وجه الجمع بين أحاديث النهي عن التحليل وبين حديث امرأة رفاعة

وجه الجمع بين أحاديث النهي عن التحليل وبين حديث امرأة رفاعة

السؤال: جاء عند أبي داود أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال " لعن الله المحلل والمحلَل له". والمحلل هو الرجل الذي يتزوج المرأة لغرض تحليلها لزوجها الأول والمحلل له هو الزوج الأول.. وورد عند بن ماجة من حديث عقبة بن عامر رضي الله عنه أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: " ألا أخبركم بالتيس المستعار؟ قالوا: بلى يا رسول الله. قال: هو المحلل. لعن الله المحلل والمحلل له." فنخلص من هاذين الحديثين إلى أن التحليل حرام شرعاً. لكن في المقابل نجد حديثاً أخر في سنن أبي داود برقم 2302 في الكتاب 12 من حديث أم المؤمنين عائشة رضي الله عنها أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم سُئل عن رجل طلق زوجته ثلاثاً فتزوجت رجلاً اخر طلقها قبل أن يواقعها، فهل يجوز أن تعود لزوجها الأول.. فقالت عائشة رضي الله عنها: فأجاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: لا تحل له حتى يذوق عسيلتها وتذوق عسيلته (أي الزوج الثاني).. فالذي نفهمه من هذا الحديث أنه يجوز التحليل شرط أن يدخل بها الزوج الثاني.. أفلا يُعد هذا تناقض بين الأدلة؟ ففي الحديثين الأول يُلعن المحلل والمحلل له، وفي الحديث الثاني نرى الأمر لا بأس به. فما قولكم في ذلك؟

الجواب :
الحمد لله

 
ليس هناك تناقض بين هذه الأحاديث ، فإن الرجل إذا تزوج امرأةً مطلقة ثلاثاً بقصد إحلالها للأول فها الزواج محرم ، وهو الذي لعن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فاعله .

وأما حديث امرأة رفاعة ، فليس فيه أن عبد الرحمن بن الزبير تزوجها بقصد التحليل ، بل روايات الحديث تدل على أنه تزوجها وهو راغب في التمسك بها ، ولم يطلقها بمجرد طلبها الطلاق ، وإنما هي أرادت أن تعود لزوجها الأول ، فبين لها النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنها لا يحل لها ذلك حتى يدخل بها الزوج الثاني ، وهي كانت قد ذكرت أنه لم يدخل بها .

وهذه بعض ألفاظ حديث امرأة رفاعة ، رواه البخاري (2639) ومسلم (1433) عَنْ عَائِشَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا : (جَاءَتْ امْرَأَةُ رِفاعَةَ الْقُرَظِيِّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَالَتْ : كُنْتُ عِنْدَ رِفَاعَةَ فَطَلَّقَنِي فَأَبَتَّ طَلَاقِي فَتَزَوَّجْتُ عَبْدَ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنَ الزَّبِيرِ . فَقَالَ : ( أَتُرِيدِينَ أَنْ تَرْجِعِي إِلَى رِفَاعَةَ ؟ لَا ، حَتَّى تَذُوقِي عُسَيْلَتَهُ ، وَيَذُوقَ عُسَيْلَتَكِ ) .
وروى مسلم (1433) عَنْ عَائِشَةَ رضي الله عنها قَالَتْ : طَلَّقَ رَجُلٌ امْرَأَتَهُ ثَلَاثًا فَتَزَوَّجَهَا رَجُلٌ ثُمَّ طَلَّقَهَا قَبْلَ أَنْ يَدْخُلَ بِهَا ، فَأَرَادَ زَوْجُهَا الْأَوَّلُ أَنْ يَتَزَوَّجَهَا ، فَسُئِلَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ ذَلِكَ فَقَالَ : ( لَا حَتَّى يَذُوقَ الْآخِرُ مِنْ عُسَيْلَتِهَا مَا ذَاقَ الْأَوَّلُ ) .

فليس في الحديث إذاً أن عبد الرحمن تزوجها بنية التحليل ، وإنما هي التي أرادت أن ترجع لزوجها الأول ، ووجود هذه النية منها لا يجعل النكاح نكاح تحليل ، لأن الطلاق ليس بيدها .

قال ابن عبد البر رحمه الله :
" وفي قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم لامرأة رفاعة : (أتريدين أن ترجعي إلى رفاعة) دليل على أن إرادة المرأة الرجوع إلى زوجها لا يضر العاقد عليها ، وأنها ليست بذلك في معنى التحليل المستحق صاحبه اللعنة " انتهى .
"التمهيد" (13 /227) .
وقال ابن القيم رحمه الله :
" لا أثر لنية الزوجة ولا الولي وإنما التأثير لنية الزوج الثاني فإنه إذا نوى التحليل كان محللا فيستحق اللعنة ثم يستحقها الزوج المطلق إذا رجعت إليه بهذا النكاح الباطل ، فأما إذا لم يعلم الزوج الثاني ولا الأول بما في قلب المرأة أو وليها من نية التحليل لم يضر ذلك العقد شيئا . وقد علم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من امرأة رفاعة أنها كانت تريد أن ترجع إليه ولم يجعل ذلك مانعا من رجوعها إليه ، وإنما جعل المانع عدم وطء الثاني فقال : ( حتى تذوقي عسيلته ويذوق عسيلتك ) " انتهى .
"إعلام الموقعين" (4 /45-46) .
والله أعلم

