Introduction
Muslims claim that Islam liberated women from the darkness of the pre-Islamic era, an age Muslims call Jahiliyyah (ignorance). Yet, when we look closer, we find several oppressive customs not only surviving but also legalized under Islamic law. One striking example is Conditional Talaq, a practice that grants men absolute power to control their wives through threats of divorce tied to conditions.
In this article, we expose the origins, logic, and real-world impact of conditional talaq, and question whether a divine system would endorse such an unjust custom.
What is Conditional Talaq?
Conditional Talaq (At-Talaq al-Mu’allaq) refers to a situation where a husband says: “If you do X, you are divorced.”
Examples:
-
“If you talk to your cousin, you are divorced.”
-
“If you leave the house without my permission, you are divorced.”
-
“If you check my phone, you are divorced.”
Under mainstream Sunni fiqh, if the condition occurs, even unintentionally, the divorce becomes valid immediately, regardless of whether the husband truly wanted it.
The largest Islamic Fatwa website IslamQA gave the following Fatwa (link):
Question: 147954
I said to my wife: If you check my mobile phone you are divorced. I am worried that she will check my mobile phone. What is the solution?.
Answer:
If a man says to his wife: If you check my mobile phone you are divorced, the basic principle is that a revocable divorce (talaaq) takes place if she checks it, and it is not possible to cancel that. He has to warn his wife against checking the mobile phone lest divorce occur.
The same IslamQA website issued another fatwa that makes this practice even more alarming. It states that once a husband sets a conditional divorce, he cannot revoke it later. This means the condition hangs over the wife’s head like a sword for the rest of her life. (Fatwa Link):
Question: 105438
My wife wanted to do something, and at that time I was angry so I said to her: If you do this thing then you are divorced, because it was not the right time for her to do that thing. After a little time passed, and after my anger abated, I gave her permission to do that thing, and when the time came to do it, she did it. Has divorce taken place, or did my allowing her to do it after that cancel it out?
Answer:
The fact that you gave her permission does not cancel out the divorce which you swore would take place or that you made conditional upon this stipulation that you mention. Going back on your word does not help you at all, and the divorce remains in effect, if she did what you wanted to prevent her from doing.
Please also see this Hanafi Fatwa that conditional talaq cannot be cancelled:
Origins: A Pre-Islamic Practice
Contrary to the claim that Islam abolished harmful customs of Jahiliyyah (ignorance), historical evidence shows conditional divorce existed in pre-Islamic Arabia. Men used such threats to maintain strict control over women. Instead of banning this illogical and abusive practice, Islamic law absorbed and legitimized it through jurisprudence.
Why? Because Islam, rather than challenging patriarchy, reinforced it. The Qur’an provided men with unilateral divorce power (Talaq) and never restricted conditional threats. Later, hadith and jurists formalized the rules, turning an ancient tribal tool into a permanent part of Sharia.
The conditional talaq is not alone, but there were many such illogical and insane customs of Jahiliyyah (ignorance), which Muhammad later made the part of Islamic Sharia. For example:
- Divorce: A husband has full right to divorce, but a woman doesn't. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- The process of 3 Divorces: The process of 3 Talaqs was again there in pre-Islamic Jahilyyah Arab culture, only to punish a woman in the name of reconciliation. Only a woman suffers under it where she is forced to stay in the husband's house as a captive for 3 menstrual cycles (i.e. about 3 months). He is allowed to have sex with other wives and dozens of slave girls, but the poor woman is forced to have no sex and love during this period of 3 Talaqs. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- Khul’: Another custom of pre-Islamic Arab culture, where only men had the right to divorce, but if a woman wanted to have a divorce, then she had to offer RANSOM money to her husband. If he accepted the offer and divorced her, then she got her freedom. But if the husband rejected the offer, then no one could compel him to divorce her and she would not get her freedom. She ws compelled to stay with her husband, even if he was abusive, or even if she disliked him. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- ‘Iddah (waiting period): Only women have to suffer the hardships of 'Iddah. For example, only a wife has to mourn the death of her husband for 4 months and 10 days and cannot marry, while a husband is not required to mourn a single day if the wife dies, and he can enjoy other wives and dozens of slave women the same night. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- Halala (Tahleel Marriage): Even if the husband is at fault for giving the divorce, but still only the poor woman has to suffer and get raped by another man before going back to her first husband. Muslim women are practically compelled to agree to go through this sexual abuse because it is their only chance to stay with their children (i.e. to return to their first husband). Otherwise, if they marry another person then they will lose custody of all of their children. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- Ila (الإيلاء): In Talaq, a woman gets her freedom and can marry another man. But in Ila (الإيلاء), a man abstains from having any sexual relationship with her wife (as a punishment) for 4 months. Then he can have sex with her, and then again leave her alone for the next 4 months. Ila was essentially a tool wielded by husbands to punish and to manipulate their wives into complying with their demands. Women were treated as mere possessions. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
- Zihar: If a Muslim man, in a fit of anger or unintentionally, compares his wife to his mother or her back to his mother's back, it becomes necessary to separate her, akin to a divorce. Only women suffered badly from it. [Muhammad copied it only from his pre-Islamic Jahiliyyah Arab culture into Islamic Sharia]
Why Did Muhammad Allow This?
