-
His words, “before he touches her,” prove that it is impermissible to divorce a wife during a period of purity in which intercourse has already taken place.
-
The wisdom behind keeping her until she becomes pure from the second menses is that the husband may well approach her in that period of purity, leading their life together to continue. For that reason some narrations of the hadith add: “and when she becomes pure, let him have intercourse with her.”
Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr said: “A revocation (rujuʿ) is scarcely recognized as valid except by intercourse, for intercourse is the very objective of marriage.”
The rationale for forbidding divorce while the wife is menstruating is to avoid prolonging the waiting period. The reason for prohibiting divorce during a clean period in which intercourse has occurred is the fear that she may be pregnant, in which case the spouses—or one of them—would regret the divorce; had they known of the pregnancy, they would have treated each other well and reconciliation would have followed estrangement.
All of this relates back to the Almighty’s words, “then divorce them at the start of their waiting period” ⦗Quran 65:1⦘, and in His Law there are manifest and hidden wisdoms and secrets.
Disagreement among the scholars:
The majority—including the four Imams—hold that a divorce pronounced during menstruation is effective. Their proof is the Prophet’s ﷺ command that Ibn ʿUmar take his wife back after he had divorced her while she was menstruating; a revocation only follows a valid divorce. Moreover, one version of the hadith states, “That pronouncement was counted as one of her divorces.”
Some scholars, however—among them Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim—maintain that such a divorce does not take effect and is null. They cite the report recorded by Abu Dawud and al-Nasaʾi: “ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿUmar divorced his wife while she was menstruating. ʿAbd Allah said: He returned her to me and did not count it as anything.” This narration appears in Muslim without the words “and did not count it as anything.”
Scholars have criticized that wording because it conflicts with all the other narrations.
Ibn al-Qayyim answered the majority’s proofs by arguing that the command to reinstate her meant to keep her in her original state, because the divorce was pronounced at a time not sanctioned by the Law and was therefore void; the marriage remained intact. As for the wording, “That pronouncement was counted as one of her divorces,” he contended that it carries no weight because it is not traced back to the Prophet ﷺ.
Ibn al-Qayyim discussed this issue at length in his Tahdhīb al-Sunan, as is his habit in debates, yet the stronger view is that of the majority of scholars. Allah knows best.