الإسلام سؤال وجواب

هنا

************************** 

Reconciling between the hadeeths which forbid tahleel and the hadeeth about the wife of Rifaa‘ah

 Prophet peace be upon him said.
Abu Dawud narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Allah has cursed the muhallil and the muhallallahu".
The muhallilis the one who marries a woman and divorces her so that she can return to her first husband, and the muhallallahuis the first husband.
IbnMajah narrated from `Uqbah ibn `Aamir that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Shall I not tell you of a borrowed billy-goat?” They said, Yes, O Messenger of Allah. He said, “He is al-muhallil. May Allah curse al-muhalliland al-muhallal lahu.”
Which means that Doing Halala is harram in Islam but on the other hand when i found this hadith,
Dawud :: Book 12 : Hadith 2302 Narrated Aisha, Ummul Muminin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was asked about a man who divorced his wife three times, and she married another who entered upon her, but divorced her before having intercourse with her, whether she was lawful for the former husband. She said: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) replied: She is not lawful for the first (husband) until she tastes the honey of the other husband and he tastes her honey.
Doesnt it mean these are contradictory that at one side prophet is cursing and other side he is allowing to do marriage for the purpose of Divorce so she can consume marriage with the previous husband.

Praise be to Allaah.

There is no contradiction between these hadeeths. If a man marries a woman who has been divorced three times with the intention of making her permissible for the first husband (tahleel marriage), this marriage is haraam and is that which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the one who does it. 

As for the hadeeth about the wife of Rifaa‘ah, it does not say that ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn al-Zubayr married her with the intention of tahleel. Rather the reports of the hadeeth indicate that he married her and wanted to keep her, and he did not divorce her just because she asked for a divorce. Rather she wanted to go back to her first husband, but the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) explained to her that that would not be permissible for her until the second husband consummated the marriage with her; she had said that he had not consummated the marriage with her. 

There follow some of the versions of the hadeeth about the wife of Rifaa‘ah. 

It was narrated by al-Bukhaari (2639) and Muslim (1433) from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that: The wife of Rifaa‘ah al-Qurazi came to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and said: I was married to Rifaa‘ah, then he divorced me and made the divorce irrevocable. Then I married ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn al-Zubayr. He said: “Do you want to go back to Rifaa‘ah? No, not until you taste his (‘Abd al-Rahmaan’s) sweetness and he tastes your sweetness.” 

Muslim (1433) narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: A man divorced his wife three times, then another man married her and divorced her before consummating the marriage with her. Her first husband wanted to remarry her, and the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was asked about that. He said: “No, not until the second husband tastes of her sweetness what the first one tasted.” 

So it does not say in the hadeeth that ‘Abd al-Rahmaan married her with the intention of tahleel (making her permissible for her first husband). Rather she is the one who wanted to go back to her first husband, and the fact that this intention was present on her part does not make the marriage a tahleel marriage, because the power of divorce was not in her hand. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) permitted her to go back to her first husband if the second husband had intercourse with her, after it became clear to him that she wanted to go back to the first husband, and it made no difference whether this desire arose after the marriage contract was done or was present before that, this indicates that it was permissible for her to go back to (the first husband) in either case. Usually if a woman is comfortable with her husband then he divorces her, she may still feel something for him in many cases; women usually dislike divorce and would like to go back to the first husband more than they would like to live with someone else… End quote. 

Al-Fataawa al-Kubra, 6/301 

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

In the words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to the wife of Rifaa‘ah, “Do you want to go back to Rifaa‘ah?” There is an indication that the woman's desire to go back to her (first) husband does not affect the one who has done the marriage contract with her, and that does not come under the same heading as tahleel, in the case of which the one who does it deserves to be cursed. End quote. 

Al-Tamheed, 13/227 

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

The intention of the wife or her guardian does not have any effect; rather what counts is the intention of the second husband. If he intends to make it permissible for her to go back to her first husband (tahleel), then he is muhallil and deserves to be cursed, as does the husband who divorced her, if she goes back to him by means of this invalid marriage. But if neither the second husband nor the first husband was aware of what was in the mind of the woman or her guardian of the intention of tahleel, that does not affect the marriage contract at all. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was aware that the wife of Rifaa‘ah wanted to go back to him and he did not make that the reason to prevent her going back to him; rather what prevented her going back to him was the fact that the second husband had not had intercourse with her, so he said, “not until you taste his sweetness and he tastes your sweetness.” End quote. 

I‘laam al-Muwaqqi‘een, 4/45-46 

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

here