Because the dissolution had in fact already taken place through the very act of mutual imprecation (liʿān), the subsequent divorce was issued where no valid marital bond remained; hence it can be characterized as neither Sunnah-compliant nor innovative. Malik’s opinion—Allah knows best—appears stronger here than that of al-Shafiʿi.

Third issue: the ruling on a husband who pronounces divorce while his wife is menstruating.

The jurists split on several levels:

1. The majority declared that the divorce stands.
2. A second group said it is neither valid nor effective.
3. Those who deemed it effective added that the husband must be instructed to revoke it, but even they divided further:
   – One party held that revocation is obligatory and enforceable; this is the view of Malik and his school.
   – Another maintained that revocation is recommended but not compulsory; this view is upheld by al-Shafiʿi, Abū Ḥanīfah, al-Thawri, and Ahmad.

Those who made compulsion obligatory differed over the period during which it may be enforced:
• Malik and most of his companions—among them Ibn al-Qāsim—stated that the husband is compelled so long as her waiting period (ʿiddah) has not expired.
• Ashhab limited compulsion to the first menstrual cycle only.

Among the scholars who order revocation there is yet another disagreement regarding the earliest point at which, after revoking, a fresh divorce may be pronounced if the husband so wishes:
• One opinion requires him, after taking her back, to keep her until she becomes pure from that menses, menstruates once more, and then becomes pure again; only then may he choose either to divorce or to keep her. This is the position of Malik, al-Shafiʿi, and others.
• The second opinion holds that he may, after revoking, wait only until she is pure from the very menses during which he divorced her, and then, if he wishes, divorce her or keep her. This is the view of Abū Ḥanīfah and the Kufan jurists. Anyone who stipulates for a Sunnah-compliant divorce that it occur during a purity in which no intercourse has taken place does not require revocation when the husband divorces her in a purity during which intercourse did occur.

Accordingly, four questions arise:

1. Does a divorce issued during menstruation take effect?
2. If it does, must the husband be compelled to revoke it, or is mere instruction sufficient?
3. After compulsion or recommendation to revoke, when may a new divorce be pronounced?
4. At what point may compulsion to revoke be enforced?

Regarding the first question, the majority hold that a divorce pronounced during menstruation counts and is valid, citing the Prophet’s statement—peace and blessings be upon him—in the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar: “Tell him to take her back.” They argue that revocation can only occur after a valid divorce.

Al-Shafiʿi transmitted from Muslim ibn Khālid, from Ibn Jurayj, that people sent to Nāfiʿ asking, “Was the divorce of Ibn ʿUmar counted in the time of the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him?” He replied, “Yes.” It is also reported that this was the legal verdict Ibn ʿUmar himself used to issue.

Those who judged the divorce invalid relied on the Prophet’s general statement—peace and blessings be upon him—“Whoever performs an act that is not in accordance with our affair, it is rejected,” and said that the Prophet’s order to undo the divorce indicates it carried no legal force or effect.