Halala (Tahleel Marriage)

Summary:

What is Halala?

Halala (or Tahleel marriage, Arabic: نكاح التحليل) is a rule in Islamic law that comes into effect after a man divorces his wife by saying Talaq three times (known as triple talaq). If the couple later regret this decision and wish to be together again, Islam does not allow them to remarry directly.

Instead, the only way for them to be reunited is through Halala, which involves the following steps:

1. The woman must marry another man.

2. This new marriage must be consummated (meaning, they must have sexual intercourse).

3. If the second husband later divorces her willingly, only then is she allowed to remarry her first husband.

Why Is Halala Problematic?

While Halala is considered a religious solution, in practice it raises many serious ethical and emotional concerns—especially for women.

For example:

• In Islam, only a man has a right to divorce. Thus, if a man angrily declares Talaq three times in a moment of rage, this can suddenly destroy an entire family. Even if the wife is completely innocent, she is the one who suffers the most.

• To return to her first husband, she is forced to marry another man and sleep with him—even if she doesn’t want to—just to fulfil the useless and unnecessary Halala requirement. This process is humiliating and deeply traumatic for the woman.

• There’s no guarantee that the second husband will eventually divorce her. If he chooses to stay married, she may be trapped in the 2nd marriage, separated from her children, her home, and her former life.

Why Do Muslim Women still Agree to Halala, despite it being a Shameful Act?

Not a single Muslim woman willingly agree to this shameful act of Halala. They are actually COMPELLED to agree to it. Why? Because Multiple Islamic Sharia Rulings leaves on other choice for them, except to agreeing to this shameful process of Halala.

Here are these multiple Sharia Rulings, which ultimately compel them to agree to it:

• In Islam, if a divorced woman REMARRIES another man, she loses custody of all of her children. 

• If she chooses to stay SINGLE, then she may get her childrn, but then she will  face lifelong social stigma and isolation.

• So for many women, going back to their first husband is the only way to keep both: a father for their children and a partner for themselves.

That’s why some women, despite the emotional toll and humiliation involved, agree to go through the process of Halala.

Islam: A System Weighted Against Women

Halala reflects the wider imbalance in Islamic divorce laws.

Men can end a marriage on impulse with just three words, while women have no legal right to end the marriage on their ownc, unless the man agrees (Khul’ is also a right of a husband in Islamic Sharaia and she cannot get freedom through Khul without the consent of her husband).

Please connect the dots and see this chain:

Triple divorce (only man's right) → only woman loses custody of her children if she remarries → only woman must marry another man and let him rape her → no divorce guarantee for woman → only woman risks of being stuck in the 2nd unwanted marriage. 

This creates a system where women are left incredibly vulnerable—forced into painful situations, with no control over their bodies or their futures.

Table of Contents:

Islamists PRAISE Islamic Halala System for being based upon Divine Wisdom, although Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance

Islamists often praise the system of Halala as a divine ruling filled with God's wisdom. But what's rarely discussed is that this practice actually predates Islam—it existed during the pre-Islamic era of ignorance (Jahiliyyah) and was later absorbed into Islamic law.

It’s unfortunate that some Islamic scholars continue to promote Halala as a sacred and wise Sharia law, while withholding the historical truth from ordinary Muslims. They don’t mention that Muhammad adopted Halala from the existing Arab culture of his time and then gave it religious backing under Sharia.

The well-known historian Dr. Jawad Ali explained in his book "Al-Mufassal fi Tarikh al-Arab Qabla al-Islam" (“Detailed History of the Arabs Before Islam”) that (link):

Thus, if Halala is a praiseworthy system, based upon divine wisdom, then give credit to pre-Islamic era of Jahiliyyah (ignorance), and not to Islam. 

Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from the Quran

Many modern Islamic apologists try to mislead people by suggesting that the controversial practice of Halala has nothing to do with Islam itself—that it was somehow invented later by scholars of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh).

But this claim is false. Halala is not just a scholarly opinion or a Fiqh interpretation—it’s a direct ruling from the Qur’an itself and has been unanimously accepted by all Muslim jurists throughout history.

