Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

8. (a ) The Marriage Agreement

Marriage is of two kinds: (1) for life; (2) temporary. As the name implies, temporary marriage (also blown asmut'ah ) means that it is for a fixed period of time whichis agreed upon, before completing the marriage agreement.

So far as the first kind of marriage is concerned, all Muslims are unanimous in accepting it. As regards the second kind, only theShi'ah consider it lawful. The latter base their acceptance on the following verse of the Holy Qur'an: "famastamtatum bihi minhunna fa'tu hunna ujurahunna - and as such of them with whom you hadmut'ah ,

give them their dowries as a fixed reward." (Surah an-Nisa ': 24) This problem has been a topic of discussion since the timeOf 'sahaba " (companions of the Prophet (s.a.w .) up to the present time. In view of the importance of thismatter it would seem appropriate to clarify some of its points.

No-one who has spent some time in the study of religious laws can deny the validity ofmut'ah . The Holy Prophet (s.a.w .) himself made it lawful. During the life of the Prophet (s.a.w .), many distinguished 'sahaba ' put it into practice. Moreover, after the demise of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .), the noble 'sahaba ' continued to take advantage of this law.

'Abdullahibn 'Abbas , Jabiribn 'Abdillah al-Ansari ,ibn Mas'ud , andUbay ibn Ka'ab , who were men of exalted rank and eminence, all insisted on the lawfulness ofmut'ah and would recite the verse in this way: "Famastamtatum bihi minhunna ilaajalin musamman " (And as such of them with whom you hadmut'ah for specified term).

We should not however think that these companions considered that there was any defect in the Qur'an, since they werewell-versed in its interpretation, they merely wanted to make a commentary on this verse so that its meaning might be clearer. Since these distinguished persons had remained devoted to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .) throughout his mission, they had had the opportunity to understand the interpretation of the Qur'an directly from the tongue of the Prophet himself (s.a.w .).

They therefore had no hesitation in disclosing the true meaning of this verse according to what they had learnt from the Prophet (s.a.w .).

We should add however that thetradition whichibn Jarir mentions in his large work ofQur'anic commentary shows that the part "Ila ajalin musamman " (for a specified term) was actually an original portion of the verse, as revealed by God.Ibn Jarir quotes AbuNasirah as saying: "When I read this verse beforeibn 'Abbas he said: 'Say 'ila ajalin musamman '.I said that I did not read like that. Upon thisibn 'Abbas said three times 'By God! This verse was revealed in this very way.'"

It is obvious that such an exalted personality asibn 'Abbas would never havewilfully changed the text of the Qur'an. If this tradition is correct, the meaning of this eminent Companion must surely have been that God the Almighty had revealed its interpretation in this way.

According to all the 'ulama ' this temporary marriage was allowed and practiced by the closest companions of the Prophet.

Those who reject the lawfulness ofmut'ah insist that God revealed further commands to hisProphet which revoked the former law. The varioushadith which are concerned with this revocation have conflicting meanings and cannot be relied upon. For the revocation of an expressordinance an express proof is necessary: some Sunnis claim that revocation took place through thesunnah , that is, the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .), after declaring it lawful, made it lawful.

Some of them say however that it was through the Book of God that a change in the law ofmut'ah was imposed upon the people. There is even conflicting views within the lattergroup : one party considering the "verse of divorce" as the relevant verse concerning the revocation, and the other the "verse of inheritance".

Furthermore most of the opponents ofmut'ah think that the following verse proves its abrogation "Illa alaazwajuhum aw mamalakat aymanuhum ". The verse gives two causes for the lawfulness of marriage, either the woman is one's wife or she is one's slave-girl (kaniz ), and asSayyid al-Alusi (a Sunni scholar) writes: "TheShi'ahs cannot regard the "Mumtu'ah " (woman taken inmut'ah ) as 'kaniz ',

a slave-girl (who is bound by laws other than those which affect a free woman), and they cannot call her the wife either, because she does not possess the conditions of wife-hood, that is 'mirath ' (inheritance), 'iddah ' (waiting period); the right to sustenance and maintenance on the part of husband, and divorce."