Muslims claim Muhammad came to eliminate injustice. If so, why didn’t he abolish a custom that:
-
Creates insecurity and fear in marriage for women.
-
Encourages emotional and psychological abuse of women.
-
Turns women into hostages of male whims.
The answer is simple: Muhammad maintained practices that reinforced male authority, just as he did with slavery, child marriage, and male guardianship. Conditional talaq gave men more control, and patriarchy was never dismantled, but only institutionalized under divine authority.
Impact on Women
Imagine living every day under the shadow of a statement like: “If you speak to your mother without my permission, you are divorced.”
-
Women become prisoners in their own homes, fearing unintentional mistakes.
-
Husbands weaponize this rule to dominate and humiliate.
-
Women often rush to scholars for fatwas, begging to know if their marriage still exists, highlighting how irrational and oppressive this system is.
This is not liberation. It is institutionalized abuse.
Logical and Moral Problem
If Islam claims to be a universal, perfect system, why does it validate a law that:
-
Depends on arbitrary conditions.
-
Treats women as property bound by fear.
-
Mirrors the exact practices of Jahiliyyah (ignorance) that Islam supposedly abolished.
A just and wise God would never endorse a rule that destroys families over a phone check or a short trip outside. This is not divine wisdom, but it’s 7th-century patriarchy dressed as religion.
Islamic Legal Position
-
Qur’an: Completely silent on the issue of conditional talaq.
-
Hadith: There are narrations from the Sahaba (companions of Muhammad) that became the basis for this ruling. Reports from companions like Ibn Mas‘ud, Ali ibn Abi Talib, and Ibn Abbas exist in the form of Athar (companion actions), where they ruled that if the stated condition occurs, the divorce is valid.
-
Jurists: All four major Sunni schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) agree that conditional divorce is valid if the condition happens, even if the husband later changes his mind.
Modern Islamic Apologists:
Some modern Islamic apologists try to escape this illogical ruling by claiming they do not accept conditional talaq, arguing it is not in the Qur’an and that the companions and scholars made a mistake.
Our counter-question is simple: Why is it not in the Qur’an? If Allah is all-knowing, He should have clarified this issue clearly to prevent centuries of suffering. The Qur’an could have easily included clear verses forbidding such harmful practices. Instead, it remained silent.
This silence caused immense hardship for women across 14 centuries. The same silence appears on many other grave issues, like allowing the rape of captive/slave women without their consent. Because of this, millions of captive/slave women were raped in Islamic history.
Why Didn’t Allah Clarify?
If Allah truly exists and knows the future, He would have known that companions and scholars would unanimously adopt these harmful practices (Ijma’). Why then did He not send even a single clear verse to prohibit them? One verse could have solved it all. For example:
- No one, including owners, are allowed to rape captive/slave women without their consent.
- Conditional talaq from the time of ignorance has no value, and no divorce occurs due to it.
- The pre-Islamic practice of Ila (الإيلاء) is abolished and no longer valid.
- Halala (Tahleel Marriage) was only a practice of ignorance and is forbidden in Islam.
- Zihar (another unjust form of divorce in pre-Islamic era) is invalid and abolished.
The Qur’an is a large book, yet instead of providing clear solutions to protect humanity and women, it is filled with boasts about divine powers of Allah, threatening non-Muslims with eternal hellfire, and some ancient stories. But when it came to real human issues, such as ending oppression, then it remained silent.
Conclusion
Conditional talaq is a glaring example of how Islam borrowed from tribal customs instead of challenging them. It is an illogical, unjust rule that continues to ruin women’s lives today. No moral system should allow a husband’s passing words to dictate a woman’s destiny.
If Islam truly aimed to establish justice, it would have abolished this practice. The fact that it didn’t speaks volumes about its human, and not divine origins.
Credit
Thanks to @FriendlyExmuslim who made people aware of this issue through his video.
Hassan Radwan