In the case of the second husband, he is remunerated (maʾjūr), and this is the view held by Rabīʿa and Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd; Dāwūd ibn ʿAlī also adopted it, provided that his intention to render her lawful again does not appear in his stipulation at the time of the contract. Ibn al-Ḥazm concurred with this opinion and states in al-Muḥallā (10/180): “Issue: If the divorcing husband (al-muṭlaq) encourages a third party to marry a woman and consummate that marriage to make her lawful for him, this is permissible—so long as he marries her without stipulating this condition in his own marriage contract with her. Once he marries her, he retains an option (khiyār): if he wishes, he divorces her; if he chooses, he keeps her. If he divorces her, she becomes lawful to the first husband. But if he had stipulated in the marriage contract that he would divorce her upon consummation, that contract is invalid, nullified outright, and does not make her lawful for him.” The implication of this statement is that a second husband may perform the “halāla” (legal re-licensing) if he intends it but does not disclose it in the marriage contract. This position, however, directly contradicts the authentic texts reported from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), which condemn and curse both the muḥallil (the one who renders her lawful) and the muḥallal lahu (the woman thus made lawful). Ibn al-Qudāma comments in al-Mughni (7/275): “… and because the Prophet (peace be upon him) cursed the muḥallil and the muḥallal lahu, he called him muḥallil despite the invalidity of his marriage. The designation ‘muḥallil’ refers to his intent to make lawful what is unlawful; had he truly made it lawful, he would not have been cursed, nor would the muḥallal lahu.” Ibn Kathīr states in his Tafsīr (1/278–280): “Section: What is meant by the ‘second husband’ is one who genuinely desires lasting marriage, as is proper in matrimony … But if the sole purpose of the second is to render her lawful for the first, this is the muḥallil condemned and cursed in the hadiths. Whenever one explicitly declares this intent in the contract, the marriage is invalidated by the consensus of the Imams.” He then cites a series of hadiths and reports—with their chains of transmission—explicitly denouncing and cursing the muḥallil and the muḥallal lahu, drawn from various sources in the Sunna. Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyya authored the work “Iqāmat al-Dalīl ʿalā Ibtāl al-Taḥlīl” (“Establishing the Proof for the Nullification of Halāla”), presenting both transmitted (naqlī) and rational (ʿaqli) evidence against religious legal ruses in general and halāla in particular. This text appears in Volume 3 of Majmūʿ Fatāwā Ibn Taymiyya, pp. 98–385. Ibn al-Qayyim also devoted a chapter to the evils of halāla and its denouncement in ʿAlām al-Muwāqqiʿīn (3/47–48), where he included the Prophet’s hadiths condemning the muḥallil and muḥallal lahu, along with their transmission chains and authentication in the canonical hadith collections.