Islamic Fiqh > Marriage and family > Raja: the return after revocable divorce > Is the wife's consent, or that of her guardian, required for the validity of the return?
Contents
Updated on 26 September 2026 at 7:12 PM
This part belongs to the full section: All sections of this part.
This part belongs to the full chapter: See all parts.
The people of knowledge agreed: the wife's consent or her guardian's is not required; the return is valid even if she is reluctant and non-consenting, by His word: « And their husbands have a better right to take them back » (Surah Al-Baqarah, 228), without condition of consent; were consent required, the husband would not be more entitled to take her back than she herself, having no such right without her approval: this would contradict Allah's report, which is impossible; the return was instituted to make repair possible in regret: were her consent required, repair would be impossible, for she may not will it (1). Imam Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « They agreed that whoever divorced his wife, lawfully married, with a sunnah divorce, while she is among those owing the 'iddah, once or several times, has the right to take her back, whether she wills it or refuses, without guardian or dower, so long as she is in her 'iddah; and the spouses inherit from one another so long as the 'iddah is not complete » (2). Imam Ibn Rushd (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The Muslims agreed that the husband has the right to return to his wife in revocable divorce so long as she is in her 'iddah, regardless of her consent, by His word: "And their husbands have a better right to take them back in that period"; and that the condition of this divorce is prior consummation » (3).
References: Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/186); Maratib al-ijma' (p. 75); Al-Iqna' fi masa'il al-ijma' (3/1282, no. 2336); Bidayat al-mujtahid (2/63).
The return is valid although the woman is unaware of it: all the jurists agree, except al-Hasan al-Basri, who said: « It is not a return, unless he informs her of it before her 'iddah expires » (1). Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The scholars agreed that the first is more entitled to her if he comes before she marries: she was his wife for his return; this proves the validity of the return though she is unaware of it » (2). Ibn Rushd (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The scholars agreed that the return is valid even if the woman knows nothing of it » (3). Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The husband of the revocably divorced woman, if he takes her back without her knowing, the taking back is valid: it requires not her consent, therefore not her knowledge, like her divorce » (4).
The ruling when the woman, unaware of the return, has married another husband: the jurists disagreed over the husband who divorced his wife then took her back without her knowing; she married another husband, then the husband claimed to have taken her back and produced witnesses: does the wife belong to the first or to the second? Does the second's consummation make a difference? The Hanafis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis (of the madhhab) hold that if the husband took back his wife without her knowing of the return, until her 'iddah expired and she married another, then the first husband comes claiming his return before the 'iddah expired and produces proof: she is his wife and the second's marriage is corrupt, for he married another's wife; she is returned to the first, whether or not he consummated the marriage. Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « This is the correct view, the madhhab of most jurists, among them ath-Thawri, ash-Shafi'i, Abu Ubayd and the partisans of opinion; it is reported from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) » (1). The proof: Allah's word: « And their husbands have a better right to take them back in that period » (Surah Al-Baqarah, 228): and he did so. The scholars agreed that the first is more entitled if he comes before she marries: this proves the validity of the return despite her ignorance; the return being valid, she is the first's wife: the second's marriage is therefore not valid. If the second has not consummated: they are separated and she is returned to the first, nothing being charged to the second; if he has consummated, she has the equivalent dower due from him: it is intercourse upon a doubt; she observes the 'iddah and does not become lawful to the first until it has elapsed from him (2). Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « If he takes her back without informing her until her 'iddah expired, and she marries another husband, then the first husband comes: she is his wife, whether the second consummated or not; they are separated, for the return is valid without her knowledge: the second married her while she was the first's wife: it is therefore not valid » (1). Al-Imrani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: neither the wife's consent nor her knowledge is a condition of the return's validity.
Procedure: if her 'iddah has expired, she has married another, and the first husband claims to have taken her back before her 'iddah expired, while the second claims: « her 'iddah ended before you took her back »: if the first produces proof that he took her back before her 'iddah expired, he is judged her husband, the second's marriage is annulled, whether he consummated or not: such is the view of Ali ibn Abi Talib and most jurists. Malik said: « if the second consummated, he is the more entitled to her »; otherwise there are two narrations: one: he is the more entitled; the other: the first; reported from Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). Proof: His word: « Forbidden to you are your mothers... » down to « and married women » (Surah An-Nisa, 23-24): the married woman is she who has a husband, and this one has one: the first; the second's marriage is therefore not valid. Once this is established: if the second has not consummated, they are separated, nothing upon him; if he has consummated, they are separated: the equivalent dower is charged to him and she is in 'iddah, for it is intercourse upon a doubt, and she is not lawful to the first until the 'iddah has elapsed from the second. If the first has no proof, he may litigate against the second, which is more meritorious, or litigate against the wife (1).
The Malikis (in the famous view) and Imam Ahmad (in one narration) hold that if the husband took her back without her knowing of his return, until her 'iddah expired and she married, and the second consummated, she is his wife and the first's marriage is annulled; reported from Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), and its meaning reported from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Qasim and Nafi'; for each of the two contracted with her while the contract was apparently permitted to him, and the second has the preference of consummation: he is given precedence. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « As for Malik's report from Umar concerning the one who divorced, informed her, then took her back without informing her until she remarried: it is not the famous report from Umar, according to the transmitters of the Hijaz and Iraq. » Abd ar-Razzaq mentioned: Ma'mar reports from Abd al-Karim al-Jazari from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, and Ma'mar from Mansur from Ibrahim: « Abu Kanaf divorced his wife, set out traveling, had his return attested before the 'iddah expired, without her knowing, and she married. Umar ibn al-Khattab was asked, and said: if he consummated, she is his wife; otherwise she is your wife if you catch her before he consummates. » Ath-Thawri, Hammad, Mansur and al-A'mash report from Ibrahim: « Abu Kanaf, a man of Najd, divorced his wife once or twice, had the return attested; she did not know, the 'iddah expired, she married; he came to Umar, who wrote to the emir of Egypt: if the other consummated, she is his wife; otherwise she is the first's wife. » Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: « she belongs to the first, whether the other consummated or not ». Waki' reported from Isma'il ibn Abi Khalid from al-Hakam that Abu Kanaf divorced his wife, informed her, had his return attested, but she was not informed; Umar said to him: « if you catch her before she marries, you are more entitled to her »; thus he said "before she marries", the preserved version being "unless he consummates". As for the saying « he divorced his wife without informing her », it is the scribe's error; the text is « he divorced, informed her, had his return attested, but she was not informed ». Waki' reported from Shu'bah from al-Hakam that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: « if he divorced her then had his return attested, she is his wife, whether he informed her or not ». Abu Bakr reported: Abdah from Sa'id from Umar ibn Amir from Hammad from Ibrahim, that Ali used to say: « he is more entitled to her, whether he consummated or not ». Abu Umar said: Shurayh, al-Hasan, Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, Ata', Ibn Shihab, Jabir ibn Zayd and others followed Umar's view in this issue, as did Malik, al-Awza'i, al-Layth and a group among the people of Medina. Among their proofs is the report of Ibn Wahb from Yunus from Ibn Shihab from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib: « the Sunnah passed judgment on the one who divorces his wife, takes her back, conceals his return, then she becomes lawful and marries another: he has nothing over her affair, which belongs to her other husband ». This report is attributed only to Ibn Shihab ("the Sunnah passed judgment", without mention of Sa'id); others report it from Ibn Shihab from Sa'id from Umar as a judgment, without mention of Sunnah; the mention of Sunnah is not proven therein, and it is reported from Umar through many channels; Ali moreover contradicted him. Qatadah reported from Khallas from Ali, regarding this issue, that he punished the witnesses of the return who concealed it, accused them, flogged them, upheld the divorce and did not return the woman to her first husband: a strange report; had he accepted their testimony of the return, he would not have flogged them; the flogging of witnesses is not proven from him nor in any fundamentals. What is known of Ali is what Ibrahim and al-Hakam reported from him; Ibrahim's mursal reports are moreover all sound by agreement. Such is the view of Ibrahim, the Kufan jurists (Abu Hanifah and his companions), ath-Thawri and al-Hasan ibn Hayy; ash-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr and Dawud said it: all follow herein Ali's word: « the first is more entitled to her, whether the second consummated or not ». The scholars agreed that the first is more entitled if he comes before she marries: this proves the validity of the return despite her ignorance; the return valid, she is the first's wife, the other's marriage is broken, separation is ordered, and she returns to the first after the 'iddah from the second, because of intercourse upon a doubt; her dower is due from him if he consummated. The proof: Allah's word: « And their husbands have a better right to take them back in that period » (Surah Al-Baqarah, 228): and he did so; this view is the most upright. Malik's view, by way of following, is the most apparent. Allah grants success, He who has no partner, and by Allah is success » (1).
Imam Ibn Rushd (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « They disagreed in this chapter over the man who divorces his wife with a revocable divorce while absent, then takes her back: the divorce reaches her, not the return, and she remarries when her 'iddah expires. Malik holds that she belongs to the one who contracted the marriage, whether he consummated or not: such is his word in the Muwatta, followed by al-Awza'i and al-Layth. Ibn al-Qasim reported from him that he retracted the first view and said: the first has more right to her, unless the second consummated. The Medinans among his companions followed the first view: they said he did not retract, having established it in his Muwatta until his death, when it was read to him: it is Umar ibn al-Khattab's view, which Malik reported in the Muwatta. Ash-Shafi'i, the Kufans, Abu Hanifah and others: the first husband who took her back is more entitled to her, whether the second consummated or not: Dawud and Abu Thawr said it, it is reported from Ali, and it is the most apparent. It is reported from Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding this issue: "the husband who took her back is given the choice: either she remains his wife, or he relinquishes it by what he had affirmed as truer". Malik's proof in the first narration is the report of Ibn Wahb from Yunus from Ibn Shihab from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib: "the Sunnah passed judgment on the one who divorces his wife then takes her back concealing his return until she becomes lawful and marries another: he has nothing over her affair; she belongs to the one who married her". It has been said this hadith is reported only from Ibn Shihab. The first group's proof: the scholars agreed that the return is valid even if the woman is unaware of it, since they agreed the first is more entitled to her before she marries; the return valid, the second's marriage is corrupt: another's marriage does not affect the invalidation of the return, before or after consummation, and this is the most apparent. Witness what at-Tirmidhi reported from Samurah ibn Jundab:
« Whatever woman two men marry, she belongs to the first of them; and whoever concludes a sale with two men, it belongs to the first of them. »Reported by at-Tirmidhi, from Samurah ibn Jundab
References: Al-Iqna' fi masa'il al-ijma' (3/1284, no. 2342); Al-Istidhkar (6/137); Bidayat al-mujtahid (2/65); Al-Mughni (7/411); Al-Istidhkar (6/137); Mukhtasar ikhtilaf al-'ulama (2/390-391); Ikhtilaf al-'ulama of al-Marwazi (p. 179); Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/181); Al-Bayan fi madhhab al-Imam ash-Shafi'i (10/254-255); Al-Mughni (7/411); Al-Mubdi' (7/397); Al-Insaf (9/159-160); Bidayat al-mujtahid (2/64-65).
Most of the people of knowledge hold that the man who divorces his wife revocably has his divorce, his zhihar and his li'an attach to her; and the spouses inherit from one another if either dies during the 'iddah. The ila' is subject to two views among the Shafi'is and Hanbalis; the correct view among them is that it is valid (1). Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The revocably divorced woman is a wife: her divorce, her zhihar, her ila' and her li'an attach to her, and the spouses inherit by agreement; khul' is valid. Ash-Shafi'i said in one of his two views: khul' is not valid, for it aims at prohibition, while she is forbidden. In our defense: she is a wife whose divorce is valid: her khul' is therefore valid as before the divorce; the purpose of khul' is not prohibition, but deliverance from the husband's harm and from his marriage which is its cause; the marriage subsists and his return cannot be ruled out; moreover we deny that she is forbidden » (1). Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The revocably divorced woman is a wife: her divorce, her zhihar and her ila' are valid, the li'an proceeds between them and they inherit from one another » (2). Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The divorced woman whose husband holds the right of return is entitled to lodging and maintenance; the spouses inherit so long as the 'iddah is not complete; when it is complete, separation occurs and inheritance falls away; so long as it is not complete, her divorce, her ila' and her zhihar attach to her; he may not, during her 'iddah, marry a fifth besides her, nor her sister, nor her paternal aunt, nor her maternal aunt; she has the wife's status in all her rulings » (3). Ibn Muflih (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The revocably divorced woman is a wife: divorce, zhihar and ila' attach to her », and the spouses inherit by agreement if either dies; and from him: « the ila' is not valid from her » (1). Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The revocably divorced woman is a wife in the generality of rulings: inheritance and maintenance are established between them; zhihar and ila' are valid; he is forbidden to marry her sister, her paternal aunt, her maternal aunt, or a fourth besides her so long as she is a wife » (2). Imam Ibn al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « All those whose sayings we preserve agreed: whoever divorced his wife, whom he had consummated, with a divorce leaving him the return, whether sound or sick, if he dies or she dies before her 'iddah expires, the spouses inherit from one another » (3).