If we examine al-Alusi claim we find it to be completely without foundation. Contrary to what he says, the wife in a temporary marriage does have certain of the rights of wife-hood. One of these concerns inheritance. The wife of a temporary marriage may receive the inheritance (unconditionally according to someShi'a 'ulama ', and according to others, on condition that the right to inheritanceis stipulated at time of marriage contract).Moreover if al-Alusi is claiming that inheritance is an obligatory feature of non temporary marriage, then he is not speaking in accordance with the law.

according to the Islamic code there are many occasions where the law of inheritance become invalid: a wife, who for example, is an unbeliever or a murderess does not get inheritance.Likewise a woman who is married to a sick man who dies before he has sexual intercourse with her is deprived of the inheritance. On the contrary if somebody divorces his wife during a time of illness, and subsequently dies, even if her 'iddah is over she is entitled to receive inheritance one year after the death of her husband.

Again, theShi'ah believe in the lawfulness ofmut'ah and regard 'iddah after such a marriage as compulsory. Subsistence for the wife (nafagah ) is another subject of dispute. TheShi'a believe that this too cannot be regarded as a primary right of wife-hood. One may look for example at the case of the women who refuses to have sexual intercourse with her husband in spite of her being a wife; nofaqih would consider subsistence as one of her rights.

There is no divorce in temporary marriage: after spending the Weed timetogether the two parties may separate.

We should point out to those who still deny theIawfulness of temporary marriage that the abrogation ofmut'ah is impossible because the relevant verse is in theSurah anal-Mu'minin and al-Mi'raj , both of which were revealed inMakkah .

Moreover, even some distinguished Sunni 'ulama ' say that theQur'anic verse concerningmut'ah was not revoked .az-Zamakhshari , in his commentary al-Kashshaf , reports, on the authority ofibn 'Abbas , that the verse concerningmut'ah is one of the irrevocable ones. Other 'ulama ' have reported thatHakam ibn 'Ayniyah , when asked whether the verse ofmut'ah had been revoked, said that it had not.

Atfirst the majority community of the Muslims acknowledged the lawfulness ofmut'ah , but later they began claiming its revocation; we have tried to show the weakness of their claims. Sometimes as we have seen they tried to prove abrogation of the verse by another verse, and sometimes, as we shall see, they attempted to prove the abrogation of the verse through atradition :

they rely upon the tradition in the 'sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim which relate that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .) mademut'ah unlawful either during the Conquest ofMakkah , or the Conquest ofKhaybar , or the Battle ofAwtas . Thesehadith are the subject of considerable dispute.

It is even reported on the authority ofQadi Ayad that some 'ulama ' say that themut'ah was made lawful a second time after a first abrogation,then subsequently made unlawful for the second time. Moreover it is recorded in some books thatmut'ah was revokedon the occasion of hajjat al-wida '. (that is the last hajj) in the 10th year of thehijrah .

Other books show that this was not so and that it was revoked during the battle ofTabuk in the 9th year of thehijrah .Some writers claim thatmut'ah was abrogated during the battle ofHunayn in the month of Shawwal in the 8th year of thehijrah ; it is also claimed by some that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .) mademut'ah lawful on the occasion of the Conquest ofMakkah , but declared it to be unlawful only a short time later in the very place he was supposed to have declared it lawful.

Most of the Sunni 'ulama ' are of the opinion that the abrogation ofmut'ah .

We must stress that theQur'anic Verseconcernin mut'ah is not called into question by anyone who examines the validity of these so-calledhadith .Moreover thehadith reported by the Sunni (ulama ) are so full of conflicting reports that their falsehood is self-evident.

It is reported in theSahih of al-Bukhari that Abu Raja' quotes 'Imran ibn Hasin as saying that the verse concerningmut'ah is present in the Qur'an and "we acted upon it in the life time of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .); neither did Allah make it unlawful in the Holy Qur'an, nor did the Prophet (s.a.w .) prohibit it during his life time. The prohibition ofmut'ah was an arbitrary act of one man.and it is said that this man was theCalip 'Umar .

" It is also reported in theSahih of Muslim on the authority of Atta' that "one day Jabiribn 'Abdillah al-Ansari came to perform 'umrah and people asked him various questions. We went to visit him at his house. When hewas asked aboutmut'ah , Jabir said: 'Yes we practicedmut'ah in the days of the Prophet (s.a.w .) and also in the days of AbuBakr and 'Umar .'"

Muslim gives another report and that is fromJabir also. Hesays: "During the days of the Prophet (s.a.w .) we used to practicemut'ah while giving a handful of dates or a handful of baked flour as a dowry." Muslim also reports in hisSahih that AbuNudrah said that he was sitting with Jabiribn 'Abdillah al-An-Sari when another man came in and said that there was a difference of opinion about the twomut'ahs (namely themut'ah of temporary marriage, and the kind ofhaj called hajjtamattu'a ) betweenIbn 'Abbas andIbn Zubayr . Jabirsaid: "While the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .) was present we used to act upon both of them, but later 'Umar prohibited both of them, so we could not do them again." Indeed they could not do it again becauseHadrat 'Umar would have a man stoned to death if he was caughtpractising mut'ah .

The fact is that if the Chapter relevant to marriage in Muslim'sSahih is carefully studied, we will find such contradictory statements that we can only wonder at their source. There are claims of abrogation in one place, while in another place proofs of non-abrogation are given. As an example of suchhadith we may quoteJihni who says: "On the occasion of the conquest ofMakkah , the Prophet (s.a.w .) himself ordered that we should be permitted to performmut'ah , but we had still not left that place when the Prophet (s.a.w .) forbade us to do it."

Thus abrogation is sometimes attributed to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .), and sometimes toHadrat 'Umar .Moreover they say thatmut'ah was current during the time of the Prophet, and during the period of the first Caliphate.

They also say thatHadrat 'Ali (a.s .) forbadeIbn 'Abbas on various occasions to talk aboutmut'ah , and so the latter subsequently changed his opinion about it. In a refutation of this we may cite the report that says that onceIbn Zubayr stood up inMakkah and said: "There are some people here who have been deprived of foresight just, as God has deprived them of their eye-sight: such persons are those who claim thatmut'ah is lawful." (Here the reference was toIbn 'Abbas , who had become blind.) At this,Ibn 'Abbas uttered loudly. "Why?I swear thatmut'ah was practiced up to the time of 'Ali (a.s .)." This clearly shows thatIbn 'Abbas never changed his opinion, and that even duringIbn Zubayr's caliphate he stood by his belief.

Rather surprisingly, the prohibitory order has even been attributed toHadrat Amir al-mu'minin (a.s .), though it was characteristic of all the Imams (a.s .) that they had declaredmut'ah wedlock to be lawful. Imam 'Ali's statement that if 'Umar had not forbiddenmut'ah there would have been only a few unfortunate men who committed fornication has become proverbial at-Tabari has reported this tradition in his "tafsir " also. In this connection ImamJa'afar as-Sadiq is reliably understood to havesaid: "I do not dotaqiyah (to deliberately conceal one's beliefs or opinions under certain conditions) in the matter of three things:mut'ahtu 'l-hajj,mut'atu 'n-nisa ', and al-mash 'ala 'l-khafayn ."

(The latter item refers to the Sunni practice of wiping over the shoes in place of washing the feet when performingwudu '.) According to the principles ofjurisprudence the conflicting reports of the Sunni commentators have been analyzed and proved to be full of falsehadith . The lawfulness ofmut'ah has been proved, and just as it was lawful at the time of the Prophet so it is today.

It wasHadrat 'Umar who prohibitedmut'ah during his rule; his prohibition was based on personal social considerations of the day, but it had nothing to do with religion. Heis reported to have said, "During the days of the Prophet (s.a.w .) twomut'ahs were permissible, but I now make them unlawful, and will punish those who disobey my order.

" What is worth noting is this that the second Caliph did not attribute the order of unlawfulness or abrogation ofmut'ah to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .), but made himself responsible for it. He, too, was responsible for the matter of punishment. We can only repeat what we have tried to demonstrate with the above example: thatmut'ah , theQur'anic ordinance concerning its legality, theSunnah (practice) of the Prophet (s.a.w .), the practice of his Companions,

its beingpractised during the rule of AbuBakr and in the early period of 'Umar's own Caliphate, are all verifiable realities which are above all argument and discussion. The books of history and traditions bear witness to the fact that during the age of the Prophet (s.a.w .) the high-ranking companions and respected members of theQuraysh allpractised mut'ah ; indeed many of the noble Muslims of that time were sons of temporary marriages.

Raghib al-Isfahani , the celebrated Sunni scholar, has reported that a Sunni scholarYahya ibn Aktham , asked one of the important nobles ofBasrah whom he followed about the justification formut'ah .The noblesiad "'Umar ibn Khattab ." "How is this," askedYahya , "he was the sworn enemy ofmut'ah ." The mansaid: "Yes, it has been proved that onceHadrat 'Umar announced from the pulpit: "Oh people! God and His Prophet madetwomut'ahs lawful, but I now declare them unlawful.

Also I will punish those who disobey me.' We accept his statement but we do not accept the validity of his prohibition." A similarhadith has been related by 'Abdullahibn 'Umar ; it is shorter and less harsh than the former: "During the age of the Prophet (s.a.w .) there were twomut'ahs , and I now make them unlawful." Some have argued that 'Umar did not want to alter the command of Allah but only to make a law which was suitable for the society of the time.

At thisstage it would be useful to recall a great work by a renowned scholar of the 6th century A.H., Muhammadibn Idris al-Hilli , namely the "sara'ir ", in which the author writes: "Temporary marriage within the Islamic code of religion is lawful. Muslims believe that its lawfulness is proved according to the Book of Godand also according to theSunnah .However some people have claimed that it had been revoked, but the veracity of this requires proof.

Moreover 'aql (the faculty of reason which allows us to understand the workings of God in his creation) tells us that every useful act about which we have no fear that it will give us any loss in this world or the next is permissible. This condition applies tomut'ah . Wemust, through our reason, acknowledge its lawfulness.

Now, if somebody asks whatis the proof , given the conflicting opinions concerning its legality, that it would not cause us loss in the next world, the answer is that the onus of proof lies on the person who pleads the possibility of its being harmful. It is beyond doubt thatmut'ah was permissible during the days of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w .), and that it was only later that they began talking of its unlawfulness and revocation. Thus until revocation can be proved we have no right to deny its lawfulness.

"When we examine thehadith which relate that the Prophet did makemut'ah unlawful, we find that these traditions all have weak chains of transmission and do not qualify as sources of certainty, nor do they provide a justification for action on the part of the Muslim.

"Let us examine again the relevant verse in the Qur'an. It occurs after the passage concerning the women who aremahram (oneis not allowed to marry them for reasons of consanguinity, etc.) "

And lawful for you are all (women) besides those mentioned', so that you may seek them by means of your wealth, taking (them) into marriage, and not committing fornication; and those with whom you concludedmut'ah give them their dowries as a fixed reward, and it shall not be a sin on you in whatever you mutually agree (to vary) after the fixed reward" (Surah an-Nisa '). In this holyverse the disputable work is "istamta'tum " which has two meanings - either to take pleasure in and profit from, or to make the agreement formut'ah according to the Islamic code - the first is the literal meaning and the second is according to its meaning within the Islamic code.

According to the principles of 'fiqh ', if a word in the Qur'an has two meanings - one literal and the other used specifically in the language of the "shari'ah " then the latter meaningmust be accepted and the literal meaning should not be relied upon. That is why for example the words "salat ", "zakat ", "sawm " and "hajj" are all to be understood according to the precise meaning of the Islamicshari'ah (code), and not according to the literal meaning to be found in the dictionary.

