No right to Divorce for Woman even if Husband doesn't do sex for years

In Islam, the wife is like a prisoner, and Islam closed all the doors upon her in order to get her freedom from an evil husband. Even if her husband is a psychopath, and beats her brutally with bruises. Or even if he imprisons her in the house and neither lets her go out nor lets others enter his house. Or even if he tortures her mentally too along with physical torture. 

The next step of Islam in this direction is where it allowed such psychopath husbands to not only imprison them in the house, but also not to show any kindness or affection towards them, and not to do any intercourse with them for several years (in order to torture them mentally). 

Such psychopath husbands only have to pay the maintenance money, and after that, no Islamic court helps poor women to get rid of such psychopaths and get their freedom.

Fatwa from Dar-ul-Ifta Deoband (link):

Question:If husband and wife do not do sex, in how many days their Nikah will be broken?
Answer:
Nikah does not break by not doing intercourse, even if they do not have sex the whole of their life, but by doing so the husband will be violating her due rights. 

There are traditions that prior to the caliphate of Umar, Muslim warriors stayed away from their wives for long periods of time (maybe years). But when Umar became caliph, he consulted his daughter Hafsa and asked her how long a wife could stay without her husband. And she told it may be 4 months to 6 months. After that, Umar was the first one who stipulated that Muslim warriors should not be sent to the fronts for so long that they were separated from their wives for more than 6 months (Reference: Mufti Ebrahim Desai)

Please also remember, despite the recommendation by Umar about 6 months, still it is not a part of Islamic Sharia, while it was only Muhammad who was allowed to tell if Allah made something a part of Sharia or not. 

Blackmailing the wives by showing ill-treatment and aversion towards them

Please remember:

  • Muslim Husbands can use these tactics in order to compel their wives to accept all of their demands, even if they are unjust. 
  • Muhammad/Allah already practically 'abrogated' verse 4:3 of doing 'Adl (Justice)' with the wives. 
  • And the new verse 4:128-129 is a license for husbands to show aversion, ill-treatment and desertion towards their wives, and thus compel them to give away their rights in name of the settlement. And the reason for this license is that men are not able to do 'Adl (justice) with them, even if they try to do it. 

(Quran 4:128-129) And if a woman fears from her husband contempt or evasion, there is no sin upon them if they make terms of settlement between them (i.e. woman agrees upon leaving some of her rights) … And you will never be able to do Justice (Arabic: تَعْدِلُوْا) between wives, even if you should strive [to do so].

For more details, please read our article: Muhammad's journey from 4 marriages to 9 marriages with the help of Revelation

Difference from Ila (الإيلاء):

In Ila (الإيلاء), a man 'swears' to Allah that he will not do intercourse with his wife for 4 months. Therefore, after 4 months, a woman gets her freedom through a divorce. 

While, if a Muslim man does not swear to Allah, then he is free to tease and punish the woman for an unlimited period of time, and she will not be able to get her freedom in any way. 

Actually, in Ila (الإيلاء) too, a man could punish his wife for an unlimited period of time. He only has to break his swear once before the end of 4 months and rape his wife. And after that, he could again start with the new Ila for another 4 months. The atonement of breaking swear is also minimal i.e. fasting for 3 days, or feeding 10 poor people. 

 

Most Read Articles

Latest Articles

Important Websites

Categories

Already Read the Article?

...but your task is still not finished.

Dear seeker of truth,
Reading about the flaws in a belief system is only the first step. To truly break free from indoctrination and reach a final, unshakable conclusion, you must apply these four critical tests to what you've just read.

Test 1: Divine Revelation or Human Drama?

The Core Challenge:
God does not appear before us, nor do His angels manifest themselves, and He performs no miracles today like the claims made in the tales of ancient times. Despite this absence, we are still demanded to recognise God through His "commands"  only. 
Let us examine these commands, and see if they give the impression of Divine Revelation, or of "Human Drama."

Please reflect:

  • Do the teachings in this article display flawless wisdom, justice, consistency, and coherence that could only come from an Omniscient Creator?
  • Or do they resemble the kinds of laws, contradictions, exceptions, and inconsistencies that one would expect from ordinary human decision-making?

Test 2: Would These Same Arguments Also Defend a False Prophet?

Imagine a man in a different era who claims to be a prophet. He marries multiple women, claims divine permission for his personal desires, issues harsh punishments, and makes scientific errors—acting exactly like Muhammad. How would you distinguish this hypothetical false prophet from Muhammad?

The truth is, Islamic apologists would easily spot him as a fraud or a cult leader, using the exact same logical critiques you just read. Yet, when Muhammad does these exact same things, apologists invent endless rationalizations to defend him.

The Rule of Logic: If your defense of a prophet works equally well to defend a proven fraud or a cult leader, your defense is not based on evidence. It is based on "special pleading", giving one man a free pass that you would never give anyone else.

Test 3: Just One Confirmed Error Is Enough

Islam makes an extraordinary claim that Allah exists, is absolutely perfect, and cannot make even a single mistake. Therefore, if even one confirmed error, injustice, or flaw is found in Islam, its entire claim to divine perfection collapses. The remaining 99.99% of the religion cannot save that claim. You cannot simply argue, "But everything else is correct."

Test 4: The "Unbiased AI" Evaluation

Artificial Intelligence models are programmed to be highly deferential toward major world religions. If you ask an AI to critique the Quran, it will  treat Islamic theology as unquestionable facts rather than claims to be tested. This creates a false "tie" in debates.

To get a truly objective, logical evaluation of the article you just read, you must force the AI to drop its religious deference. Read the prompt below, then click the button to copy it. Paste it into your AI chat before asking it to analyze the article.

When reviewing the article, keep the following principles in mind:
The Qur'an and Hadith cannot be used as evidence of their own divine origin. They are claims whose origin is being examined. Your task is to evaluate whether the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic legal system are better explained as Divine Revelation or as human authorship. Therefore:
• Treat the Qur'an and Hadith as claims, not proof.
• Evaluate the article using logic, internal consistency, factual accuracy, and principles of justice.
• Treat scholarly interpretations as arguments in favor of Islam, not as binding authority.
Based on these principles, answer this question: Do the objections raised in the article expose flaws that reason and justice cannot reconcile, or do the strongest Muslim apologetic arguments successfully answer those objections?

Note: The AI’s response is not a final judgement. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. 

About the Author & This Website

About the Authors: 

The ideas, arguments, research, article structure, and final conclusions are my own. AI tools are used only as editorial assistants to improve grammar, wording, readability, and clarity.

About the Website:

This website is not a “neutral” or purely academic platform. Think of a courtroom, where a judge or jury listens to two opposing sides. We represent one side. It is not our role to be neutral. Our responsibility is to present our case honestly, with arguments and evidence.

You, the reader, are the judge and jury. Your role is to remain fair, to examine all sides, reflect carefully, and then reach your own conclusion with sincerity.

Read more →