنه
كناية، أى من كنايات الظهار والطلاق، قال فى البحر: وإذا نوى به الطلاق
كان بائناً كلفظ الحرام. (فتاوى الشامى: ٤٧٠/٣، باب الظهار، سعيد. وكذا فى
البحر الرائق: ٩٨/٤، كوئته)
الدر المختار
ويكره قوله أنت أمي ويا ابنتي ويا اختي. وفى الشامية: والذي فى الفتح: وفي
"أنت أمي" . وينبغي أن يكون مكروباً فقد صرحوا بأن قوله لزوجته يا أخية
مكروه. وفيه حديث رواه أبو داود ... الخ. (الدر المختار مع الشامى: ٤٧٠/٣، باب
الظهار، سعيد)
Further reading: Fath al-Qadir, vol. 4, p. 252; Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol.
13, p. 322; Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband, vol. 9, p. 384; Kifāyatul Muftī, vol.
6, p. 440.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
"You must tell everyone that I divorced you."
Question:
A woman said to her husband: "Give me a divorce. There is disgrace in
this marriage." In reply to this request, he took a piece of paper and
wrote: "Your disgrace will be removed. You must tell everyone that I
divorced you." It seems that he did not want to issue a divorce. Has
divorce taken place?
139

Answer:
If he really did not issue a divorce and only said to his wife: "You must
tell everyone that I divorced you", then divorce did not take place on
the basis of religious integrity. Yes, it has taken place judicially.
However, if he had brought a witness from before hand, then divorce
will not take place even judicially. If the husband's intention behind
this statement was divorce, then divorce has taken place.
فتاوى الشامى:
وأما ما في إكراه الخانية: لو أكره على أن يقر بالطلاق فأقر لا يقع، كما لو أقر
بالطلاق بازلاً أو كاذباً، فقال فى البحر: إن مراده لعدم الوقوع فى المشبه به
عدمه ديانةً، ثم نقل عن البزازية والقنية: لو أراد به الخبر عن الماضي كاذباً لا
يقع ديانةً، وإن أشهد قبل ذلك لا يقع قضاءً أيضاً. (فتاوى الشامى: ٢٣٨/٣،
كتاب الطلاق، سعيد)
Further reading: al-Bahr ar-Rā'iq, vol. 3, p. 246; Hāshiyah Chilpī 'Alā
Tabyīn al-Haqā'iq, vol. 2, p. 195; Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband, vol. 9, p.
158.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
"Go to your mother's house until your mind comes right."
Question:
A man said the following in anger: "Go to your mother's house until
your mind comes right." There was no discussion of divorce nor was it
the husband's intention. Rather, it was an argument related to the
children, and the husband made this statement. Has divorce taken
place?
Answer:
Provided the question which is posed is correct, divorce did not take
place. This is because the statement: "Go to your mother's house" is
ambiguous. When an ambiguous statement is made, divorce only takes
place if an intention was made for it. Bearing in mind that the second
part of the statement - "until your mind comes right" - negates
divorce, we conclude that divorce was not the objective. Rather, it was
to keep her at her mother's house until a certain time.
140

الهداية:
وبقية الكنايات إذا نوى بها الطلاق كانت واحدة بائنة، وإن نوى ثلاثاً كان
ثلاثاً ... وبذا مثل قوله أنت بائن، وألحقي بأبلك. (الهداية: ٣٧٤/٢. وكذا فى
الفتاوى الهندية: ٣٧٥/١)
الفتاوى الهندية:
الفصل الخامس فى الكنايات: لا يقع بها الطلاق إلا بالنية أو بدلالة الحال
كذا فى الجوبرة النيرة. (الفتاوى الهندية: ٣٧٤/١)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
"If you go to your parents' house, then the third one."
Question:
A man had issued two divorces on separate occasions in the past. He
now has only one divorce to issue. He said to his wife: "If you go to
your parents' house, then the third one." He did not utter the word
"divorce" or any other word of similar meaning. Will the third divorce
apply if she goes to her parents' house?
Answer:
If the husband had the intention of divorce when he said "the third
one", then the third divorce will apply to the woman if she goes to her
parents' house. But if he said it merely to threaten her, divorce will not
take place.
امرأة قال لها زوجها: أنت طالق واحدة، فقالت له المرأة: بزار، فقال الزوج:
بزار، فهذا على وجهين: إما أن ينوي شيئاً أو لم ينو، ففى الوجه الأول بو على ما
نوى، وفى الوجه الثاني لا يقع. (الفتاوى الهندية: ٣٨١/١)
From the above text we learn that the husband uttered the word "one
thousand" in reply to the wife, but when he did not make an intention,
divorce will not take place.
The following is stated in another place:
يكون إقراراً بالطلاق إذا نوى. (الفتاوى الهندية: ٣٨٦/١)
141

