Halala (Tahleel Marriage)

Summary:

Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which:

• If a husband and a wife are separated through a divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.
• Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).

In the process of Islamic Halala:

1. The woman must initially marry a different man.
2. Subsequently, consummate the marriage with this new husband.
3. Only if the second husband divorces her does she become eligible to remarry her initial husband.

However, the implementation of Halala introduces a host of potential challenges and hardships that predominantly fall upon the woman. For instance:

1. If a husband impulsively utters Talaq (divorce) to his wife three times in a fit of anger, it can abruptly shatter the entire family unit.
2. In these situations, the woman often bears the brunt of the consequences, even if she is entirely blameless and the divorce stems entirely from the husband's actions.
3. Unpredictable Outcomes: Even if a woman is willing to endure the tribulations of Halala, there is no assurance that the second husband will eventually grant her freedom by initiating a divorce. Consequently, she could find herself permanently bound to her second husband, unable to reunite with her children, family, and former spouse. This inherent uncertainty presents an elevated risk for women involved in Halala proceedings.

Why Do Muslim Women Agree to the Disturbing Practice of Halala?

The motivation behind why Muslim women willingly subject themselves to the distressing process of Halala, which involves engaging in sexual relations with another man, can be understood through the following reasons:

• Islam practically "forces" poor women to do so.
• In Islam, if a woman is divorced, then either she has to live her remaining life as a single, otherwise she would lose the "custody" of her children if she "remarries".
• Thus the only option for a woman to have both (i.e. to have the love and support of a man, and also to have her children) is to return to his first husband. That is why, Muslim women still agree to undergo this shameful process of Halala and being raped by another man. 

The concept of Halala underscores the intricate and unjust dynamics embedded within Islamic divorce rulings, particularly highlighting the vulnerabilities and uncertainties that women may face under such circumstances.

Table of Contents:

• Summary:
  • Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance
  • Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran
  • Muslim women still feel compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the humiliation and risky process of Halala
    • The Primary Factor: Lingering Affection for the Former Spouse Despite Temporary Conflicts
    • The Second Factor: Sustaining Family Unity for the Sake of Children
    • The Third Factor: Islamic Ruling that all the children will be separated from the mother if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)
  • Risks Associated with Halala for Women
  • 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')
  • What is the LOGIC behind Halala?
    • First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper
    • 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
    • Third Defence: The Origin of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) Arises ONLY from Misapplied Triple Divorce in One Sitting (Common in Hanafi Fiqh)
  • A Muslim Owner can make the wife of his male slave HALAL for himself (to have sex with her)
  • Secular Western Laws vs Halala

Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance

Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:

Thus, Muhammad copied this non-logical practice from his Arab culture of the time of ignorance. 

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

Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:

Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e (link):

• Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking a divorce later and remarrying her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in Islamic countries, and even in Western countries too where the Muslim population resides.
• While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the "intention" of later taking Talaq. But in this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite with her children and her former husband i.e. she will lose both of them despite loving them both. This Hanbali/Maliki ruling is even more cruel to poor women. 

Muslim women still feel compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the humiliation and risky process of Halala

The process of Halala brings a lot of shame and humiliation and risks for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergo the Halala process. But many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel compelled) to undergo the humiliation of the process of Halala in order to reunite with their ex-husband.

But why? 

The factors for Muslim women's readiness to even undergo this shameful process of Halala are as under.

The Primary Factor: Lingering Affection for the Former Spouse Despite Temporary Conflicts

Human beings inherently encompass a spectrum of emotions, encompassing both love and anger. Temporarily succumbing to mistakes due to fits of anger is a common human inclination. Consider a scenario where a husband impulsively utters Talaq (divorce) three times in the heat of the moment. Should this impulsive act permanently preclude any opportunity for rectification? Is it reasonable to believe that such a fleeting episode erases the entirety of their shared affection? In alignment with human nature, it remains entirely plausible for a woman to continue harboring love for her former husband, and vice versa, despite the occurrence of divorce. 

The essential premise is this that their enduring "mutual affection" and "collective consensus" should serve as a substantial rationale to permit their reuniting in marriage. In truth, if they are willing to rekindle their union, it becomes imperative to offer robust "encouragement and assistance" to facilitate their reunion. This course of action is not only advantageous for the couple themselves, but also profoundly beneficial for the well-being of their children. Disallowing their reunion contradicts human nature, defies logical reasoning, and imposes gratuitous hardships upon both the couple and their children.

Islamic defenders frequently present a single justification: the prescribed three menstruation cycles (or three months) for proper divorce proceedings. They contend that this timeframe adequately allows both parties, man and woman, to reconcile and resolve their disputes before resorting to divorce. But if they still get divorced, then it is their punishment from Allah that the woman has to undergo Halala (or even worse, they can never reunite as the newer husband refuses to divorce her).

However, this assertion crumbles under scrutiny.

This defense lacks substance, as it disregards the complexities of human nature. In reality, conflicts and disagreements often persist beyond the confines of a mere three months. The notion that all disputes can be effectively addressed and resolved within this brief span is inherently unrealistic.

For a woman, the experience of residing with her parents or siblings, often alongside her children, highlights the adversities of life without a partner. Similarly, a man navigating life without his spouse or children, or single-handedly caring for the children himself, gains insight into the challenges of such a situation. The process of taking time apart engenders a realization of the depth of their feelings for each other and underscores the void that separation creates.

Therefore, the mandated three-month period, while imposed with the intention of promoting reconciliation, contradicts both logic and the intricacies of human emotions. It ignores the fact that resolving disputes and rekindling relationships often necessitate more time than this rigid timeframe allows.