References: Al-Bayan (10/245); An-Najm al-wahhaj (8/18); Maghni al-muhtaj (5/12); Ad-Dibaj (3/486); Al-Mubdi' (7/393); Al-Insaf (9/152-153); Al-Iqna' fi masa'il al-ijma' (3/1282); Al-Mughni (7/400); Al-Muhadhdhab (2/74); Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/180); Al-Kafi fi fiqh al-Imam Ahmad (1/292); At-Taj wa-l-iklil (3/120); Sharh mukhtasar Khalil (4/86); Ash-Sharh al-kabir with the hashiyah of ad-Dasuqi (3/337); Tahbir al-Mukhtasar (3/232); Al-Mubdi' (7/393); Zad al-ma'ad (5/453); Al-Ishraf (5/220).
The jurists disagreed over the divorced woman who claims her 'iddah expired in less than three months, the husband denying the expiry: is her word admitted? The Hanafis: the minimal period in which the woman is believed when she claims her 'iddah expired is sixty days, according to Imam Abu Hanifah; below that, she is not believed. Muhammad and al-Hasan ibn Ziyad (may Allah have mercy on them) disagreed over extrapolating Abu Hanifah's view. According to Muhammad: the divorce is deemed to have occurred at the start of the lunar month, as a precaution against divorce in a month of purity after intercourse; her purity is fixed at fifteen days and her menses at five, the median figure: her 'iddah expires with three purities of fifteen days each and three menses of five days each: sixty days in all. According to what al-Hasan reported from him: the divorce is deemed at the end of the month of purity, as a precaution against lengthening the 'iddah upon her; her purity is fifteen days and her menses ten: purity is estimated at its minimum for the woman's sake, and menses at its maximum for the husband's: her 'iddah expires with two purities of fifteen days and three menses of ten days: sixty days in all. According to Abu Yusuf and Muhammad, the minimum is thirty-nine days: she is trustworthy in reporting what is in her womb: her word must be admitted if she reports what is possible; her statement is possible if the divorce occurred at the end of the month of purity, her purity being fifteen days at minimum and her menses three days at minimum: her 'iddah expires with two purities (thirty days) and three menses (nine days): thirty-nine days in all. Example: the divorce occurs just before her first menses: three days; she purifies fifteen days, menstruates three days, purifies fifteen days, menstruates three days, and the 'iddah is complete: below that she is not believed (1).
The Malikis: the wife claiming her 'iddah expired falls into three cases. First case: her husband took her back, then she claims: « my 'iddah ended with three qur' or by the settling of the pregnancy »: she is believed, even if the husband contradicts her, provided there is a time in which the 'iddah's expiry is possible by what she claims; she is not made to swear even if she departs from her habit, women being trusted regarding their private parts. Second case: she claims expiry within a period in which it rarely expires, such as a month or thereabouts, or the matter is obscure: the women are questioned about it; if they testify for her, that is, that women menstruate like her, she is believed. Third case: she claims expiry within a period in which it cannot expire at all, neither usually nor rarely: she is not believed and the women are not questioned (1).
The Shafi'is: when the woman claims her 'iddah expired by the qur', one examines: if she was divorced in a month of purity while regular, the minimum possible expiry for her likes is thirty-two days and two instants: she is divorced at the very last instant of the month of purity, and that instant counts as a first qur'; she menstruates a day and a night, then purifies fifteen days: second qur'; she menstruates a day and a night, purifies fifteen days: third qur'; then she enters the third menstruation: her 'iddah has expired upon the entry of an instant into the third menstruation. Adding the two purities (thirty days), the two menses (two days) and the two instants: thirty-two days and two instants in all; the first instant is part of the 'iddah, the last is not part of it but reveals its expiry: it is required for the 'iddah without being of it: it therefore avails neither the return nor any other effect of the marriage, such as inheritance; a new contract concluded during that instant would be valid. Such is the minimum of three qur'. As for the beginner (mubtada'ah), the woman divorced before her first menses who then menstruates, the minimum possible is forty-eight days and one instant for entry: the month of purity of the divorce is not a qur', not being flanked by two flows of blood; and another instant is not considered, the divorce possibly having occurred within the end of that month of purity. If she is divorced during her menses, regular or beginner, the minimum expiry is forty-seven days and one instant: divorce attached to the end of her menses, then purification of fifteen days, menses of a day and a night, purification of fifteen days, menses of a day and a night, purification of fifteen days, then entry into the menses (1).
The Hanbalis: the woman claiming her 'iddah expired within a possible period is believed, by Allah's word: « It is not permitted to them to conceal what Allah created in their wombs » (Surah Al-Baqarah, 228); the interpretation says: it is menses and pregnancy; were their word not admitted, concealing it would not be forbidden them; it is a thing they alone know: their word prevails therein, like intention in acts where it is considered, or a thing known only from them: their word is admitted therein. If she claims her 'iddah expired by menses within a single month, she is not admitted without testimonial proof, even from a single woman; affirmed from what is reported of Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him): « a woman came to him: her husband had divorced her, and she claimed to have menstruated three times in one month, purified herself at each qur' and prayed. Ali said to Shurayh: judge her case. Shurayh said: if proof from her close kin, whose religion and trustworthiness are acceptable, testifies that she menstruated three times in one month, purified herself at each qur' and prayed, she is truthful; otherwise she is a liar. Ali said: kalon, a Roman word meaning "good", that is, "well done" », forming thirty with his hand. Expiry within a month being very rare, proof is necessary. Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « there is no disagreement: the 'iddah expires within a month if proof establishes it » (2). The minimum expiry is twenty-nine days and one instant: he divorces her at the very end of the month of purity; she menstruates a day and a night, purifies thirteen days, menstruates a day and a night, purifies thirteen days, menstruates a day and a night, then purifies an instant, so that the cessation of menses be known; that instant is not part of her 'iddah but is indispensable to know the cessation: were the return to fall upon that instant, it would not be valid.
References: Al-Mabsut (3/200); Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/198-199); Al-Muhit al-Burhani (4/91); Mukhtasar al-Wiqayah (1/407); Sharh Fath al-Qadir (4/187); Tibyin al-haqa'iq (2/260); Durrar al-hukkam sharh ghurar al-ahkam (4/418); Hashiyat Ibn Abidin (3/524); At-Taj wa-l-iklil (3/120-121); Sharh mukhtasar Khalil (4/86); Ash-Sharh al-kabir with the hashiyah of ad-Dasuqi (3/338); Tahbir al-Mukhtasar (3/233); Al-Umm (5/246); Al-Hawi al-kabir (10/306); Rawdat at-talibin (5/529-530); An-Najm al-wahhaj (8/14-15); Kinz ar-raghibin (4/12-13); Maghni al-muhtaj (5/10-11); Tuhfat al-muhtaj (9/604-606); Nihayat al-muhtaj (7/71-72); Ad-Dibaj (3/483-484); Al-Ishraf (5/380-381); Bukhari, mu'allaq: chapter of the woman who menstruates three times in a month (1/505); ad-Darimi (855); Sa'id ibn Mansur, As-Sunan (1309); Ibn Abi Shaybah (4/200); al-Bayhaqi, Ma'rifat as-sunan wa-l-athar (12/381); al-Hafiz in Fath al-Bari (1/506): its men are trustworthy; Al-Mughni (1/190); Al-Mubdi' (1/271).
First case (during the 'iddah): if he says « I took you back yesterday or last month » during the 'iddah, his word is admitted whether the wife confirms or denies it: having acquired the power of return, he has that of acknowledging it, like divorce; he reports a thing he can create at once, the husband having the power of return at once; whoever reports a thing he can create at once is believed, for otherwise he would create it immediately, and the denial has no effect. He becomes like the agent before revocation saying: « I sold it yesterday » (1).
Second case: he says to her after the 'iddah expired: « I had taken you back yesterday, last month, or two days ago »: the people of knowledge agree that his word is not admitted: the word is the woman's with her oath, unless he produces testimonial proof, or, according to the Malikis, if he used to spend the night with her during the 'iddah: he is then believed and his return valid, even if she denies him. Without proof, his word is not admitted: he reports a thing he can no longer create, no longer having the power of return after the 'iddah's expiry; he becomes like the agent after revocation saying: « I sold it », denied by the principal (1). Imam Ibn al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « They agreed likewise that if the divorcer says after the 'iddah expired: "I had taken you back during the 'iddah", and the woman denies it, the word is the woman's with her oath, and he has no way to her; but an-Nu'man saw no oath in marriage or in the return; his two companions contradicted him, saying what the rest of the people of knowledge say » (1). Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « If he says after her 'iddah expired "I had taken you back during your 'iddah" and she denies him, the word is the woman's, by agreement: he claimed possessing her at a time when he did not own her, the origin being non-existence and the existence of separation » (2). Imam Ibn al-Qattan al-Fasi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The people of knowledge agreed that if the divorcer says after the 'iddah expired: "I had taken you back during the 'iddah", and the woman denies it, the word is the woman's with her oath, except an-Nu'man, who saw no oath in marriage or in the return » (3). Imam al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « The scholars agreed that if the divorcer says after the 'iddah expired: "I had taken you back during the 'iddah", and she denies it, the word is the woman's with her oath, with no way for him to her, except an-Nu'man, who saw no oath in marriage or in the return; his two companions contradicted him like the rest of the people of knowledge » (1).
References: Mukhtasar ikhtilaf al-'ulama (4/232); Al-Mabsut (6/22); Tuhfat al-fuqaha (2/180); Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/185); Sharh Fath al-Qadir (4/163); Al-Mudawwanah al-kubra (5/324-325); At-Taj wa-l-iklil (3/117); Sharh mukhtasar Khalil (4/82-83); Ash-Sharh al-kabir with the hashiyah of ad-Dasuqi (3/331-332); Tahbir al-Mukhtasar (3/227); Al-Umm (5/247); Al-Bayan (10/250); Rawdat at-talibin (5/535-536); Al-Mughni (7/407); Al-Kafi (3/232); Sharh az-Zarkashi (2/122); Al-Mubdi' (7/401); Al-Insaf (9/163); Al-Ishraf 'ala madhahib al-'ulama (5/380); Al-Mughni (7/407); Al-Kafi (3/232); Al-Iqna' fi masa'il al-ijma' (3/1287, no. 2348); Tafsir al-Qurtubi (3/122); At-Taj wa-l-iklil (3/117); Sharh mukhtasar Khalil (4/82-83); Ash-Sharh al-kabir with the hashiyah of ad-Dasuqi (3/331-332); Tahbir al-Mukhtasar (3/227).
When the spouses disagree over the expiry of the 'iddah within a period in which it may expire or subsist, three cases arise. First case: she precedes him with the claim. If she says at the outset: « my 'iddah has ended », and he replies: « I took you back yesterday » for example, and she denies him, his word is not admitted: the word is the woman's according to the jurists of the four schools, Hanafis, Malikis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis; for her information of her 'iddah's expiry is admitted, being possible: his claim of the return therefore comes after the judgment of her 'iddah's expiry: it is not admitted (2). Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « If their disagreement concerns a period in which her 'iddah may expire and subsist, and she begins by saying "my 'iddah has ended", then he says "I had taken you back" and she denies him, his word is not admitted: her information of the expiry is admitted, being possible; his claim of the return comes after the judgment of expiry: it is not admitted » (1). Imam ash-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « Every divorced woman over whom her husband has the right of return, if she says "my 'iddah has ended" then says "it has not ended", the return belongs to her husband. If she says "my 'iddah has ended" and he denies her, she is made to swear: if she swears, the word is hers with her oath; if he does not swear, he is made to swear decisively whether her 'iddah ended or not; if he balks, she is not returned to him » (2). Az-Zarkashi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: « If she precedes him with the claim, saying within a period in which expiry is possible: "my 'iddah has ended", and he replies "I had taken you back", the word is the woman's, without known disagreement: her information, in this state, of her 'iddah's expiry is admitted; by her word the expiry of her 'iddah was judged, and his later claim is not admitted, the creative act having lapsed: his information is therefore also lapsed » (3).
References: Bada'i' as-sana'i' (3/186); Al-Jawharah an-nayyirah (4/480); At-Taj wa-l-iklil (3/120-121); Sharh mukhtasar Khalil (4/86); Ash-Sharh al-kabir with the hashiyah of ad-Dasuqi (3/338); Tahbir al-Mukhtasar (3/233); Al-Bayan (10/251-252); Rawdat at-talibin (5/535-536); An-Najm al-wahhaj (8/20); Maghni al-muhtaj (5/13); Tuhfat al-muhtaj (9/610); Ad-Dibaj (3/487); Al-Mughni (7/407-408); Sharh az-Zarkashi (2/491); Al-Mughni (7/407-408); Sharh az-Zarkashi (2/491); Al-Mubdi' (7/402); Al-Insaf (9/163); Kashshaf al-qina' (5/403); Al-Umm (5/226); Sharh az-Zarkashi (2/122).