Khul’ خلع (i.e. getting freedom from husband) is not a “right” of a woman, but it is still a “right” of a husband to either grant it or deny it 🔥ʰᵒᵗ

Muslims tell a lie when they say that Allah gave the right of Khul’ to a woman so that she could also get rid of her husband if he is abusive, or doesn't show affection and love, or if he does not satisfy her sexually, or if she simply dislikes him due to his manners etc. But all these are the lies of Muslims. 

Table of Contents:

• (1) Khul’ is totally dependent upon the will of her husband:
  • • (2) Woman has to offer the “Ransom Money” to her husband, in order to get her freedom 
    • (3) Even Islamic Courts could not compel the Muslim husband to divorce her
    • (4) Even if her husband beat her so brutally that she gets bruises all over her body, still she has no right to get her freedom through the courts
    • Quranic Verse about the Khul’
    • Muhammad said: "Women who seek their freedom through Khul’ are hypocrites"
    • Even if the husband beats and breaks the bones of the wife, still she could not get the divorce automatically without his approval (and forget about any fine for damaged body part)
    • If bone or any part of a woman is not broken due to the hitting of her husband, then she has no right to get her freedom
    • A woman could not get her freedom through Khul’ even if the man is infertile:
    • Islam apologists: Woman is “emotional” and thus husband should decide for her if divorce is in her favour or not
    • Islam Apologists: But the Sunnah way of giving Talaq is 3 menstrual periods
    • Muslim women should ask these questions themselves:
    • A Response from a Muslim woman: I never heard about the ransom money
    • Difference between the "Islamic Laws" and the "Laws of Muslim Countries"

(1) Khul’ is totally dependent upon the will of her husband:

All 4 Sunni Imams of Fiqh agree that: 

• A woman has no right to take a divorce from her husband through Khul’. 
• But it is completely the choice of the husband, either to grant her freedom through a divorce or to deny it. 
• And no Islamic Court could compel the husband to divorce her if he doesn’t want to divorce her.

(2) Woman has to offer the “Ransom Money” to her husband, in order to get her freedom 

In order to get the approval of her husband:

1. The wife has to offer the “ransom money”, so the husband becomes greedy for the money and accepts her proposal to set her free by giving her a divorce. 
2. There is no limit to that “ransom money”. She has to offer him Haq-Mehr (i.e. bridal price, which she got at the time of marriage) back, or even more than this. It is again the will of the husband to agree upon any amount of money that he will.  He is totally free to blackmail her in this case in order to get more and more money from her.

(3) Even Islamic Courts could not compel the Muslim husband to divorce her

If the husband does not agree to give her freedom, then even Islamic courts could not compel the husband to set her free. 

Courts could only interfere in the following cases:

• Impotence.
• If the husband does not pay the maintenance money.
• If the whereabouts of the husband are not known.
• If the husband has become insane.

(4) Even if her husband beat her so brutally that she gets bruises all over her body, still she has no right to get her freedom through the courts

Yes, even the husband acts like a wild beast, and he beats the wife without any reason and beats her so brutally that she gets bruises all over her body, still neither could she get the so-called  Khul’ nor could Islamic courts set her free from her cruel husband.

Quranic Verse about the Khul’

Quran 2:229:

الطَّلاَقُ مَرَّتَانِ فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ وَلاَ يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُواْ مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا إِلاَّ أَن يَخَافَا أَلاَّ يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللّهِ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللّهِ فَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا افْتَدَتْ بِهِ 

A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on either of them if she gives something for her freedom (Arabic word:افْتَدَتْ  which means Ransom money).

Muhammad said: "Women who seek their freedom through Khul’ are hypocrites"

If a woman does not simply like her husband and seeks to get her freedom by using the greed of money of her husband, then Muhammad declared such women to be hypocrites. 

Sunnan Tirmidhi, Kitab-ul-Talaq:

عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏"‏ الْمُخْتَلِعَاتُ هُنَّ الْمُنَافِقَاتُ ‏"‏

The Prophet said: "The women who seek a Khul are hypocrites."
This tradition is “Sahih” (i.e. Authentic)

Sunnan Tirmidhi, Kitab-ul-Talaq:

عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ أَيُّمَا امْرَأَةٍ سَأَلَتْ زَوْجَهَا طَلاَقًا مِنْ غَيْرِ بَأْسٍ فَحَرَامٌ عَلَيْهَا رَائِحَةُ الْجَنَّةِ 

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whichever woman seeks a Khul from her husband without harm (cause), then the scent of Paradise will be unlawful for her."
This tradition is also “Sahih”.

