or their independent judgments differed, so they regarded it as binding at times and not binding at others.

As for the view that counting all three divorces is a binding religious rule like other religious prescriptions, no evidence from the revealed law supports it. According to the preferred view, the man who pronounced this divorce may count it as a single divorce and take his wife back. Yet nothing is binding, since she was menstruating, provided he fears Allah and has repented of this innovation.

Section

As for “divorce during menstruation,” the disagreement over whether it takes effect stems from the following report:

“The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb, when he informed him that ‘Abd Allāh ibn ‘Umar had divorced his wife while she was menstruating: ‘Tell him to take her back until she menstruates, then becomes pure, then menstruates again, then becomes pure.’”

Some scholars understood his words, “Let him take her back,” to mean taking back a divorced wife. On this basis, they held that a man who divorces his wife during menstruation is instructed to take her back, although the divorce takes effect. Is this instruction a recommendation or an obligation? There are two views, both reported from Ahmad. The position of Abū Hanīfa and al-Shāfi‘ī is that it is recommended; Mālik’s position is that it is obligatory.

May he divorce her during the first period of purity following the menstruation in which he divorced her, or must he wait until the period of purity following a second menstruation? Here too there are two views, both reported from Ahmad and both held within Abū Hanīfa’s school.

Must he have intercourse with her before the second divorce? Most of these scholars do not consider this obligatory. Some, however, do; this is one view within Ahmad’s school. It is strong by analogy with the position of those who consider the divorce effective, but weak in terms of the evidence.