In conclusion, this 3 months period limitation is actually not based upon WISDOM of any Divine Being in the heavens, but Muhammad simply copied this pre-existed practice of Halala from his Arab culture of the time of Jahiliyyah (ignorance). In another words, the WISDOM of pre-Islamic Arabs and the WISDOM of Allah are EQUAL in limiting the time period to 3 months to resolve the disputes. Failing this, it is predominantly the woman who bears the consequences, subjected to the distressing ordeal of Halala.

The Second Factor: Sustaining Family Unity for the Sake of Children

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

The Halala Ruling intertwines with another significant Islamic Ruling. According to this tenet, a woman risks losing all custody of her children if she chooses to marry any man other than her ex-husband. The rationale rests on the premise that a wife's time, excluding periods of prayer, belongs solely to her new husband, who retains the right to summon her for intimate purposes at his discretion. However, the presence of children from her previous marriage hinders the second husband's entitlement to engage in these activities. Hence, the directive dictates that a woman must be separated from her children should she opt to marry another individual.

Please read our article: Strange Islam: If a divorced woman remarries, then she will lose the Custody of her children

The convergence of these two Islamic rulings significantly impacts divorced Muslim mothers, placing them in a challenging conundrum. Effectively, they are coerced into selecting from the following three unfavorable alternatives:

1. Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of the house, and then to find a good job, and then to work the whole day there, and at the same time look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society is to remarry and get the support of another man.

2. Alternatively, they may choose to marry a man of their choosing, seeking both emotional and financial support. Yet, this choice bears the grievous consequence of having all their children forcibly separated from them – a heart-wrenching reality that no mother should endure.

3. Their third option involves remarrying their ex-husband. While this course provides financial stability and keeps the family united, it necessitates the participation in Halala – a distressing and undignified process that compels them to yield their bodies against their wishes.

In sum, the intricate interplay between these two "Islamic Rulings" forces divorced Muslim mothers into a challenging position. They must contend with choosing between relinquishing their right to remarry, enduring the heartbreak of losing their children, or submitting to the humiliating process of Halala. This predicament underscores the complex and often oppressive nature of  Islamic practices concerning divorce and remarriage.

Risks Associated with Halala for Women

Engaging in the practice of Halala exposes women to three significant risks, each carrying its own set of challenges.

Firstly, a distressing scenario arises if the second husband elects to withhold divorce. Under Islamic Sharia, women possess neither the right to initiate a divorce nor the option of Khul' (as elaborated in our Khul' article for further insights).

Secondly, an even graver concern surfaces when the second husband not only retains her as his wife but resorts to abusive behavior, subjecting her to physical violence. This maltreatment coerces her into submission, compelling her to provide sexual services wholeheartedly. It's essential to note that Islamic Sharia sanctions a husband's severe beating, even inflicting bruises, should his wife fail to meet his sexual expectations adequately. Regrettably, no recourse to an Islamic court guarantees her emancipation from such an abusive union, unless the husband physically harms her to the extent of breaking bones or any other part of her body. Please read our article: Wife Beating in Islam (Recommendation vs Law)

Thirdly, a woman faces a formidable hazard known as the "Ghayrah" of her first husband. Once intimacy with the second husband occurs, her status and worth depreciate in the eyes of her first spouse. The affection he once held may wane, particularly within an emotionally charged and sensitive Islamic society that emphasizes Ghayrah (Arabic: غَيْرَة‎) –. Consequently, broader society views a woman who partakes in Halala – an attempt to reunite with her former husband and children – with disapproval. The negative sentiment extends beyond societal perception, potentially manifesting in the first husband's refusal to remarry her based on the premise of Ghayrah, even after she secures a divorce from her second spouse.

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:

Key Points::

1. Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie that her 2nd husband was impotent (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed not to be impotent. Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, while her 2nd husband already had 2 sons from his other wife. 
2. So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? The answer is, Islam does not allow a woman to get rid of her abusive husband in any way, except for some exceptional cases of Fask (i.e. Dissolution of Marriage) or Khul'.
3. In Faskh فسخ (i.e. dissolution of marriage), an Islamic court can grant a divorce to a woman in 4 exceptional cases (1) If the husband is IMPOTENT (2) If he is insane (3) If his whereabouts are not known for many years (4) If he does not pay the maintenance money. Thus, the female companion of Muhammad was practically compelled by Islam to use the slander of impotence against her 2nd husband, in order to get rid of him. 
4. Khul’ خلع is another way for a woman to get rid of her abusive husband. But it is not a Right of a woman, but still a right of the husband. In Islamic Khul', a woman has to offer "ransom money" to her husband. If he accepts the money offer and divorces her, then she will get rid of him. Nevertheless, if he denies taking the offer, then no Islamic court can compel him to divorce her. In this case, she is not going to get rid of him. (Please also note, in this century many Islamic countries have changed the law of Khul', and they have indeed allowed women to separate themselves from their husbands through court, even without offering ransom money, and even without his consent. But it is only a Bid'ah (i.e. Innovation) in the original Islamic Ruling).  
5. Thus, the Sahabia (female companion) was not at fault for telling a lie and slandering her 2nd husband wrongfully, but it was the fault of Islam. The unnatural Islamic Ruling of Halala FORCED her to tell that lie. Islam is not a religion of NATURE. That female companion loved her 1st husband and no such unnatural ruling of Islamic Halala was able to change her human nature. 
6. And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control 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.

Furthermore:

• 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 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 attacked 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, the wife 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.

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.

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.
• 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.

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 save their family life.
• 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 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 woman and children in order to get back to their complete family life. 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.

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.
• 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. 

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.