The husband said to the wife: "Implement the leeway of women."
Apparently it means that she must make a plan for halalah because
three divorces have been issued. However, since he did not utter the
word of divorce, his statement will be dependent on his intention. If he
had an intention of divorce, it will apply. If not, there will be no
divorce.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
142

WRITTEN DIVORCE
الدلائل الباهرة في تنفيذ كتابة الطلاق للزوجة الحاضرة
Issuing a written divorce in the presence of the wife
Question:
A person issues a written divorce in the presence of his wife and gives
the note to her without uttering any word. Does divorce take place?
Answer:
A written divorce is like a verbal one. Whether the wife is present or
not, divorce takes place. Yes, if a person is compelled to write it, then
the written note of such a person will not be considered and divorce
too will not take place.
The following are examples of a written divorce:
Kitābat-e-mustabīnah: To write on paper, on a wall, etc. a divorce
which is clear and permanent. This is divided into two categories:
1.
Mustabīnah marsūmah: When a formal divorce document is
written with the addressees name.
2.
Mustabīnah ghayr marsūmah: When a person writes on any
piece of paper or on a wall. He writes "divorced" or "I have
divorced" without attributing it to his wife and without
sending it to her.
The first type takes the place of a verbal utterance and divorce takes
place with it.
In the second type divorce will only take place if the husband says that
it was his intention to divorce his wife.
Kitabat-e-ghayr mustabīnah: When the writing does not come into
existence and cannot be read. For example, a person writes on water
or in the air. Divorce does not take place under any condition.1
1 Majmū ah Qawānīn Islāmī, 129-130; register 3/4, Muslim Personal Law Board.
143

الفتاوى الهندية:
الكتابة على ثلاثة أوجه مستبين مرسوم أى معنون وبو يجري مجرى النطق فى
الحاضر والغائب على ما قالوا، ومستبين غير مرسوم كالكتابة على الجدار
وأوراق الأشجار وبو ليس بحجة إلا بالبينة والبيان وغير مستبين كالكتابة
على الهواء والماء وبو بمنزلة كلام غير مسموع فلا يثبت به الحكم. (الفتاوى
الهندية: ٤٤٢/٦، مسائل شتى)
الدر المختار:
كتب الطلاق، إن مستبيناً على نحو لوح وقع إن نوى، وقيل مطلقاً، ولو على نحو
الماء فلا، مطلقاً، ولو كتب على وجه الرسالة والخطاب كأن يكتب يا فلانة:
إذا أتاک كتابي بذا فأنت طالق طلقت بوصول الكتاب جوبرة.
وفى الشامية: (قوله كتب الطلاق الخ) قال فى الهندية: الكتابة على نوعين:
مرسومة وغير مرسومة، ونعني بالمرسومة أن يكون مصدراً ومعنوناً مثل ما
يكتب إلى الغائب وغير المرسومة أن لا يكون مصدراً ومعنوناً، وبو على
وجهين مستبينة وغير مستبينة، فالمستبينة ما يكتب على الصحيفة والحائط
والأرض على وجه يمكن فهمه وقراءته، وغير المستبينة ما يكتب على الهواء
والماء وشيء لا يمكن فهمه وقراءته. ففي غير المستبينة لا يقع الطلاق وإن
نوى، وإن كانت مستبينة لكنها غير مرسومة إن نوى الطلاق يقع وإلا لا، وإن
كانت مرسومة يقع الطلاق نوى أو لم ينو، ثم المرسومة لا تخلو إما أن أرسل
الطلاق بأن كتب: أما بعد فأنت طالق، فكما كتب بذا يقع الطلاق وتلزمها
العدة من وقت الكتابة، وإن علق طلاقها بمجئ الكتاب بأن كتب: إذا جاءک
كتابي فأنت طالق فجاءبا الكتاب فقرأته أو لم تقرأ يقع الطلاق كذا فى
144

الخلاصة. (الدر المختار مع رد المحتار: ٢٤٦/٣، مطلب فى الطلاق بالكتابة،
سعيد)
الهداية:
ثم الكتاب على ثلاثة مراتب: مستبين مرسوم وبو بمنزلة النطق فى الغائب
والحاضر على ما قالوا، ومستبين غير مرسوم كالكتابة على الجدار وأوراق
الأشجار وينوي فيه لأنه بمنزلة صريح الكناية فلا بد من النية وغير مستبين
كالكتابة على الهواء والماء وبو بمنزلة كلام غير مسموع فلا يثبت به الحكم.
(الهداية: ٧٠٥/٤، کتاب الخنثى)
وفى الشامية: اعلم أن بذا في كتابة غير مرسومة أى غير معتادة، لما فى التبيين
وغيره أن الكتاب على ثلاثة مراتب: مستبين مرسوم وبو أن يكون معنوناً:
أی مصدراً بالعنوان، وہو أن یکتب في صدره من فلان إلی فلان على ما
جرت به العادة فهذا کالنطق فلزم حجة ... الخ. (فتاوى الشامى: ٧٣٧/٦، مسائل
شتى، سعید)
بدائع الصنائع:
وأما النوع الثاني فهو أن يكتب على قرطاس أو لوح أو أرض أو حائط كتابة
مستبينة لكن لا على وجه المخاطبة امرأته طالق فيسئل عن نيته فإن قال:
نويت به الطلاق وقع وإن قال: لم أنوبه الطلاق صدق فى القضاء لأن الكتابة
على بذا الوجه بمنزلة الكتابة لأن الإنسان قد يكتب على هذا الوجه ویرید به
الطلاق وقد يكتب لتجويد الخط فلا يحمل على الطلاق إلا بالنية ... وإن
كتب كتابة مرسومة على طريق الخطاب والرسالة مثل أن يكتب أما بعد يا
فلانة فأنت طالق أو إذا وصل كتابي إليك فأنت طالق يقع به الطلاق ولو قال:
ما أردت به الطلاق أصلاً لا يصدق إلا أن يقول نويت طلاقاً من وثاق
145

فيصدق فيما بينه وبين الله عز وجل لأن الكتابة المرسومة جارية مجرى
الخطاب ألا ترى أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كان يبلغ بالخطاب مرة
وبالكتاب أخرى وبالرسول ثالثاً وكان التبليغ بالكتاب والرسول كالتبليغ
بالخطاب فدل أن الكتابة المرسومة بمنزلة الخطاب فصار كأنه خاطبها
بالطلاق عند الحضرة فقال لها: أنت طالق. (بدائع الصنائع: ١٠٩/٣، سعيد)
درر الحكام شرح مجلة الاحكام:
المادة : ٦٩: الكتاب كالخطاب ... والحاصل أن كل كتاب يحرر على وجه المتعارف
من الناس حجة على كاتبه كالنطق باللسان. (درر الحكام شرح مجلة الاحكام:
٦٢/١، دار الكتب العلمية)
(وكذا فى الفتاوى التاتارخانية: ٣٧٧/٣، فى ايقاع الطلاق بالكتاب. والأشباه
والنظائر: ١٢٣/٣، مع شرح الحموى. والبحر الرائق: ٤٧٧/٨، مسائل شتى،
كوئته. وتبيين الحقائق: ٢١٨/٦، مسائل شتى، ملتان. وتنقيح الفتاوى الحامدية:
كتاب الدعوى)
From the above-quoted texts of the jurists, it is established that
kitābat-e-mustabīnah marsūmah takes the place of a verbal utterance
of divorce, and that divorce takes place without making a distinction
between whether the wife is present or not.
Observe the verdicts of the seniors:
At-Tarā'if wa az-Zarā'if contains an answer of Hadrat Muftī 'Azīz ar-
Rahman Sahib - the muftī of Dar al-'Ulum Deoband - to a question
asked by Hadrat Maulānā Ashraf 'Alī Thanwī Sahib rahimahullāh.
As regards a written divorce, it seems to be established from the texts
that an explicit or ambiguous divorce takes place when written in the
presence of the wife. This is if it is his intention to issue a divorce, and
not for mere writing practice. In the case of marriage, the prerequisite
is that witnesses must hear the proposal and the acceptance of both
partners. Where it is possible for the proposal and acceptance to be
heard, if it is written down [and not uttered] it is possible to classify it
as a futile action. And there is no need for it in the case of a divorce. In
146

