Lucknow, India - Senior Vice Chairman of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) Kalbe Sadiq on Monday announced that triple talaq was "anti-Quran". He also said the fatwa issued by the ulema in Imrana case was "stupid and clashed with the tenets of the Quran.
Addressing a conference on empowerment of women in Islam in Lucknow on Sunday, Sadiq asserted that Talaq-I-bidah (innovative triple talaq) started through an "executive order of second Caliph Umar. He said the order issued nearly 1400 years ago was under certain circumstances and it could not become part of Shariat. Sadiq called upon the Islamic Fiqah Academy to thrash out the issue as it had created a lot of problem in the community.
He said while in Shia Fiqah (jurisprudence) there was no concept of triple talaq, in Ahle Hadis saying "talaq, talaq talaq" in one go was counted "single" and it could be reversed if the husband wanted it. But under Hanafi sect "triple talaq" in one go was final, but it had no sanction of the Quran, Dr Sadiq said adding, privately the Sunni Ulema had realised this grave mistake but were not in a position to declare it null and void publicly.
Quoting prominent Sunni scholar Maulana Wahiduddin Khan of Islamic Centre, Sadiq said he had declared it illegal. Sadiq said "Halala" concept following triple talaq was a shameful practice. Under Halala, a man could get back his wife only after she was married to another person and then divorced. He said this practice had no Quranic authenticity. Sadiq said Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in his well-known book "Tarjumanul Koran" had also opposed this system of Talaq. He said Shariat upgraded the life of woman and not degraded it.
Referring to the fatwa in Imrana case, Sadiq said, "Fatwas had damaged Islam very much", as strange fatwas had been given throughout the Islamic history. He said the mufti who issued fatwa in Imrana case did not know that it was a case in which edict was not required. He said fatwa could be issued on problems and not in a case.
He said the stand of the Hanafi school of thought in Imrana’s case clashed with the basic concept of the Quran. He said under Quranic injunction accused and not victim was supposed to get punishment. Imrana was certainly a victim, he said.