Triple Ṭalāq in One Session: An Analysis of the Opinions of Classical, Medieval, and Modern Muslim Jurists under Islamic Law

Abstract

Abstract This work analyzes one of the hottest and most tricky issues of the Muslim Family Law, i.e., whether in cases of divorce (ṭalāq), three repudiations spoken in one session equal one or three repudiations. There had been no disagreement regarding this issue among the four Sunni Schools of Jurisprudence until the end of the 7th century Hijrah when Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn al-Qayim challenged the position of the ğamhūr (majority of Islamic scholars). Before them only the Shīʿa and the Ẓāhirites had treated three pronouncements in one session as one. The ğamhūr has given very strong arguments in support of their point of view, whereas Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn al-Qayim have advanced very weak arguments in support of their view. The Shīʿa Imāmiyah School of Thought holds two opinions. According to one view, three ṭalāqs in one session amount to one, while the second point of view holds that three repudiations in one session do not amount to any ṭalāq.