Kitab al-Iqrār of Shāmī, like the acknowledgement of various debts,
divorce has been classified as equally applicable whether uttered
verbally or written.
فإنه كما يكون باللسان يكون بالبنان. الدر المختار.
If an acknowledgement of debt is written down, and the writer
acknowledges that it is his writing, there will be no doubt about the
compulsion of the debt. Although Shāmī has expressed - based on a
text from al-Ashbah wa an-Naza'ir - with regard to various issues that
the written word by a person who is present and can speak will not be
considered, the obvious meaning of this is that a witness cannot give
testimony solely on the basis of a written document. This is because a
mere piece of writing could have been written for writing practice. In
short, the preferred and established ruling seems to be that if a
written divorce is given even to a woman who is present, then divorce
takes place. This is the cautious approach and is also the view of
Hadrat Maulānā Mahmud Hasan Sahib and Maulānā Anwar Shah. That
is all. Was salām. 'Azīz ar-Rahman, Deoband, 1330 A.H. Thursday.1
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah:
A written divorce is like a verbal one. In other words, whatever rule is
applied to a verbal divorce will be applied to a written one. However,
when a person is compelled to write a divorce, divorce will not take
place until the man utters it verbally.2
Further reading: Imdad al-Fatāwā, vol. 2, p. 386; Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 5,
p. 184.
However, 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah writes:
ظابره أن المعنون من الناطق الحاضر غير معتبر. (فتاوى الشامى: ٧٣٧/٦،
مسائل شتى، سعيد)
From the above, it seems that the inscribed divorce of a dumb person
against the wife who is present is valid while the written divorce of a
speaking person against the wife who is present is not considered.
However, there are explicit texts of the jurists against the opposing
meaning which 'Allamah Shāmī rahimahullah expresses here. An
1الطرائف والطرائف: ١٢-١٣، فائدة فقهية متعلقة بالطلاق بالكتابة.
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah, vol. 8, p. 309.
147

opposing meaning will only be considered when the expressed word is
not contrary to it. 'Allamah Shamī rahimahullah himself accords it the
level of qiyas (analogical reasoning) and not an established rule.
Furthermore, 'Allāmah Rāfi'ī rahimahullah objects to 'Allāmah Shāmī's
expression of qiyās. He writes:
(قوله وظاهره) لم يظهر وجه ظهوره من عبارة الأشباه. (تقريرات الرافعي، ج ٦،
ص ٣٥٥، مسائل شتى، سعید.
It is possible that the text of al-Ashbah means that the inscribed
divorce of a dumb person is valid while his non-inscribed divorce is
not taken into consideration.
Furthermore, this is not even the preferred creed of 'Allamah Shāmī
rahimahullah. His preferred creed is what is mentioned in the
previously-quoted texts. We conclude that a written divorce which is
mustabīnah marsūmah is classified as an explicit divorce. Just as an
explicit divorce is the same whether issued in the presence of the wife
or in her absence, the same can be said about a written divorce which
is mustabīnah marsūmah. That is, divorce will take place whether the
wife is present or not, and whether the man uttered the word of
divorce with his tongue or not.
We learn from the texts of most jurists that the written and spoken
words are equal for establishing rulings even though there is a
difference between the two, viz. the written word is compared to the
spoken word. This is similar to the difference between the written
word and gesture of a dumb person. Nonetheless, the two are equal in
establishing a ruling.
Shams ad-Din Qādī Zādah makes an objection to this. Observe the
following from Natā'ij al-Afkār:
قوله وبو بمنزلة النطق فى الغائب والحاضر على ما قالوا، فإنه إذا كان بمنزلة
النطق في حق الحاضر أيضاً لم يكن حجة ضرورية، فينبغي أن يكون حجة
فى الحدود أيضاً كما كان النطق حجة فيها أيضاً فليتأمل فى المخلص. (نتائج
الافكار: ٥٢٥/١٠، مسائل شتى، دار الفكر)
In other words, if the written word is like the spoken one, it ought to
be an evidence in the penal laws.
148

This objection is incorrect because penal laws are established as
prescribed by the Shari'ah; and the written word is not prescribed for
them. For example, a single admission of guilt is sufficient. But when it
comes to adultery, the Ahadith contain the admission of guilt repeated
four times. This is why it will be necessary to say it four times.
Furthermore, penal laws fall off in the presence of doubts.
If the spoken word is considered to be effectual for the one who is
present but the written word is ineffectual, then in the case of a
written divorce, the one who has the ability of speech will have to
accompany his written divorce with a verbal one. Irrespective of
whether he issues it in the presence of witnesses or not, just as it is
necessary to utter it at the time of a marriage. For example, Zayd
writes a proposal of marriage to Hindah. Before she can accept the
proposal, it will be necessary for it to be read in the presence of
witnesses and then accept the proposal so that the prerequisite of the
proposal and acceptance is fulfilled.
If a person in Durban sends a written divorce to his wife in
Johannesburg, divorce will take place even though - in our times - he
is able to utter it to her over the telephone together with proving his
identity. Why does divorce still take place?
A written bequest is valid. But if a person is able to speak, he ought to
make a verbal request and the written word ought to be disregarded.
Furthermore, when permission is given to relate Ahadith which were
heard verbally, the written permission is valid even though the person
is able to speak. In such a case, a written permission ought to be
invalid.
اعلاء السنن:
أن يكتب الشيخ مسموعه لحاضر أو غائب بخط أو بأمره. وأما المجردة فتمنع
الرواية بها، وأجازه كثيرون من المتقدمين والمتأخرين. (اعلاء السنن: ١٦٧/٨)
For a transaction to be valid, the Shari'ah prescribes the words "I have
bought it." At the same time, a mutual exchange [of goods and money
without uttering a single word] is valid. If the two parties are able to
speak, why is such a mutual exchange valid?
Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam gave a letter to 'Abdullah ibn
Jahsh radiyallahu 'anhu and forbad him from opening it before he
reached a certain place. He was ordered to open it only when he
reaches that place.
149

If the written word is invalid without reading it verbally, this letter of
Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam would be unacceptable.
The principal's office of a madrasah sends out a written
announcement for the examinations; a verbal announcement is not
made. Imagine if the students do not write the exams and say: "You
sent a written instruction even though you are able to speak. This
announcement is therefore unacceptable." What reply will we give to
them?
The salah times are written on the masjid board but the imam of the
masjid does not come to perform the salah at the stipulated time.
When asked, he says: "You have the power of speech, so your written
word is not considered." What reply will we give to him?
In short, if we were to consider the written word to be unacceptable, it
will give birth to various other issues.
The jurists say that the written divorce of a person under compulsion
is invalid. This ruling applies only to the divorce of the person who is
compelled to issue a divorce. The reason behind this is to save one's
self from wrong and oppression. Adopting a leeway is legitimate to
save one's self from wrong. For example, an oppressor compels a
person to take an oath to issue three divorces, and he issues them to
save himself from the oppression. He then presents witnesses that it
was a false oath. The same can be said about a written divorce - the
person refuses to utter it verbally but writes it down to save himself
from injustice.
لأن الكتابة أقيم مقام العبارة باعتبار الحاجة ولا حاجة ههنا.
This means that the spoken word is left out for the written word
because of some need or reason. Here the objective is only to save
one's life and not for any other need. His life has been saved and
divorce did not take place. Now if a person writes down a divorce,
there could be several reasons for it. The wife could have demanded it
so that it could serve as a proof in the future. It could be needed in
court. The husband may be scared of his wife and cannot pluck the
courage to issue a divorce verbally. Or, because this is an era of
writing; it is not only to save one's life.
There are countless injunctions which are based on societal norms.
Just as societal norms are considered in commercial transactions, the
societal norm of today is that the written word is like the spoken word.
In fact, it is more conclusive. This is why Hadrat Maulana Thanwī,
Hadrat Shaykh al-Hind, Hadrat Muftī 'Azīz ar-Rahman and Hadrat
150

Anwar Shah Kashmirī rahimahumullah considered the written word to
be equal to the spoken word.
We cannot understand how the written word is not accepted as valid
especially in our times.
شرح المجلة:
(المادة: ١٦٠٩): إن سند الدين الذي يكتبه الرجل أو يستكتبه ويعطيه لآخر
فمضى بإمضائه أو مختوماً بختمه يعد إقراراً بالكتابة ويكون معتبراً ومرعياً
كتقريره الشفابي إذا كان مرسوماً أى إذا كان قد كتب موافقاً للرسم، والعادة
والوثائق المعلمة بالقبض المسماة بالوصول بي من بذا القبيل أيضاً. (شرح
المجلة: ص ٩٠٢)
(المادة: ١٦١٠): من كتب سنداً أو استكتبه مرسوماً على الوجه السابق وأعطاه
فمضى أو مختوماً إذا أقر بأنه لم ولكنه أنكر الدين الذي حواه فلا يعتبر
إنكاره ويلزم أداء ذلك الدين. (شرح المجلة: ٩٠٤)
After quoting the texts of the jurists, Muftī Muhammad Ashraf Sahib -
the muftī of Jāmi ah Mahmūdīyyah, Springs - writes:
The following points are established from the previously-quoted
rulings and texts:
1. Kitabat-e-mustabīnah falls under the ruling of a verbal
divorce.
2.
Mustabīnah marsumah falls under the ruling of an explicit
divorce.
3.
Mustabīnah ghayr-marsūmah falls under the ruling of an
ambiguous divorce.
4. If the written divorce is not preconditioned, it falls under the
ruling of an issued divorce. The divorce will apply the moment
it is written.
5. Erasing a kitabat-e-mustabīnah is the same as retracting from
a precondition. And the rule is that one cannot retract from a
precondition.
151

6. If the written divorce is confirmed, it is accepted in a court of
law. The denial of the husband will not be considered.
... Based on the previous discussion, especially the general texts related
to the rules of a written divorce, the validity of a written divorce in
court, the principle of "a woman is like a judge", and the demands of
present-day conditions and societal norms; it is our view that a written
divorce - with its prerequisites and details - is valid irrespective of
whether the wife is present or not.
The societal norm of today is that people give more importance to the
written word. Sometimes, they note down a point instead of speaking
it because the written word remains, it becomes a piece of evidence,
and proves beneficial at the time of need. More significance is given to
the written word at the time of making important agreements."
A detailed fatwa on this subject has been published by the Dar al-Ifta'
of Dar al-'Ulum Karachi. It proves that a written divorce issued in the
presence of the wife is valid. This fatwa contains the corroborative
signatures of several muftīs and is also the fatwa of several dar al-iftās
of Pakistan.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
An issue related to a written divorce
Question:
Here in South Africa, a man wrote three divorces on a piece of paper
and gave it to his wife who was present. Some muftīs labelled this
divorce ineffectual. They present the following text of Shamī as proof.
لكن فى الدر المنتقى عن الأشباه أنه في حق الأخرس يشترط أن يكون
معنوناً وإن لم يكن لغائب وظابره أن المعنون من الناطق الحاضر غير معتبر.
(شامى: ٧٣٧١٦).
This means that the divorce written by a person who has the power of
speech and given to a woman who is present - and written in line with
societal norms and habits - is not valid. What is the reply to this
verdict?
1 Condensed from a fatwa of Muftī Ashraf Sahib, dated 16 Rajab 1424 A.H./13
September 2003.
152

Answer:
A written divorce given to a woman in her presence is valid and
applies to her. A meeting of muftis was held a few years back. The final
view of many of the muftis present was that divorce takes place. This
issue has raised his head once again because of the incident [which
you related]. Observe the following texts of the jurists:
وبو أى المستبين بمنزلة النطق فى الغائب والحاضر على ما قالوا فإنه إذا كان
بمنزلة النطق في حق الحاضر أيضاً لم يكن حجة ضرورية. (تكملة فتح
القدير: ١٠\٥٢٥، دار الفكر)
وفي الشامي: فهذا أى المستبين كالنطق فلزم حجة. (فتاوى الشامى: ٧٣٧/٦،
سعيد، وشرح الحموى على الاشباه: ١٢٣/٣، احكام الكتابة)
وبو يجرى مجرى النطق فى الحاضر والغائب. (حاشية الكنز من ملا مسكين
والعينى، ص٤٩٠، ورمز الحقائق: ٤٩٩/٢، مسائل شتى)
وبو أى بذا المذكور من الكتابة كالنطق فى الغائب والحاضر على ما قالوا فيلزم
حجة وفي زماننا الختم شرط لكونه معتاداً. (مجمع الانهر: ٧٣٣/٢، دار احياء
التراث العربى)
ثم الكتابة على ثلاثة أوجه مستبين مرسوم، وهو جري مجرى النطق فى الحاضر
والغائب على ما قالوا. (عالمكيرية: ٤٤٢/٦، مسائل شتى)
ثم الكتاب على ثلاث مراتب مستبين مرسوم وبو بمنزلة النطق فى الغائب
والحاضر على ما قالوا. (الهداية، مسائل شتى: ٧٠٥/٤)
والحاصل أن كل كتاب يحرر على الوجه المتعارف من الحاضر حجة على كاتبه
كالنطق باللسان. (درر الحكام شرح مجلة الأحكام، مادة الكتاب كالخطاب،
لعلی حیدر)
153