Even if the husband beats and breaks the bones of the wife, still she could not get the divorce automatically without his approval (and forget about any fine for damaged body part)

Sunan Abu Dawud, Book of Divorce:

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
Habibah daughter of Sahl was the wife of Thabit ibn Qays Shimmas. He beat her and broke some of her part. So she came to the Prophet after morning, and complained to him against her husband. The Prophet called on Thabit ibn Qays and said (to him): Take a part of her property and separate yourself from her. He asked: Is that right, Messenger of Allah? He said: Yes. He said: I have given her two gardens of mine as a dower, and they are already in her possession. The Prophet said: Take them and separate yourself from her.

Sheikh Albani declared this Hadith to be “Sahih” (authentic)

So, the injustices of Allah/Muhammad against the poor woman are:

• She could not get the divorce even if he beats her, and beats her so brutally that it breaks part of her body (i.e. bone) 
• And still, she has to pay for her freedom
• And forget about her getting any penalty/fine money for damaging her body part. 

In the non-religious Western world of today, where humans make the laws according to their own rational thinking, such poor women will not only get their freedom without paying anything, but they will also get the money for damage to their body parts. 

If bone or any part of a woman is not broken due to the hitting of her husband, then she has no right to get her freedom

Sahih Bukhari, Book of Dress:

Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil, and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Messenger came, `Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!"
When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife.
She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment,
`Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Messenger! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to (her first husband) Rifa`a (by doing Halala with me).
" Allah's Messenger said, to her, "If that is your intention (i.e. to do Halala), then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you."
Then the Prophet saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"

Therefore, this tradition says:

1. This woman was extremely unsatisfied with her husband and didn’t love him, and wanted to get rid of him. 
2. Since Khul’ is not the right of the woman in Islam, but depends upon the will of the man, that is why she was unable to get rid of him despite having a strong desire for her freedom. 
3. And this 2nd husband used to beat her brutally till she got bruises all over her body. But despite this beating, he didn’t give her a divorce or give her freedom through Khul’.
4. And Muhammad didn’t prohibit that cruel man from beating her so brutally but made it a part of Islamic Sharia by keeping quiet about it (known as Hadith-e-Taqriri). 
5. And Muhammad also didn’t give her the right to take her freedom through Khul’ after such a beating. 

A woman could not get her freedom through Khul’ even if the man is infertile:

All 4 Sunni Fiqh Imams agree that the wife could not take divorce if the man is infertile. 

The largest Islamic Fatwa website Islam Q&A writes (link):

With regard to the man’s sterility, i.e., his inability to father children, this is not counted as a fault that would necessitate annulment of the marriage, according to the majority of scholars, apart from the view of al-Hasan al-Basri, and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah 

Actually, it was impossible to find out if a man was infertile in the previous centuries. Therefore, it was impossible to blame the man for infertility. This was the case with Muhammad himself. 

Islam apologists: Woman is “emotional” and thus husband should decide for her if divorce is in her favour or not

This is so wrong to only blame women for being emotional. Indeed, men could also be emotional and could make false decisions in anger. 

But despite the extremely uncontrolled and extreme emotional nature of men in anger, still Islam made it so easy for men to say 3 times Talaq and the divorce takes place. 

Islam Apologists: But the Sunnah way of giving Talaq is 3 menstrual periods

Sunnah or not, Islamic Sharia indeed does allow men to divorce their wives in anger by saying 3 times Talaq. 

Secondly, if the divorce process is 3 menstrual periods long, then not only the husbands come out of their anger, but women will also come out of their anger or emotions. Thus, then Islam should also give this right to women to give divorce after 3 months, while they are no more in a state of emotions/anger. 

Thirdly, if Islam does not give this right to women to decide for themselves even after 3 months (by blaming them of being emotional), then still Islam had to give this right to the father or brother or son of the woman to decide on her behalf. 

But when Islam says that if a woman wishes her freedom, then it is the Husband who should decide for the wife if divorce is in her favour or not, then this is not Wisdom, but plain Stupidity. 

Muslim women should ask these questions themselves:

If you are a Muslim woman, then please ask this question from yourself:

• If you were there in place of Allah, and you had to make the laws, would you have made such a law like Khul’ for the women? 
• Do you really consider that such an “Unjust” law like Khul’ could be made by the divine owner of Wisdom?
• Do you accept this blame that only women are emotional and thus unable to decide for themselves for their lives? 
• Do you find it fair that even in case of differences and disputes, and despite having a strong desire to separate, still it is the husband who will decide for you if divorce is good for you or not?
•  Don’t you realize that this thing which is called “Allah”, does not give the right of getting freedom to you while he thinks that woman is a creature with a “lower Intelligence Level” as compared to a man?
• Don’t you feel that these unjust laws like Khul’ are not made by any Divine God in heaven, but a MAN is present behind these laws, whose thinking is that women are of lower status than men, and she should always obey the men?