We have already made it dear that a well-known group of the companions believed in the lawfulness ofmut'ah and that Amir al-mu'minin himself openly declared its lawfulness; 'Abdullahibn 'Abbas used to enter into polemical discussion withibn Zubayr on this topic and these discussions became so widely known that they were not only talked of by the common people but the poets of that time also gave vent to their reactions in their verses.

Also 'Abdullahibn Mas'ud ,Mujahid ,Ata'i , Jabiribn 'Abdullah al-Ansari ,Salmah ibn al-Akwa ', AbuSa'id Khudri ,Mughirah ibn Sha'hab ,Sa'id ibn Jabir andIbn Jarih also gave the verdict thatmut'ah was lawful. All these men are esteemed and trustworthy men of knowledge; they arrived at their decision through careful examination of the matter.

We have so far thrown light on this topic from only a religious or historical point of view. Now let us assess it from the ethical and social point of view. Islam is a great blessing and mercy for the world. The message of Islam is like a divine song whichis diffused from heaven over the world of man, and which gave and still gives the answer to those who seek to understand the reason for man's existence on earth.

Our revealed religion suits every age, meets the needs of all men in every age in this world, and guarantees for them prosperity both spiritual and material. Islam was revealed by God not to make man's life harder but on the contrary, to fill it with mercy,meaning and order. That is why Islam is themost perfect religion and the last code of religion before the end of the world; this divine law adorns human culture and civilization with perfection; no other man-made institutions or laws are needed.

Let us now examine oneactivity which every individual is obliged to undertake at some time in his life, namely, travel. We find that the Islamic code indicates precisely the code of conduct to be expected from theMuslim who is travelling, whether for trade, for war or on the hajj or 'umrah , for example.

It hardly needs tobe pointed out that God, the All-Wise, has endowed man with sexual desire for the preservation of the human race. Andit also goes without saying that atraveller is unable to fulfill the requirements of a permanent marriage.

Under these conditions, what should thistraveller do who has been away from his home for a long time?

How should be behave especially when he happens to be young and subject to strong sexual urges.

There are only two alternatives possible if we do not allowmut'ah ; heshould either control his passion or must indulge in unlawful relationships. Itshould be stated that excessive control and suppressing of sexual desires sometimes causes serious physical and mental illness. Sterility is also another possible consequence of such self-control. Such practice is patiently against the dictates of wisdom, and God says in the Quran, "God wishes ease for you and does not wish for you discomfort."

May God save us from sexual mal-practices. Most parts of the world are suffering its consequences today.

I swear to God that if the Muslims act in compliance with the religious laws, this universe, according to the divine promise, will become complete mercy for them, and man will live in harmony andprosperty .

Mut'ah is thus a welcome and necessary law of the Islamic religion.If the Muslims acted in accordance with the conditions for lawfulmut'ah (the making of an agreement between the two parties stipulating the time limit and dowry, and the 'iddah , for example), and take advantage of this divine blessing, evil-doing would to a great extent be eradicated, thehonour of man and woman would be saved, the Muslim community would grow in number, the world would be rid of illegitimate children and moral values would be strengthened.

The pronouncement of the exalted man of the community, 'Abdullahibn 'Abbas cannot be over-praised. Ibn Athir relates that he says, "Mut'ah was a blessing with which God the Almighty endowed theummah of Muhammad (peace and the blessings of God be upon him and his descendents) and, had it not been prohibited, no-one, except the truly perverted ones, would have committedadultry (see the "Nahayah " ofIbn Athir and the "Fa'iq " ofaz-Zamakhshari ).

The effects of his exalted teacher and guardian, Amir al-mu'minin are reflected in this statement ofIbn Abbas . The fact is that the Islamic world is rejecting this divine mercy and as a result has plunged itself into shameless immorality.

8 (b)Talaq (Divorce)

It is clear that the essence of marriage is the very special union whichis established between man and woman, and which makes the two different individuals close companions and partners to each other. The cooperation and communion between wife and husbandmay be compared to a person's eyes and hands - each hand is different from the other but each complements and perfects the other.

The very nature of this act, that two personalities, who are quite unacquainted with each other,are so strongly joined and united through wedlock that it precludes any conception of a stronger union, shows the particular strength of this alliance . There can be no better words than the following verse of the Holy Quran: "Hunna libasuln lakum wa antum libasuln lahunna " (2:187), "They are your garments and you are their garments."Truly this verse expresses the subtle intimacy of the relationship of marriage.

The obvious feature of the non-temporary alliance is that the two make an agreement to remain together for life.

It may happen however that the marriageis no longer desired either on the part of one or both parties and divorce becomes necessary. The code of religion ordains that certain conditionsbe fulfilled according to the kind of divorce in question. There are three kinds of divorce: firstly, if divorce is desired from the side of the husband, separation is called "talaq "; secondly, it is desired from the side of the wife, she can obtain "khul "'.And lastly , if disagreement is on both sides, they can have recourse to "mubarat " to obtain separation.

Since Islam is a social religion and ithas been founded on unity and oneness, its greatest objective is love and concord. The creation of disharmony in whatever form is tobe avoided whenever possible. Accordingly, a large number oftraditons have expressed the undesirability of "talaq " (divorce) and some of them say that among the acts made lawful by God, there is no act more undesirable than divorce.

That is why the messenger of God has made clear toman the conditions and restrictions of divorce, so that it may occur as infrequently as possible within the Muslim community.

Among the rules of divorce, the presence of two just witnesses is a necessary condition. If divorce is pronounced in the absence of two just witnesses, it will be considerednull and void . This condition is the best means of doing away with mutual hatred, because two 'just' persons will consider it their duty to bring about peace and friendship between the couple through admonition and preaching before carrying out the divorce.

Of course, it will not be successful on every occasion but the number of divorcescan be minimized by the intervention of these two persons who are respected within their community for their good sense and justice.

It is regretful to note that our Sunni brothers, do not accept this argument. They did not consider the presence of two just witnesses necessary for divorce.Consequently the number of divorces is growing so great among them that it causes inconvenience to a great number of people.

Unfortunately, many of us, as well as our Sunni brothers, are unaware of the hidden wisdom contained in the religious code. We pray that Muslims may whole-heartedly comply with the divine laws so that the bitterness thathas been created in their private lives, and the confusion that has spread in their social affairs, may at least be reduced.

The important condition of divorce is that the one who divorces must not be under compulsion, or in a state of anger, or any other state ofmind which diminishes his ability to think clearly and make decisions in a reasonable manner. (Moreover, the divorce should have completed her monthly period of menstruation and not have had sexual intercourse in the 'new month'. This condition inevitably helps to delay and eventually lessen the number of divorces).

In theJa'fari (Shi'a ) 'fiqh ', pronouncement of divorce three times in one sittingis counted as only one divorce. Thus if a man pronounces divorce three times in one sitting, his wife does not become forbidden for him forever. Theycan be united again without any condition.

If the man then again divorces his wife, returns a second time to the woman and then divorces her a third time, the woman shall become forbidden after this third divorce. After that, she cannot become lawful for him unless she marries (and subsequently divorces) another man. If this thing happens, nine times, he will be unlawful for her former husband forever.

Most of the 'ulama ' of the Sunni community stipulate that if a husband says three times to his wife that he has divorced her, it will be considered as an irrevocabletalaq ; resumption of conjugal relations is only possible if the wife marries and subsequently divorces another man, though it is clearly stated in certain of their acceptedhadith that divorce pronounced three times in one sitting is to be counted as one divorce.

It is narrated in al-Bukhari , on the authority ofIbn 'Abbas , that "during the time of the Prophet, and during the caliphate of AbuBakr , and for two years during the caliphate of 'Umar , the 'three divorces' meant only one divorce, butHadrat 'Umar said: that although people were entitled to delay divorce, they did not wish to wait, and so, seeing no obstacle in the way, we granted permission for them to carry it out" (that is, he recognized the validity of irrevocable divorce after pronouncing divorce three times in one sitting).

The Holy Quran is itselfunambigious in this matter: "Divorce (shall be lawful) only twice, then (you should) either keep her in fairness or send her away with kindness." (2:229)After this, God, the Almighty, says: "So if he divorces her (for a third time), then she shall not be lawful to him until she weds another husband." (2:230) We have tried to give a brief account of the causes of divorce; if more details are required, one may refer to the books of Islamic jurisprudence..

* * * * *

There are also other causes of separation such as defects and diseases in either party. If the man is sexually impotent or becomes insane, the woman has the right to divorce him. Certain diseases of a woman's sexual organs entitle the man to divorce his wife.Zihar andilla ' (kinds of oaths of rejection of the woman on the part of the man, common amongst the Arabs before the coming of Islam) may also be a cause of separation.

The various kinds of "iddah " and other allied mattersare dealt with comprehensively in more specialized works offiqh .Suffice it to say that after the death of the husband, it is compulsory for the wife to observe "iddah " even if she is "ya'isah " (past the menopause), or is a minor, or has not had coition with her husband. In divorce, "iddah " is compulsory in cases other than the three mentioned above. In unlawful coition (adultery), there is no 'iddah .

The necessary waiting period after the death of the husband is four months and ten days, but, in case the woman is pregnant, she must wait until delivery. This, of course, may be less or more than the four months and ten days. The duration of the "iddah " after the divorce is three months, and for the pregnant woman, it istill delivery and for thekaniz , or slave girl, it is half the period of the free woman.

If the divorce has not accrued twice before and there is no 'khul ', the husband can resume conjugal relations at any time during the period of 'iddah . The man no longer has the right to return to the wife unless the two parties are willing to make a new act of marriage (and only then under certain conditions).

It is not considered necessary by theShi'a that two witnesses be present for the resumption of marriage (as it is in the case of divorce), but it is desirable; it is not necessary moreover to recite anything specific. Such words and signs as serve the purpose are sufficient.

As we have already made clear, the relationship of marriage cannot be broken unless one or both partners expresses dislike for the other; if the dislike is from the side of the husband, he has the right totalaq , through which he can, if he desires, divorce his wife; and if the wife detests him, she can, on payment of some money, demanded by the husband, (it may be equal to or more than the dower) and after reciting the prescribed words (sighah ), be released from the bond of wedlock.

This latter is calledkhul ' and it is only valid if all conditions of divorce are fulfilled and there is very strongill-feelings on the part of the woman for the husband. This is in accordance with what the Holy Qur'an says:

"And if you fear that they shall not (be able) to keep (themselves) within the limits (fixed) by God, there shall be no sin on either of them about what she gives up to get herself free (from the wedlock). These are the limits ordained by God. Beware! Exceed them not." (2:229)

The commentary of theahlu 'l-bayt about this verse is that it concerns the wife who says to her husband, "I will not believe in your swearing; I will not respect the divine code concerning marriage conduct as far as you are concerned. I will not allow coition; and will bring undesirable people into your house." This obviously shows extreme hatred on the part of the wife and there would then appear to be no possibility of harmonious relations between her and her husband.

If, however, the feeling of dislike is equally strong on both sides, anydivorce which takes place is called a "mubarat " divorce. This kind of divorce is likewise only valid if all the conditions oftalaq (divorce)are fulfilled , but in this case, the husband has no right to claim more than the dower money that he has paid to the wife. Inkhul ' and 'mubarat ', the divorces is irrevocable.

After it, the husband cannot assume conjugal relations. If however the woman takes back the money she gave the husband at the time of 'khal ", they may resume the conjugal alliance as long as the period of "iddah " has not come to an end.

There are also other causes of prohibition (for instance, if the husband calls his wife 'mother' or 'sister' or likens her to either, the wife becomes prohibited to him till he performs an act of atonement. Thisis called zihar .

Theseare explained in the relevant books. Such incidents seldom take placetoday as they were particular to the Arabs of pre-Islamic days.