الموسوعة الفقهية:
وجه انعقاد العقود بالكتابة بو أن القلم أحد اللسانين كما قال الفقهاء بل
ربما تكون بي أقوى من الألفاظ ولذلك حث الله المؤمنین علی توثیق دیونهم
بالكتابة. (الموسوعة الفقهية الكويتية، مادة: العقد بالكتابة او الرسالة، ٢١٠/٣٠،
وزارة الاوقاف، الكويت)
It becomes clear from the above-quoted texts that a written divorce is
valid irrespective of whether the wife is present or not. The answers to
the text which was quoted from Shami are as follows:
1. The view of 'Allamah Shami rahimahullah differs with that of the
previously-quoted juridical texts. His view is therefore less acceptable.
The view that divorce takes place is the preferred view.
2. 'Allāmah Rafi'ī rahimahullah, the annotator of Shāmī, refutes this
view and classifies it "not obvious". He writes:
لم يظهر وجه ظهوره من عبارة الأشباه. (تقريرات الرافعي،
ضميمة شامي: ٦\٣٥٥).
3. The above-quoted text is in itself different from 'Allamah Shāmī's
other text. The latter which is in line with the texts of the various
juridical books will be taken into consideration. For example:
فهذا كالنطق فلزم حجة. (شامي: ٧٣٧١٦).
When 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah said:
ظاهره أن المعنون من الناطق الحاضر.
He proved that it is the opposite meaning of what was mentioned
before. The principle is that the expressed word (mantuq) is given
preference over the non-expressed word (mafhūm mukhālif).
4. Muftī 'Azīz ar-Rahman Sahib, Hadrat Shaykh al-Hind, Hadrat
'Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmirī and Hadrat Maulana Thanwī
rahimahumullah accepted the verdict of the general books of fatawa
and not the text of 'Allamah Shamī rahimahullah.
5. The text under question is related to the issue of compulsion.
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah quoted it from Ashbah; in fact from
154

Sharh Ashbah who in turn quotes it from Khānīyyah. (Refer to Ashbāh
Ma'a Sharh al-Hamawī, vol. 3, p. 123). The texts of Sharh Ashbah and
Khānīyyah contain a discussion on compulsion; not on when a husband
issues a divorce in the presence of his wife without being compelled to
do so.
Observe the text of Fatāwā Qādī Khan:
رجل أكره بالضرب والحبس على أن يكتب طلاق امرأته فلانة بنت فلان
ابن فلان فكتب امرأته فلانة بنت فلان ابن فلان طالق لا تطلق امرأته لأن
الكتابة أقيمت مقام العبارة باعتبار الحاجة ولا حاجة بهنا. (فتاوى قاضيخان
على بامش الهندية: ١\٤٧٢-شرح الأشباه: ١٢٣١٣)
The gist of this is that if a person writes a note of divorce under
compulsion and gives it to his wife, the divorce will not take place.
This is because the written word takes the place of the spoken word at
the time of need, and there is no need here. In other words, in the light
of the previous texts, the written word is a fundamental evidence, but
in the case of compulsion, the verdict of non-application of the divorce
is given and the written word is accepted as an essential evidence.
In normal situations, the written word is a fundamental evidence and
akin to the spoken word. However, there is no need to fulfil it in a state
of compulsion and it will have no effect. In short, the written word is
not valid in a state of compulsion irrespective of whether the wife is
present or not. The issue of compulsion is therefore not related to
whether the wife is present or not. Rather, it has been accepted as an
essential evidence in this situation. That the written word is a
fundamental evidence in normal situations is mentioned in the
previous texts of al-Bahr ar-Ra'iq and Fath al-Qadir.
Additional details on this subject can be found in Tahrirī Aur Zabardastī
Ialāq Kī Tahqīq of Maulānā Muftī Muhammad Ridwan Sahib. Kindly
refer to it. This book contains the recommendations and reviews of
many muftīs.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Writing a divorce in an unconventional manner
Question:
Zayd was sitting on a chair with a table in front of him. He wrote his
wife's name and three divorces on the table. He wrote: "Three divorces
to my wife Zaynab." Later on, he said that there was neither an
155

argument between them nor did he write it in anger. He was merely
joking. Has divorce taken place?
Answer:
When a divorce is written in an unconventional manner without
having an intention of divorce, then divorce does not take place. If it is
written with an intention of divorce then divorce will take place. In
the present case, the divorce was written in jest and there was no
intention of divorce, so divorce does not take place.
ومستبين غير مرسوم كالكتابة على الجدران وأوراق الأشجار أو على كاغذ لا
على الوجه المعتاد فلا يكون حجة إلا بانضمام شيء آخر إليه كالنية. (فتاوى
الشامى، مسائل شتى: ٧٣٧١٦).
Majmū ah Qawānīn Islāmī:
Divorce will take place in a kitābat mustabīnah ghayr marsūmah when
the husband says that it was his intention to divorce his wife. Radd al-
Muhtār states:
وإن كانت مستبينة لكنها غير مرسومة إن نوى الطلاق يقع وإلا لا!
Further reading: Majma' al-Anhur, vol. 2, p. 733; al-Fatāwā al-Hindīyyah,
vol. 6, p. 442.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
A divorce written under compulsion
Question:
A woman had a divorce notice written, asked a policeman to
accompany her and went to her husband. The policeman threatened
the husband saying: "Sign this document or I will shoot you." The
husband asked: "What does this document contain?" The policeman
replied: "One divorce." The husband had no alternative but to sign the
document. Later on he was informed that the divorce notice contained
three divorces. How many divorces are applicable, one or three?
Answer:
A written divorce is accepted as valid by the Shari'ah provided it is
written willingly by the husband. In other words, the husband wrote
1 Majmū ah Qawānīn Islāmī, p. 130.
156

the divorce note willingly by himself, or he willingly signed the
divorce document. Divorce does not take place when the husband is
compelled to write a divorce note or to sign such a document. In the
above case, if the husband did not utter any divorce verbally, no
divorce has taken place.
وفى البحر: فلو أكره على أن يكتب طلاق امرأته فكتب لا تطلق. (فتاوى
الشامى: ٣\٢٣٦، مطلب فى الاكراه على التوكيل، سعيد)
رجل أكره بالضرب والحبس على أن يكتب طلاق امرأته فلانة بنت فلان
ابن فلان فكتب امرأته فلانة بنت فلان ابن فلان طالق لا تطلق امرأته.
(فتاوى قاضيخان على بامش الهندية: ١\٤٧٢)
وفى الظهيرية: رجل أكره بالضرب والحبس على أن يكتب طلاق امرأته
فكتب فلانة بنت فلانة امرأته طالق، وفى الحاوي: ولم يعبر بلسانه لا تطلق.
(الفتاوى التاتارخانية: ٣٨٠١٣، ايقاع الطلاق بالكتابة)
Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband:
Divorce does not take place when a husband is compelled to sign a
divorce document while he did not utter a divorce verbally nor wrote
it himself.1
Kitab al-Fatāwā:
The threat of a policeman is included in the classification of a
compulsion.2
Further reading: Majmū'ah Qawānīn Islāmī, p. 135, register 6; Imdād al-
Muftīyīn, vol. 2, p. 635; Kitab al-Fatāwā, vol. 5, p. 102.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband, vol. 9, p. 154.
2 Kitab al-Fatāwā, vol. 5, p. 90.
157

When an intoxicated person is asked to sign a divorce document
Question:
The enemies of a man made him consume alcohol or made him lose his
senses in some other way. They then got a person to write a divorce
notice and forced the man's thumbprint onto the document while he
was in a state of intoxication. Or, they got him to sign the document.
They then wrote a divorce addressed to his wife, while attributing it to
him. The man and his wife have no knowledge of this divorce
document. The entire episode came to pass deceptively. Has the
divorce taken place?
Answer:
Divorce does not take place by deceiving a person or making him sign
a blank document without informing him.
Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband:
Writing a divorce document without informing the husband of its
contents and then asking him for his thumbprint will not validate the
divorce. In the same way, divorce does not take place if the husband is
tricked into placing his thumbprint on a blank page and then someone
writes the divorce on it later on.
A Hadīth of Ibn Mājah states:
الطلاق لمن أخذ الساق ...
The following is stated in Shāmī:
وكذا كل كتاب لم يكتبه بخطه ولم يملم بنفسه لا يقع
الطلاق ما لم يقر أن كتابه.
Thus, in such a case, divorce from the husband did not take place.1
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
When a written divorce is not accompanied by the spoken word
Question:
A man wrote a divorce and sent it to his wife. He did not say anything
verbally. Does the divorce take place?
1 Fatāwā Dār al-'Ulūm Deoband, vol. 9, p. 102. Also: Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol. 12,
p. 644.
158