Your human rationale and humanity in you are enough to guide you and you could easily differentiate between right & wrong.

A Response from a Muslim woman: I never heard about the ransom money

A Muslim woman wrote:

First time I am hearing that a wife needs to pay ransom money in Khul'. If Im not mistaken a woman does not need to pay back the dowry. Also, they can ask for divorce through the court if the husband abuses her (mentally or physically), or fails to give nafkah (maintenance money) etc.

Answer:

The problem is the Deceptions of Muslims, where they MIX one thing with another and keep thus hide the real face of Islam.

For example:

• If a man is impotent and unable to penetrate, then a woman can take a divorce through the court.
  But if the man is infertile, and could not give children to the woman, then in this case women are NOT allowed to get their freedom through a divorce in the courts, and to marry another man in order to get the children.

• And Muslims also tell that women are also allowed to take a divorce if a man is not providing them with their maintenance money.
  Although this statement by Muslims is true, but still, it is not the "complete" truth.
  The complete truth is this the woman has to wait 2 years if he is not providing her with the maintenance money. And only after this period (i.e. 2 years), Islamic courts will let the women take divorce.

• And in case:
  * Man is ugly.
  * Woman does not love him due to his bad habits.
  * Or the man is abusive and beats her brutally.
  If a woman wishes to get her freedom from him, then she simply cannot do it in Islam.
  Yes, one possible way is to use the greed of her abusive husband, and offer her the dower (bridal gift) back, or even more than this (according to the demand of the abusive husband).
  But still, the final decision of her freedom lies in the hands of her husband. He could accept her offer and set her free, or he could reject the offer, and in this case, all doors are closed for her to get her freedom.
  Not even the Islamic courts could provide her freedom from her abusive husband in this case.

Difference between the "Islamic Laws" and the "Laws of Muslim Countries"

Real Islamic Rulings have been described above (i.e. Khul' is not the right of a woman, but it depends upon the will of her husband to grant her freedom or not).

During the last 14 centuries of Islamic history, this Islamic Ruling stayed the same.

But in this century, thanks to the Western Feminist Movement, even women in Islamic countries are becoming aware of their rights as humans.

Thus, these feminist movements in the Muslim countries fought against this Divorce/Khul' ruling of Islam, and to their surprise, they also succeeded in many Muslim countries in "CHANGING" this actual Islamic ruling.

Now in many Muslim countries, indeed women can go to court, and ask for the Khul' (without paying the ransom money).

Actually, Islamic Scholars initially tried to stop this change, but this Islamic Ruling was so much against Humanity, that they failed to achieve success in it.

It is the same like Muslim men didn't need the permission of their first wife to marry another wife, but due to the strong opposition from the feminist movement in Muslim countries in this century, now Muslim men have to ask the written permission from first wife before taking another woman as a wife.

For example, please read the following 2 Studies about how Courts were given the right to give freedom in Khul' without paying the ransom money, while Islamic Scholars opposed it, while according to Sharia it is the right of the husband and not the courts.

Study 1

Study 2

Abstract:
Pakistan is an Islamic country. The laws made by the Parliament and Judiciary are administered according to the injunction of Islam. There are many laws made for the protections of women. Among these rights granted, right of women to khul " is also awarded by Islamic Law. Khul " is the proposal given to the husband by the wife for divorce. Judicial Khul " is exercised in Pakistani courts, according to Article 2(ix) of dissolution of Muslims Marriages Act 1939. A large number of Ulama (Islamic Jurists) even today, refuse to recognize khul " granted by courts without the consent of the husband as a valid divorce. Confusion is caused by two parallel and conflicting interpretations of the Islamic Law. On one hand, there is the statutory law and interpretation by the Superior Courts of Pakistan and on the other hand, is the interpretation of Jurists of Islamic Law with strong arguments from Qur " an and Sunnah.

In simple words, Sharia got defeated in this matter by the hands of Muslims themselves. It was not a western conspiracy against Islam, but it was totally an internal war of Muslims, where Sharia Ruling got this defeat, and the majority of the Muslims had to remove it from the law of their country themselves. Please remember, a huge majority of Pakistanis Muslims themselves turned against this Islamic ruling of Khul' and they rebelled, and finally removed it from the law of their country. 

***

Please don't forget the Bigger Picture: