User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 1

Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce

According to Islam, if a man divorces his wife thrice, then he could not directly remarry her. But if the divorced woman marries another man, and he divorces her or dies, after that she is allowed to remarry her first husband. This ruling has been directly mentioned in Quran.

This affects the whole family, but especially women and the children are affected from it.

Islam critics deem this practice to be illogical.

• It takes away the chance from the couple to reconcile later, and to correct their mistake.
• And it is the woman and the children, who have to suffer mainly.
• It combines with another Islamic Ruling of Talaq in Islam i.e. if a divorced woman marries another man, then all her children will be taken away from her immediately.
• Therefore, every divorced Muslim woman is compelled to choose between the two options i.e. either she should give her right to remarry another man, or she should giver her right to have children. In both these cases, a family life of divorced Muslim woman (i.e. to have a husband and children at the same time) is broken.
• The only way for a divorced Muslim woman to enjoy the love and financial support of a man, and at the same time to keep her children, is to remarry her first husband. But again this door has also been shut for her due the Islamic Ruling that she could not remarry her ex-husband directly.
• Children will also certainly loose either their father, or their mother in this case.

This Islamic Ruling was taken from the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance

ٰIslam took the following practices of the era of Ignorance of the Arab society^[1]:

• Talaq was only the right of husband, while women din't have this right.
• The 3 Talaqs system was also a practice of pre-Islamic era.
• A Husbands was allowed to take his wife back up till after the 2 Talaqs.
• But after the 3 Talaqs, the wife became prohibited for him, till the time she married another person, who later divorced her. Only after that, the former husband could have married her ex-wife back.

For the people of time of ignorance, it should serve as a punishment for the husband that any other man also tasted his wife (i.e. had intercourse with her). But they didn't consult the women, if they wanted to be used in such a way or not, while women had a lower rank and they were not worthy of consultation.

Later, Islam also made it a part of Islamic Sharia too.

Nevertheless, Islam made it more difficult for the couple to reunite, by putting a condition that no contract could be made with the 2nd husband at the time of marriage, that he would later divorce her. This practically ended (or severely limited) the chance of reunion between the the first husband and the wife.

Why Muslim women still wish or even feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands?

Many divorced Muslim women wish, or even feel themselves compelled, to reunite with their ex-husband.

The reasons are as under.

First Reason: The couple still love each other, despite the temporary anger and dispute

A divorce may occur due to many reasons (like temporary anger, inexperience of the young couple to solve their dispute, or family pressure, or financial situation etc.).

But all these factors could change with time, and they may be able to solve their dispute later.

Nevertheless, problem occurs for the divorced Muslim couples that they don't have any chance to correct their mistake, and to reunite due to this Islamic Ruling.

Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children

In case of divorce:

• Both partners have to live separately,
• And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.
• In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.
• Therefore, for the sake of their children, the divorced couples may wish to reunite later.

But again, due to this Islamic Ruling, the divorced couple get's no chance to correct their mistake and to reunite for the sake of their children.

Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)

Another Islamic Ruling stipulates that^[2]:

• A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).
• Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belongs to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.
• Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings".
• They either have to deny the financial support and their wish to have love and attention from another husband, or to deny her children.
• Only option for such divorced Muslim mothers to have a complete family life (along with love from any man and children), is to return to her former husband.

This is one of the main reason why Muslim women are very harshly and unilaterally hit by divorce, and they may feel themselves strongly compelled to return to their first husband (even if these women were totally innocent, and it was the fault of their husbands to divorce them). This is the "Only Chance" available for a Muslim woman in Islam to have a complete family life (which includes husband and her children).

Nevertheless, this "Only Chance" has also been usurped by religion from her. Even if she wishes to reunite with her ex-husband for the sake of family life and her children, still she has to take many "risks".

Combination of This Ruling + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce

This Islamic Ruling does not affect the woman's life alone, but it works in combination of two other Islamic ruling (i..e Wife beating + A wife does not have the right to take divorce).

The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:

Therefore:

• Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.
• Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.
• So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage).
• But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.
• And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.

Moreover:

• Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or Khul' or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).
• Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).
• And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).
• And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.
• And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.
• And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.
• The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.
• And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the 'Iddah article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.

What is the LOGIC behind Halala?

Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:

• What is the logic behind Halala?

• And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?
• And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?

Defences of Halala by Islam advocates

Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today.

First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper

Islam advocate gives the following reason^[3].

• In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.
• Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.
• That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.
• It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.

But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:

• It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.
• Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man
• Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.
• And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.
• And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.
• And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.
• And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?

Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly

Another Islam advocate claims that^[4]:

• Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.
• In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.
• Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.

But the problem with this logic is:

• Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.
• What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.
• She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.
• And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.

3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala

Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:

• Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later^[5].
• And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.

This argument triggers a response by two parties.

First one are the Hanafis, who say that^[6]:

• Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.
• But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.
• In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.

And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:

• Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).
• The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.
• If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.
• But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.
• And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.
• Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.

4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)

Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that^[7]:

• Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.
• This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.
• And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.
• And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting^[8]. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.

But the problem with this logic is:

• What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months?
• Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.
• Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.
• Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.

Moreover:

• Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.
• These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.
• Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.
• And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.

A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes

Moreover:

• Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.
• But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.

(Note: There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)

This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:

• On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.
• While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.

Secular Western Laws vs Halala

Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:

• Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.
• They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.
• They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).
• They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.
• They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.

References: