Scholars defending Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah on divorce i.e. 3 equals 1 in one sitting.

Scholars defending Fatwa of Ibn Taymiyah on divorce i.e. 3 equals 1 in one sitting.

1. Shaykh ul Islam Saleh bin Umar Siraj ud din al Bulqini
2. Imam Mur`i bin Yusaf al Karmi (d 1033 h) said:
3. al Ayni Hanafi
4. Imam Abul Muzaffar Yusaf bin Muhammad (696h to 776h)
5. Ibn Hajar asqalani
6. Qadhi Shokani replied to the claim of Abrogation.
7. ad-Dhahabi

 

1. Shaykh ul Islam Saleh bin Umar Siraj ud din al Bulqini said:

وانتصب للرد عليه الشيخ تقي الدين السبكي في مسألتي الزيارة والطلاق، وأفرد كلاً منهما بتصنيف، وليس في ذلك ما يقتضي كفره ولا زندقته أصلاً، وكل أحد يؤخذ من قوله ويترك إلا صاحب هذا القبر- يعني النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم – والسعيد من عدت غلطاته، وانحصرت سقطاته، ثم إن الظن بالشيخ تقي الدين أنه لم يصدر منه ذلك تهوراً وعدواناً- حاش لله- بل نعله لرأي رآه وأقام عليه برهاناً،

Then Taqi ud din as-Subki started to refute him on the topics of Ziyarah and divorce and wrote books on these issues. There is nothing in these issues because of which disbelief and heresy is applicable to him. We take and reject the saying of everyone except Prophet peace be upon him… And to say that Shaykh Taqi al-Din said this because of carelessness and agression? May Allah save us! It cannot happen.

[al Radd al Wafir Ibn Nasir al-Din ad-Damishqi page 249, Ghayat al Amani fe Radd al Nabhani 2/161-164]

 

2. Imam Mur`i bin Yusaf al Karmi (d 1033 h) said:

Ibn Tamiyah rahimaullah said “If the divorce is given three times at one time then one divorce will be counted” He is not alone in this saying rather it is narrated from Ali, Zubair, Abdul Rahman bin Awf, Ibn Masood, Ibn Abbas, This is said by Ata, Tawus, Amr bin Denar, Saeed bin Jubayr, Abul Shoatha, Muhammad bin Ishaq, Hajjaj bin Artaah, This is said by Scholars of Qartaba, and group of them are Muhammad bin Salaam al Khisshni (d 286 h) Faqeeh Asar, Asbegh bin al Habbab, This is accepted by Abu Hayaan Andalusi in his Tafseer “al Nahr” and Imam Ibn Al Qayyim”[ash-Shahadatul Zakaiyah fe Thana Al Aimma al Ibn Tamiyah page 90-91]

Then he said “Ibn Tamiyah was a Mujtahid as the scholars of his time are witness over it.. only a rigid and jahil would go against this
[ash-Shahadatul Zakaiyah fe Thana Al Aimma al Ibn Tamiyah page 91]

3. Imam al Ayni Hanafi said:
   ولم يكن بحثه فيما صدر عنه في مسألة الزيارة والطلاق إلا عن اجتهاد سائغ بالاتفاق، والمجتهد في الحالين مأجور مثاب، وليس فيه شيء مما يلام أو يعاب، ولكن حملهم على ذلك حسدهم الظاهر، وكيدهم الباهر، وكفى للحاسد ذماً آخر سورة الفلق، في احتراقاته بالقلق،
   Whatever he said regarding the issue of “Ziyarah” and “Talaq” is his Ijtihaad, which is allowed by the agreement. The Mujtahid get the thawab whether he is right or even when he is wrong. AND THEN THERE IS NOTHING IN HIS (THE FATAWA OF ZIYARAH AND TALAQ) WHICH SHOULD BE BLAMED AND CONDEMNED, envious tried to make his name bad by doing mischievous things. The last verse of Surah Falaq is enough in refutation of envious. he burns because he is anxious. [Taqreez of al Ayni on the book “Radd al Wafir”, Ghayat al Amani 2/157]

 

4. Imam Abul Muzaffar Yusaf bin Muhammad (696h to 776h)

When as-Subki said regarding Ibn Taymiyah after his death:
لو كان حياً يرى قولي ويفهمه … رددت ما قال أقفو أثر سبسبه كما رددت عليه في الطلاق وفي … ترك الزيارة رداً غير مشتبه
If he was alive, he would listen and understand that I wrote a refutation.. As I refuted on the issue of divorce and visiting the graves.. [Quoted by his student Safadi in al Wafi bil wafiyat 21/172]

Imam Abul Muzaffar Yusaf bin Muhammad (696h to 776h) [Trustworthy Imam, see Radd al Wafir 1/131] wrote:
الحمية الإسلامية في الإنتصار لمذهب ابن تيمية
in refutation of as-Subki, Just quoting two lines from it,

He said:
لكن إذا الأسد الضرغام غاب عن الـ … ـعرين تسمع فيه ضج ثعلبه
كذا الجبان خلا في البر صاح ألا … مبارزٌ وتغالى في توثبه
When the Powerful Lion (Ibn Taymiyah) is not in the Jungle, You hear the noises of the fox (as-Subki).
Coward ask for someone to come against him when there is no one in the ring. [quoted by Mahmud al Alusi in Ghayat al Amani 1/430]

5. Ibn Hajar asqalani said.

الرابع أنه مذهب شاذ فلا يعمل به، وأجيب بأنه نقل عن علي وابن مسعود وعبد الرحمن بن عوف والزبير مثله، نقل ذلك ابن مغيث في ‏”‏ كتاب الوثائق ‏”‏ له وعزاه لمحمد بن وضاح، ونقل الغنوي ذلك عن جماعة من مشايخ قرطبة كمحمد بن تقي بن مخلد ومحمد بن عبد السلام الخشني وغيرهما، ونقله ابن المنذر عن أصحاب ابن عباس كعطاء وطاوس وعمرو بن دينار‏.‏
ويتعجب من ابن التين حيث جزم بأن لزوم الثلاث لا اختلاف فيه ، وإنما الاختلاف في التحريم مع ثبوت الاختلاف كما ترى ، ويقوي حديث ابن إسحاق المذكور ما أخرجه مسلم
Fourthly this (saying 3 talaq equals 1) is Odd Madhab so it is not practiced, It is answered this(the madhab of 3 talaq=1) is narrated from (2) Ali, (3)Ibne Masood, (4)Abdul Rahman bin Awf and (5)Zubair (RadhuAllahanhun) same is mentioned by Ibn e Mugeeth in Kitab al wathaiq and Muhammad bin Wadah attributed to him, and Ghanwi mentioned same(madhab) from Scholars of Qartaba like (6)Muhammad bin Taqi bin Muhammad,(7)Muhammad bin Abdus Salam Al Hashni etc, And Ibn e Munzar mentioned (same fatwa) from Companions of (8)Ibn e Abbas ra Like (9) Ata (bin abi ribah),(10)Tawus(bin Kaisan),(11)Omar bin Dinar.
Astonishment over Ibn Teen when he said with certainty that there is no difference of opinion in the obligation of Triple Talaaq (taking place) and difference is only on prohibition while there is a difference of opinion as you are seeing. The hadith of Ibn Ishaq becomes powerful with the hadith of Sahih Muslim(Fath ul Bari 9/369)
.
Then Ibn Hajar asqalani ra said that The issue of three divorce is like Mutah i.e. Mutah became haram at the time of Prophet peace be upon him but some of the sahaba were not aware of it, but at the time of Umar ra all the sahaba agreed it is Haram..

6. Qadhi Shokani replied to the claim of Abrogation.

وَيُجَابُ بِأَنَّ النَّسْخَ إنْ كَانَ بِدَلِيلٍ مِنْ كِتَابٍ أَوْ سُنَّةٍ فَمَا هُوَ ؟ وَإِنْ كَانَ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ فَأَيْنَ هُوَ ؟ عَلَى أَنَّهُ يَبْعُدُ أَنْ يَسْتَمِرَّ النَّاسُ أَيَّامَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَبَعْضَ أَيَّامِ عُمَرَ عَلَى أَمْرٍ مَنْسُوخٍ وَإِنْ كَانَ النَّاسِخُ قَوْلَ عُمَرَ الْمَذْكُورَ فَحَاشَاهُ أَنْ يَنْسَخَ سُنَّةً ثَابِتَةً بِمَحْضِ رَأْيِهِ ، وَحَاشَا أَصْحَابُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنْ يُجِيبُوهُ إلَى ذَلِكَ .

Regarding Abrogation we will say If it has been abrogated from any evidenceof Quran and Sunnah, then where is that evidence ?. And If it is said that it has been abrogated from Consensus (Ijma) then we will say where it is proven Ijma ? And It is very absurd that people have been practicing on a thing in the era of Abu Bakr r.a and starting era of Umar r.a which has been abrogated. And if it is said that the Nasikh (abrogator) is the saying of Umar r.a then it is also unbelievable how Umar r.a can abrogate a Proven Sunnah from his own opionion ?. And we ask forgiveness by imagining such about Companions r.a that they would have abrogate a Sunnah.[Nayl al awtar 10/256].

7. ad-Dahabi defended him by saying:
وأوذي رحمه الله في ذات الله تعالى من قبل المخالفين، وأخيف في نصرة السنة المحضة، حتى سار على منارة، وعلى وضوح، ولكن الله جمع له قلوب أهل التقوى، وجمعهم على محبته، والدعاء له، وكبت الله أعداءه،
And he Rahimaullah was harmed in his path to Allāh by his opponents, threatened because he aided the pure Sunnah until Allāh raised his lighthouse, and united the hearts of the people of piety upon love of him and supplication for him, and Allah crushed his enemies. [quoted from al-Dhahabī by Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī in Dhayl Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābilah (4/496-497) through his work Muʿjam al-Shuyūkh, quoted by Abu Zahra in Hiyat Shaykh al Islam page 777, Omar bin Saood quoted in Sharah Limiyah 1/7 from Mojam ash-Shuyukh]