and a punishment is not imposed for doing something permissible. Moreover, Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, was asked about a man who divorced his wife with three pronouncements, and he said: “Had he feared Allah, He would have made a way out for him.” (1) This indicates that it is forbidden. This is the correct view: issuing three pronouncements of divorce at once is forbidden.

Some scholars held that a threefold divorce is not forbidden, but permissible. This is the position of al-Shafi‘i, who said: The evidence that it is not forbidden is that Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, enforced it; had it been forbidden, he would not have enforced it, since what is forbidden may not be enforced. Indeed, enforcing what is forbidden amounts to opposing Allah, for when Allah forbids something, He intends His servants to avoid it; if we enforce it, we bring it about.

He answered the hadith, “Is the Book of Allah being treated as a plaything while I am among you?!” (2) by saying that it is weak. Perhaps, however, the hadith did not reach al-Shafi‘i, may Allah have mercy on him, through an authentic chain. The correct view is that the least that can be said of the hadith is that it is sound, and a number of scholars have authenticated it. Furthermore, the proofs we have mentioned are clear.

As for his statement that, had it been forbidden, Umar would not have enforced it, we reply: Umar did not enforce it because he approved of it, but rather as a punishment for the one who committed it. This is why, when he enforced it, he said: “People have hastened in a matter in which they had been granted respite. What if we were to enforce it upon them?” So he enforced it upon them.