Hadith 3362

(1) The statement: "There is no consideration for divorce under coercion"—Ash-Shafi’i adhered to the hadith of compulsion and said: Divorce and emancipation under coercion do not occur. According to us, these are valid based on these narrations and by analogy to their validity in jest. The foundational principle in our view is that any contract that cannot be annulled is not prevented from taking effect due to coercion. Likewise, whatever is valid in jest is also valid under coercion, as mentioned in Al-Luma’at. Therefore, Al-Hidayah states: "The divorce of a coerced person is effective, contrary to Ash-Shafi’i’s view."

(2) The statement: "Narrated by Muhammad with his chain"—In Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, it is mentioned that Ash-Sha’bi considered the divorce of a coerced person permissible. The same was said by Ibrahim, Abu Qilabah, Ibn Mas’ud, and Shurayh. Ibn Hazm also reported that it was authentically narrated from Az-Zuhri, Qatadah, Sa’id ibn Jubayr, and others. Abu Hanifah and his companions adopted this view. Al-Faraj ibn Fadalah narrated from ‘Amr ibn Sharahbil that a woman coerced her husband to divorce her, so he divorced her, and ‘Umar upheld the divorce. A similar narration is reported from Ibn ‘Umar and ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, as mentioned in ‘Umdat al-Qari’.

(3) The statement: "Except the divorce of an insane person..."—This refers to the divorce of a ma’tuh (mentally deficient). Here, ma’tuh refers to an insane person, not the commonly understood meaning of one lacking maturity or experience. Rather, it denotes a severe mental disorder. This is mentioned in Al-Bahr as the definition of insanity. It includes the ma’tuh, and the best distinction between the two is that a ma’tuh is one with weak comprehension, incoherent speech, and poor judgment, but he does not strike or insult, unlike an insane person. This is cited in Ar-Radd al-Muhtar and Al-Kawkab ad-Durri, derived from both.