The proof is in the Qur’an itself, Surah Al-Baqarah 2:230, which states:

Because this verse is so clear, no Islamic scholar or school of thought ever denied the legitimacy of Halala. The only difference lies in the details of how it can be carried out (link):

• The Hanafi and Shafi’i schools permit a woman to marry a second man even if the intention from the start is to eventually divorce and return to her first husband. This is why we see “Halala centres” operating not just in Muslim-majority countries but also in the West wherever Muslim communities live.

• On the other hand, the Hanbali and Maliki schools reject this idea. They insist that the second marriage must be completely genuine, with no prior agreement or intention to divorce.

But ironically, this stricter view ends up being even more harmful to women. If the second husband refuses to divorce her, the woman could lose both—her children and the man she still loves—even though she may be completely innocent in the original divorce.

In either case, it’s the woman who suffers the most, and Halala—far from being a merciful or wise system—often becomes a source of deep injustice.

Why Many Muslim Women Still Choose to Go Through the Painful Process of Halala

In many Islamic societies, the process of Halala—where a divorced woman must marry another man, consummate that marriage, and get divorced again before she can return to her first husband—comes with shame, emotional stress, and real risks for women. Society often looks down on women who go through this process. Still, many Muslim women choose to do it. Why?

The Fist Reason: They Still Love Their First Husband

As humans, we experience all kinds of emotions—love, anger, regret. Sometimes in a moment of anger, a husband may say "Talaq" (divorce) three times, officially ending the marriage in Islam. But should that moment of anger permanently erase all the love and shared memories they had?

Often, both the husband and wife still care for each other after the divorce. They may want to fix things, reunite, and raise their children together again. But Islamic law doesn’t allow that unless the woman marries another man and then gets divorced again—a condition known as Halala.

This seems unfair. If both people truly want to be together again, shouldn’t they be supported, not punished? Helping them reunite would be better for them and especially for their children. Denying them that chance just because of a mistake or emotional outburst makes their lives even harder.

But What About the 3-Month Waiting Period?

Islamic scholars often argue that the three-month waiting period (called iddah) after divorce is enough time for couples to reflect and possibly reconcile. And if they don’t reconcile during this time, they say it’s a punishment from Allah—especially if the woman then has to go through Halala.

But real life is more complicated than that.

Sometimes, three months just isn’t enough time to cool down, think things through, and understand the depth of the relationship. The pain of being separated from your partner or children often takes longer to truly hit. Living with your parents again, dealing with loneliness, or being a single parent—these experiences may take more than three months to make someone realise what they lost.

So saying that three months is enough to solve every emotional conflict is unrealistic. Human relationships don’t work that neatly.

The Second Reason: Keeping the Family Together for the Children

When a couple gets divorced, they usually start living separately. This means the children end up living with only one parent — either the mother or the father. In both cases, the children's sense of a united family is broken. That’s why many divorced Muslim women still hope to get back with their ex-husbands. Their main reason is the well-being of their children. They want their kids to grow up in a loving home where both parents are present and involved in their lives.

The Third Reason: Losing Custody of Children if the Mother Marries Someone Else

There is another Islamic ruling that closely connects with the practice of Halala. According to this rule, if a divorced woman marries someone other than her former husband, she can lose custody of her children. The reasoning behind this is that in Islam, a wife’s time, apart from prayer, is considered to belong to her new husband. He has the right to call her for intimacy whenever he wants. If her children from a previous marriage are with her, it could interfere with that right. Because of this, Islamic teachings say that if she marries someone else, she must be separated from her children.

There is a hadith in Sunan Abi Dawud 2276 that supports this:

Sunan Abi Dawud 2276:

A woman said: Messenger of Allah, my womb is a vessel to this son of mine, my breasts, a water-skin for him, and my lap a guard for him, yet his father has divorced me, and wants to take him away from me. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: You have more right to him as long as you do not marry (to another man).

You can also read our detailed article on this issue: 

• Islam: If a divorced woman remarries, then she will lose the Custody of her children

This situation puts divorced Muslim mothers in a very difficult position. They are forced to choose between three painful options:

1. Remain single to keep their children
   In this case, the mother keeps custody of her children, but she is not allowed to marry again. This creates serious challenges. Life is not easy for a single woman in many Islamic societies. She faces many restrictions, such as wearing hijab, avoiding contact with men, and having limited freedom. On top of that, she has to manage the house, care for her children, and find a way to earn money—often without much help.

2. Marry someone else and lose her children
   If the woman remarries for love or support, she may be forced to give up her children. This is an extremely painful situation for any mother. Losing custody simply because she chooses to move on with her life is a cruel reality many women face.

3. Remarry her ex-husband, but go through Halala
   This option allows her to stay with her children and get financial support, but it comes at a heavy cost. In order to remarry her ex-husband, she must first go through Halala—a process that often involves sleeping with another man before being “allowed” to return to her former spouse. Many women find this process humiliating and emotionally damaging.

In the end, these Islamic rulings put divorced women in a corner. They are left with impossible choices: stay single and struggle alone, lose their children, or submit to a degrading process just to rebuild their family. It shows how deeply unfair and painful these rules can be for women, especially when it comes to divorce and remarriage.

Risks Associated with Halala for Women

Halala places women at risk in several serious ways. These dangers are emotional, physical, and social, and each one carries its own painful consequences.

1. The Second Husband May Refuse to Divorce
One of the biggest risks is that the second husband may choose not to divorce the woman after consummating the marriage. According to Islamic Sharia, women do not have the right to end the marriage on their own. They cannot file for divorce, nor can they request Khul' (as explained in more detail in our article on Khul'). This leaves the woman trapped in a marriage she never wanted to stay in.

2. Abuse by the Second Husband
An even more distressing outcome occurs when the second husband becomes abusive. In some cases, he might beat the woman and use violence to force her into submission. She may feel pressured to provide sexual services just to avoid more pain. Unfortunately, under Islamic law, a husband is allowed to beat his wife if she does not meet his sexual expectations, even if it results in bruises. Islamic courts usually do not offer protection unless the abuse is so extreme that it causes broken bones or serious physical harm. This leaves many women without any real way to escape an abusive situation. For more details, please see our article: Wife Beating in Islam (Recommendation vs Law).

3. Loss of Value in the Eyes of the First Husband
Another painful reality is related to how her first husband may view her after Halala. In many Islamic cultures, there is a concept called Ghayrah (protective jealousy). After a woman has been physically intimate with another man, her worth may seem diminished in the eyes of her former husband. The love he once felt might fade, especially in a culture where honour and emotional pride are highly valued. Even if she goes through Halala with the sole aim of reuniting with her children and rebuilding the family, the stigma may prevent her first husband from accepting her again. Society also tends to judge women harshly for going through Halala, adding further emotional burden.

In short, Halala creates a situation where only women risk being trapped in unwanted marriages, face potential abuse, and lose their dignity and acceptance in the eyes of both their community and their former husbands.

The combination of 3 Islamic Rulings: Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through a divorce (not even through Khul')

Halala does not come alone. it is the convergence of three specific Islamic decrees that contribute to the distressing circumstances faced by women:

1. Halala:
2. Wife Beating, even with bruises: Islamic teachings permit husbands to physically beat their wives, which may lead to physical harm such as bruises.
3. A wife has no right to take a Divorce: A wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way, as she does not have a right to take a divorce (not even through Khul' or through any Islamic court).

The combination of all these three Islamic Rulings can be seen in action in the following Hadith:

Please note that second marriage wasn’t some romantic choice for that female companion—it was a shackle forced on her by a system that thrives on crushing women. Islam is a merciless cage for women, a religion that dresses up oppression as divine will. Picture this: a husband, in a fit of rage, divorces his wife. What does Islam do? It rips mothers away from their children. A divorced woman might get the custody if her kids are small, but the second she dares remarry another man for financial support, or just for a shred of human connection and love, Islam snatches even those tiny children away from her and she loses their custody too. 

So what’s her choice if she’s a Muslim woman who wants both—a man’s companionship and her own flesh and blood (i.e. her children)?

The answer is: She’s got only one path: crawl back to her first husband, tail between her legs, just to keep her family intact. That’s the only way she gets a man’s support without Islam snatching away her children from her. 

However, Islam didn't stop with its injustice against a woman here, but it further stipulates that if she wants to back to her first husband,then she has to drag through the filth of halala—a degrading farce where she let another Muslim man rape her against her will, and then get divorced again. 

The alternative? Islam’s ultimatum is clear: stay single forever, a lonely widow to your own dreams, or kiss your children goodbye. That’s the “justice” this religion peddles.

So if that female companion wanted to get back to her first husband, then the only way to hold for her was to grit her teeth through halala’s humiliation. She didn’t “choose” that second marriage; she was shoved into it, to another controlling and abusive man, because Islam left her no other road.

And don’t let the apologists spin their tales. They’ll crow that she had the “right” to seek khul' from that second husband, that she marched to Muhammad for that reason. No, she didn’t go to Muhammad because Islam handed her khul' from her 2nd husband on a silver platter—she went to claw her way out by accusing her second husband of impotence. That’s right: her only escape hatch wasn’t some grand right to divorce; it was a desperate loophole. Islam doesn’t grant women khul' as a free pass, but her only chance to get rid of a such an abusive 2nd husband is to prove that he is impotent (where Islam allows her to get her freedom from him). 

So what’s left for these women, crushed under Islam’s boot? Scream “impotence” from the rooftops, true or not. And if they lie? Don’t you dare blame them. The real villain here is Islam itself, stacking injustice so high it’s a wonder women can breathe. It’s not their deceit—it’s survival. This system doesn’t just fail women; it rigs the game so they’re forced to scrape, scheme, and suffer for the tiniest sliver of freedom. Add to that the absurdity of men holding unchecked power—triple talaq in a heartbeat, no questions asked—while women grovel for scraps of agency. That’s not a religion; that’s a prison with extra steps.

Furthermore:

• According to this hadith, the husband used to 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 freedom (except if 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. Islam compels her to live with him her entire life in such an abusive relationship.
• 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 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 a divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only. Not only this, but he started to beat her brutally in order to compel her to provide him with sex services wholeheartedly. 
• And in such cases, not only is one family destroyed but both families are destroyed. The house of the 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 centre of beating for the woman.
• The children of the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother tortured in this way.
• And it is only the woman who mainly has to face all these difficulties. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce from the 1st husband (where a woman is alone in the house, but the husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave women), or it is the 'Iddah (waiting period) of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband in the name of Halala, and then providing him with 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, the men are free to enjoy their other wives and the slave women.

What is the LOGIC behind Halala?

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

• What is the logic behind Halala?

• And how is Halala going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?

• And how is Halala going to secure the interests of the children? Actually, Islamic apologists have never answered this question. 

Here are the defences, that have been presented by Islamic apologists today.

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

An Islamic apologist gave the following reason (link).

In Islam, only the husband has the right to give a 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 for his bad temper. It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person. The ruling of Halala is there, so that the husband does not take the issue of divorce lightly.

However, this line of reasoning is flawed and devoid of wisdom, as the Halala ruling is also punishing the wife and the children (even in cases when they are totally innocent). 

Primarily, even if it was the complete fault of the 1st husband of giving the divorce, still it is the wife who bears the brunt of the divorce procedure's hardships:

• The ordeal commences with the three-month duration of divorce, during which she remains confined to her husband's residence, deprived of his affection or intimacy. This period resembles solitary confinement, deeply affecting her emotional and mental state [Note: Traditionally, a divorce can also happen when the husbands pronounces 3 Talaqs in a single sitting. It can save the woman from 3 months solitary confinement like situation].
• Subsequently, she must endure the three additional menstrual cycles of 'Iddah, another phase of isolation where her sexual desires and emotional needs remain unfulfilled. This period exacerbates her emotional distress.
• Following this, she enters the grueling process of marrying another man, subjecting herself to physical intimacy against her volition. This is succeeded by the six-month ordeal encompassing the second divorce (Talaq) and subsequent 'Iddah.
• If the second husband proves to be abusive and forces her to remain against her will, she faces a lifetime of physical and emotional abuse, detached from her children. In this instance, the Halala process effectively condemns her to perpetual misery, as she endures forced intimacy and separation from her children.
• Adding to her ordeal, she confronts the disdain of Islamic society, which deems Halala antithetical to female modesty. Her status dwindles in the eyes of her initial husband, potentially straining their relationship or impeding his willingness to remarry her.

The predicament extends to the innocent children, who grapple with the burdensome consequences of being separated from their mother when she moves to the second husband's household, in accordance with Islamic principles.

Ultimately, the defense of Halala as a response to a husband's temper falls short in adequately addressing the immense physical, emotional, and psychological toll it inflicts upon the wife, children, and the societal fabric as a whole.

Just look at the female companion of Muhammad, who was tortured both physically and mentally by her 2nd husband. Can one still say that Halala is not a punishment for the poor woman, but for his first husband?

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

Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticize Hanafi/Shafi'i 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 ^(link).
• And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and Western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.

This argument triggers a response by two parties.

The first ones are the followers of Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqh, who say that ^[link]:

• Any such "precondition (of taking divorce later)" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and only such people are cursed who OPENLY Stipulate such condition.
• However, if no such precondition is "stipulated" openly, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.

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

• Halala is in its EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi/Shafi'i Fiqhs, or it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqhs).
• The only difference is one is MORE harmful, while the other is a little bit LESS harmful.
• If we accept the Hanafi/Shafi'i Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of divorce is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to reunite.
• But if we accept the Hanbali/Maliki Fiqhs as 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 the biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will lose their mother and their family life in this case.
• And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in Islamic and Western countries is concerned, then it may be stupid, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor mother and children in order to reunite. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more miserable.
• Thus, when modern Islamic 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 for divorced mothers, who lose their children for their entire lives.

Third Defence: The Origin of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) Arises ONLY from Misapplied Triple Divorce in One Sitting (Common in Hanafi Fiqh)

Modern Salafi Islamic apologists claim that ^[link]:

The practice of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is a direct consequence of erroneous Fiqh interpretations regarding the issuance of triple divorces in a single sitting ^[link]. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam. Responsibility for this lies with Hanafi Fiqh, not with Islam itself. If the three Talaqs were pronounced over three separate instances (spanning three months), there would be no need for Halala, as the couple got enough time to think and resolve their disputes during those 3 months.

However, this Salafi logic is flawed:

1. Duration of Resolution: Can one guarantee that a marital dispute will reach resolution within a mere three months? Is it not plausible that more time may be needed for genuine reconciliation? Consider a scenario where a husband realizes his error and seeks reunion after a year. What provision is made for such cases? Restricting the issue within three menstrual cycles may not always align with the reality; sometimes individuals require a more extended period for comprehension.

2. Effect of Separation: Instances have demonstrated that temporary separation between partners can often lead to resolution. The partners, separated, may learn lessons through child rearing, emphasizing the value of their union. However, in the Islamic divorce process, the wife is compelled to remain in her husband's residence throughout the divorce period, which can last around three months. This system may fall short in facilitating lessons, particularly for husbands who are permitted to engage with other women and slaves during this interval.

3. Extended Resolution Time: 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 the name of Halala, which negatively affect not only the couple but also the children. 

Furthermore:

• The matter of Triple Talaq extends beyond Hanafi jurisprudence; all four Sunni Fiqhs acknowledge the legitimacy of divorce arising from the pronouncement of triple divorces in one sitting. It may not be a Sunnah way to divorce, but legally it still a Sharia law and it is valid, and there is no punishment for husbands for divorcing their wives 3 times in one sitting. Therefore, the question is, if it was against decency to divorce a woman 3 times in one sitting, why didn't then Allah altogether abolish this law? Why to keep it in the name of non-Sunnah way of divorcing? 
• The denial of Triple Talaq in Islam pertains only to a few later coming Zahiri scholars; for the vast majority of Islam's 1400-year history, both Triple Talaq and the ensuing Halala practice have persisted globally.
• Even in the cases of three Talaqs in three menstrual cycles, numerous divorced women express the desire to reconcile with their former spouses, while it is the ONLY option for poor women to not lose the custody of their children and also have a support of a husband. Otherwise, if they remarry, then Islam snatches away their children from poor women. 

ٖFourth Defence: It's not Islam, but later coming Muslims made an Unnecessary Trend of 3 Talaqs (although 1 Talaq is also enough & better)

Please watch this video of Zakir Naik about Halala.

His argument is as following (in our own words):

It is a misconception that a woman needs 3 divorces to marry another man. Even after just 1 Talaq and completion of her 'iddah (3 menstrual cycles), a woman becomes eligible to marry someone else. She can even remarry her former husband without Halala after 1 or 2 divorces. Only after the third divorce does Halala become a requirement. Therefore, Halala would not be necessary if Muslims avoid divorcing their wives three times. Islam, according to him, only requires 1 divorce for separation, but Later coming Muslim Generations have Misconcenptions and they themselves have made this Unnecessary Trend of giving 3 Talaqs. 

Our Response: The Unnecessary Trend of Triple Talaq Did Not Originate from Later Muslims, but Was Present from the Time of Muhammad and the Early Companions

We respectfully disagree with Zakir Naik’s portrayal. The practice of issuing 3 divorces was not a trend invented by later Muslims, but is documented in the early Islamic period, during the time of Muhammad and his companions. This raises serious questions about whether this so-called “unnecessary” practice truly developed later due to any "misconception", or whether it stems from ambiguity or inconsistency in the early Islamic rulings themselves.

1. The Quran and Muhammad Did Not Clearly Recommend One Talaq with 3-Month Iddah

While Zakir Naik claims that 1 Talaq followed by 3 menstrual cycles of waiting period should be the "norm", the Quran (Surah Al-Baqarah 2:229-230) and Muhammad (Sahih Muslim 1471a) actually talk about 3 Talaqs with 1 mentrual cycle of wiating period between them,as a "norm" (i.e. without any 3 mentrual cycles of Iddah in between them as Zakir Naik suggests).

Yes, the Quran does not clearly discourage using all three divorces, nor does it recommend a pause of 3 months between each one. The door for triple divorce is thus left open, and early Muslims openly and oftenly practiced it, without any criticism by Muhammad (i.e. 3 Talaqs were neither a miscoption nor an unnecessary trend according to Allah and Muhammad)

2.  Muhammad Did Not Clearly Ban or Stop or even DISCOURAGED the Use of Three Divorces, actually he STIPULATED it

If 3 Talaqs were "unnecessary", why didn't then Muhammad even "discouraged" the use of three Talaqs?

Instead of discouraging, (and contrary to Zakir Naik's suggested path), Muhammad actually suggested the path of 3 divorces to Ibn Umar

Look at the following two tradition, where instead of asking Ibn Umar for 1 Talaq + 3 months Iddah (as Zakir Naik suggests), Muhammad suggested Ibn Umar 3 times Talaqs with one month waiting period between these 3 Talaqs:

Sahih Muslim 1471a:

Ibn 'Umar (Allah be pleased with them) reported that he divorced his wife while she was menstruating during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). 'Umar b. Khattib (Allah be pleased with him) asked Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) about it, whereupon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: Command him ('Abdullah b. 'Umar) to take her back (and keep her) and pronounce (the 2nd) divorce when she is purified and she again enters the period of menstruation and she is again purified (after passing the period of menses), and then if he so desires he may keep her and if he desires divorce her (finally the 3rd time) before touching her (without having an intercourse with her), for that is the period of waiting ('ldda) which God, the Exalted and Glorious, has commanded for the divorce of women.

And the following Hadith:

Sahih al-Bukhari 5252:

Therefore, the "norm" for Muhammad himself was 3 Talaqs, and not 1 as suggested by Zakir Naik. Otherwise, Muhammad would have asked Ibn Umar to stop on the 1st Talaq, and to take her back, and to wait 3 months of Iddah. Or even he could have asked Ibn Umar to stop on the 2nd Talaq, and to wait and reflect for 3 months before deciding to give her the final 3rd divorce. 

3. If triple talaq wasn’t practiced during the Prophet Muhammad’s time, then why did he curse those involved in Halala?

Muhammad cursed both the man who does Halala, and the woman for whom Halala is done (link):

لَعَنَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم الْمُحِلَّ وَالْمُحَلَّلَ لَهُ

"The Messenger of Allah cursed the Muhill and the one the Muhallal was done for."

Here, muhill refers to a man who marries a woman with the prearranged intention of divorcing her to make her permissible (halal) for remarriage to her first husband, and muhallal lahu refers to the first husband who benefits from this arrangement.

This again proves it was a common practice during Muhammad's era to give 3 divorces (either in one sitting or in 3 mentraul cycles). Only due to this the issue of Halala became so common among companion (just like Halala centers today). And it is contrary to what Zakir Naik or Salafists claim today (i.e. one talaq with 3 months Iddah). 

4. Caliph Umar's Decision to Count Triple Talaq in one sitting as Final Confirms the Practice Was Widespread Among Early Muslims

Later, during the caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab, male companions were practicing 3 Talaqs. Upon that, Umar decided to treat 3 Talaqs in one sitting as final and binding too—not allowing reconciliation. If this had been a later innovation by misguided Muslims, one would expect earlier control or criticism. Instead, it reflects how deeply rooted the practice of 3 Talaqs already was among the companions.

5. Even the Quran talks about 3 Talaqs without any discouragement

While Zakir Naik claims that 1 Talaq followed by 3 menstrual cycles of waiting period should be the "norm", the Quran (Surah Al-Baqarah 2:229-230) and Muhammad (Sahih Muslim 1471a) actually talk about 3 Talaqs with 1 mentrual cycle of wiating period between them, as a "norm" (i.e. without any 3 mentrual cycles of Iddah in between them as Zakir Naik suggests).

This understanding is backed by the Hadith of Ibn Umar (Sahih Muslim 1471e), where Muhammad instructs him about timing divorce with menstrual cycles and forbids doing so during menstruation or while having had sexual relations.

That is why, throughout Muslim history we see the use of 3 Talaqs and Halala among Muslim communties, and it is still the "norm" today, where we even see Halala centers everywhere. 

No where in the Quran, Hadith, practices of Sahaba, practices of early Muslims, fatwas of early scholars we see Zakir Naik's aclaimed path as a "norm" in Islam.

If Allah is all-knowing, and he really knows the Future Unseen, and he know that Muslims will take the norm of 3 Talaqs, which could have destroyed lives of millions, then he could have easily himself "clearly" mentioned in the Quran that norm is only 1 Talaq and 3 months waiting period. Such a "single clear" verse in the Quran could have saved lives of millions of women during the last 14 centuries, from undergoing the shameful act of Halala.

A Muslim Owner can make the wife of his male slave HALAL for himself (to have sex with her)

Moreover, if an owner got a lust for the wife of his male slave, then Islami permits the owner to separate her from her husband and then use her for sex services. And once the owner fulfils his lust, and then gets bored with her, then he can return her to her previous male slave husband. 

(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 in English.)

On one side, we have a free man and woman who wish to rebuild their family life together, with their children, through mutual agreement. However, the avenue of Halala prevents them from doing so. Conversely, a slave woman aspires to lead a modest family life with her slave husband. Nevertheless, she is compelled against her desires to abandon her spouse and go to her owner, and provide her with sex services.

Secular Western Laws vs Halala

Secular Western laws are totally opposite to Halala:

1. Equal Rights and Divorce: In secular Western countries, women are granted EQUAL rights, even in the context of divorce. These laws ensure that both partners have equitable legal standing throughout the dissolution process.

2. Protection Against Abuse: Robust safeguards are in place to shield women from abusive behavior by their spouses. Secular Western legal systems prioritize the safety and well-being of individuals facing such circumstances.

3. Recognition of Ongoing Emotions: Secular Western societies acknowledge that divorced individuals might continue to feel affection for their former spouses, underscoring the complexity of human emotions after divorce, without stigma.

4. Consent and Resolution: The essence of mutual agreement is highly valued in secular Western legal frameworks. Conflict resolution between partners is encouraged through internal discussions and mutual consensus, reflecting a commitment to maintaining amicable relationships.

5. Empowerment in Dispute Resolution: The power to determine the timeline for resolving conflicts and achieving reconciliation is placed in the hands of the involved parties themselves. This empowerment fosters an environment of personal agency and choice.

In essence, the contrast between secular Western laws and the practice of Halala is stark. While secular Western legal systems prioritize gender equality, protection from abuse, emotional nuance, mutual agreement, and individual agency in resolving conflicts, the concept of Halala lacks these principles.