during that period of purity, and thus marital life may continue. For this reason one chain of the ḥadith states: “When she has purified herself, he may approach her.”

Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr said: A return (rujūʿ) is scarcely known to be valid except through intercourse, for that is the very purpose of marriage.

The wisdom behind forbidding divorce during menstruation is to prevent the waiting-period from being unduly prolonged; the wisdom behind forbidding divorce in a state of purity in which intercourse has already occurred is the fear that she may be pregnant, whereupon the spouses—or one of them—would regret the divorce. Had they known of the pregnancy, they would have treated one another well, and harmony would have replaced separation and alienation. All of this goes back to the Almighty’s words: “Then divorce them at the commencement of their waiting-periods” (Quran 65:1). Allah’s law contains judgments and secrets, both manifest and hidden.

• Disagreement among the scholars over the validity of a divorce pronounced during menstruation:

The majority of scholars—including the four Imams (Abu Ḥanīfah, Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and Aḥmad)—hold that such a divorce does take effect. Their proof is the Prophet’s ﷺ instruction to Ibn ʿUmar to take his wife back after he had divorced her while she was menstruating; a return can only follow a prior divorce. In addition, one wording of the ḥadith states: “It was counted as one of her divorces.”

Some scholars—among them Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim—maintained that the divorce does not take effect and is null and void.

They cited as evidence the report recorded by Abū Dāwūd and al-Nasaʾī: “ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿUmar divorced his wife while she was menstruating. ʿAbd Allāh said: The Prophet returned her to me and did not regard it as anything.”

The scholars, however, considered this narration objectionable because it conflicts with all the other ḥadiths.

Ibn al-Qayyim replied to the majority’s evidence by saying that the command to take her back means to leave her in her original state, for a divorce pronounced outside the time allowed by the Law is void; thus the marriage remains in force.

As for citing the wording, “It was counted as one of her divorces,” he held that it furnishes no proof, because it is not—