Azami 6609

Abu Dawud (2229), Tirmidhi (1185 repeated), and Hakim (2/206) all narrated it through the route of Hisham bin Yusuf, from Maamar, from Amr bin Muslim, from Ikrima, from Ibn Abbas, and he mentioned it. Tirmidhi said, "Hasan gharib." Hakim said, "Sahih isnad, except that Abdul-Razzaq narrated it as a mursal report from Maamar." Abu Dawud said, "This hadith was narrated by Abdul-Razzaq from Maamar, from Amr bin Muslim, from Ikrima, from the Prophet ﷺ as a mursal report."I say, Hisham bin Yusuf is the Sanaani, the judge of Sanaa. He was reliable and precise. Abu Zura ranked him above Abdul-Razzaq. Abdul-Rahman bin Abu Hatim said, "I heard Abu Zura, and I asked him about Hisham bin Yusuf, Muhammad bin Thawr, and Abdul-Razzaq, and he said, 'Hisham had the most sound written record among the Yemenis.'" Abu Zura said on another occasion, "Hisham was the oldest of them, the most retentive, and the most precise." Abu Hatim said, "Reliable and precise." Someone of his standing is not harmed by Abdul-Razzaq's disagreement with him.The hadith of Abdul-Razzaq in his Musannaf (11858) comes from Maamar, from Amr bin Muslim, from Ikrima, the freedman of Ibn Abbas, who said, "The wife of Thabit bin Qays bin Shammas sought release from her husband, so the Messenger of Allah made her waiting period one menstrual cycle." In the isnad is Amr bin Muslim, who is the Jundi, the Yemeni, for whom Muslim narrated one hadith. Ibn Main said in one narration, "There is no harm in him," and Ibn Adi said, "He has no hadith that is extremely objectionable." Ibn Hibban deemed him reliable, so a narrator of his standing has his hadith graded hasan.There is disagreement over the name of Thabit bin Qays bin Shammas's wife. Some say Jamila bint Sahl, which is the most well known, others say Habiba bint Sahl, others say Jamila bint Sulul, others say Zaynab bint Abdul-Rahman bin Ubayy, others say Maryam al-Mughaliya, and others say something else. On the surface this appears to be confusion, but it can be explained by Thabit bin Qays having more than one wife, and the disagreement over the name of the woman who sought release does not affect the soundness of the hadith.As for what was narrated from Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet ﷺ made release count as one irrevocable divorce, this is extremely daif. It was narrated by Daraqutni (4/45-46) and Bayhaqi (7/316), both through the hadith of Rawwad bin Jarra, from Abbad bin Kathir, from Ayub, from Ikrima, from Ibn Abbas, and he mentioned it. Abbad bin Kathir is the Thaqafi, the Basri. Ahmad said, "He narrated fabricated hadiths." Ibn Main said, "Daif in hadith." Nasai said, "Abandoned." Bukhari, Abu Zura, Daraqutni, Ajli, and others declared him daif. The conclusion is that he is extremely daif, indeed "abandoned," as stated in Taqrib. Also in the chain is Rawwad bin Jarra, whom Nasai declared daif, and Daraqutni said, "Abandoned." Bayhaqi said, after discussing Abbad bin Kathir the Basri, "How could it be sound, when the position of Ibn Abbas and Ikrima is contrary to it?" And there are other hadiths of similar meaning that are not sound.The scholars differed regarding the waiting period of the woman who sought release. Most scholars among the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ and others said that the waiting period of the woman who sought release is three menstrual cycles, for the apparent meaning of the Book regarding the waiting period of divorced women covers the woman who sought release along with others. This is the view held by Ahmad, Ishaq, and the people of Kufa. Some scholars among the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ and others said that the waiting period of the woman who sought release is one menstrual cycle, relying on the hadith of Rabee bint Muawwidh. Ishaq bin Rahawayh said, "If someone were to hold this view, it would be a strong position." Tirmidhi mentioned this.Sheikh Islam bin Taymiya, may Allah have mercy on him, said, "Whoever examines this view will find it consistent with the principles of the Sharia. The waiting period was made three menstrual cycles so that the time for taking the wife back would be extended, so that the husband could reconsider, and so that he would be able to take her back during the waiting period. But if there is no right of taking her back, then the purpose is simply to clear her womb of pregnancy, and one menstrual cycle is sufficient for that, just as it is for clearing the womb."It can be understood from the hadiths in this chapter that release is an annulment and not a divorce. This is because Allah Almighty said, "Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three menstrual periods" [Baqarah 2:228]. If she were divorced, her waiting period would not have been limited to a single menstrual cycle. It is also because Allah mentioned divorce at the beginning of the verse and at its end, and mentioned release in between, saying, "Divorce is twice. Then, either keep her in an acceptable manner or release her with good treatment. And it is not lawful for you to take anything of what you have given them unless both fear that they will not be able to keep within the limits set by Allah. But if you fear that they will not be able to keep within the limits set by Allah, then there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself. These are the limits of Allah, so do not transgress them. And whoever transgresses the limits of Allah, those are the wrongdoers. And if he divorces her, then she is not lawful to him afterward until she marries a husband other than him" [Baqarah 2:229–230]. If release were made a form of divorce, then the count of divorces would come to four.This is the view held by Ibn Abbas, Uthman, Ibn Umar, and Ahmad in one narration, and it is the position chosen by Sheikh Islam bin Taymiya and his student Ibn Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on them, because the husband has the right to take his wife back in divorce, unlike release, in which there is no right of taking her back. Rather, he would marry her again with a new dowry and a new marriage contract.The practical significance of this disagreement appears in the case where a man divorces his wife twice and she then seeks release from him. Can he marry her again or not? Ibn Abbas was asked about this, and he said, "Allah mentioned divorce at the beginning of the verse and at its end, and release in between, so release is not a divorce, he may marry her." Bayhaqi narrated this (7/316) with a sahih isnad, and said, "There is nothing in this chapter more sahih than this hadith of Ibn Abbas."The disagreement also becomes apparent in the case where a man releases his wife repeatedly, for it would be permissible for him to marry her again with a new marriage contract and a new dowry, without her having married another husband in between.