Scholarly Opinions on the Hadith of Rukana Regarding Triple Divorce

Authored by: Qari Usama bin Abdul Salam (Hafizahullah)

Introduction​

The narration attributed to Rukana (RA), which states that three divorces pronounced in one sitting are considered one, has been a subject of scrutiny among scholars and hadith experts. This article presents the views of prominent muhaddithin (hadith scholars) and their analyses of the chain of narration and its implications.

Primary Sources of the Hadith​

This narration is found in:

• Musnad Ahmad (Hadith 2387)
• Musnad Abu Ya‘la (Hadith 4295)
• Al-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi (Hadith 14987)
• Ma‘rifat As-Sahabah by Abu Nu‘aym Al-Asbahani (Hadith 2803)

The chain of narration primarily includes Dawud bin Husayn from Ikrimah.

Scholars Supporting the Authenticity of the Hadith​

1. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal: Considered the narration reliable and cited it in his works.
   • Mujmu‘ Al-Fatawa, Vol. 2, p. 67
   • I‘lam Al-Muwaqqi‘in, Vol. 2, p. 217
2. Imam Abu Ya‘la: Included the narration in his Musnad, deeming it authentic.
   • Fath Al-Bari, Vol. 2, p. 362
3. Hafiz Ibn Kathir: Supported its reliability.
   • Tuhfat Al-Ahwadhi, Vol. 2, p. 196
4. Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: Declared the hadith as explicit evidence on the matter.
   • Fath Al-Bari, Vol. 9, p. 362
5. Sheikh Nasiruddin Albani: Graded the narration as authentic.
   • Irwa Al-Ghalil, Vol. 7, p. 145
6. Imam Shawkani: Cited it as clear evidence in the dispute over triple divorce.
   • Nayl Al-Awtar

Critical Analysis of the Hadith by Other Scholars​

Concerns with the Narrator Dawud bin Husayn (عن داود بن حصين عن عكرمة):​

1. Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani:
   • Criticized Dawud bin Husayn’s reliability, declaring the hadith weak (da‘eef).
   • Taqrib At-Tahdhib (5178)
   • Talkhis Al-Habir, Vol. 3, p. 213
2. Imam Sufyan bin Uyaynah:
   • Avoided narrating from Dawud bin Husayn.
   • Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta‘dil, Vol. 3, p. 409
3. Imam Ali bin Al-Madini:
   • Declared the narration munkar (rejected).
   • Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta‘dil, Vol. 3, p. 409
4. Imam Yahya bin Ma‘in:
   • Reported that Imam Malik abandoned narrations from Dawud bin Husayn.
   • Tarikh Ibn Ma‘in, Vol. 3, p. 194
5. Imam Abu Hatim Ar-Razi:
   • Categorized the narration as munkar.
   • Al-‘Ilal Al-Hadith, Vol. 2, p. 260
6. Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:
   • Explicitly stated that the narration is not established and criticized the reliance on it by certain groups.
   • Masail Imam Ahmad by Abu Dawood, p. 170
7. Imam Al-Bukhari:
   • Deemed the narration weak.
   • Al-‘Ilal Al-Kabir, p. 171
8. Imam Abu Dawood:
   • Rejected the reliability of Dawud bin Husayn’s narrations.
   • Mizan Al-I‘tidal, Vol. 3, p. 5

Key Points from Critics​

1. Discrepancies in the Chain of Narration:
   • The reliability of Dawud bin Husayn is disputed among major hadith scholars.
2. Alternative Narrations Contradict the Hadith:
   • Eight other narrations from Abdullah bin Abbas (RA) contradict this account.
3. Weak Memorization of Narrator:
   • Several scholars noted flaws in Dawud bin Husayn’s memory, impacting the reliability of the hadith.

Scholars Who Classified the Hadith as Weak​

1. Imam Al-Bayhaqi:
   • Cited contradictions in Ibn Abbas’s other narrations and considered this hadith unauthentic.
2. Hafiz Al-Mundhiri:
   • Agreed with Imam Al-Bukhari’s assessment.
3. Hafiz Dhahabi:
   • Counted this narration among the weak reports.
   • Mizan Al-I‘tidal, Vol. 3, p. 5
4. Sheikh Muqbil bin Hadi:
   • Declared the narration as munkar.
   • Nashr As-Sahifa, p. 246
5. Hafiz Muhammad Zubair Ali Zai:
   • Criticized the narration as unreliable.
   • Anwar As-Sahifa fi Ahadith Ad-Da‘ifa

Conclusion​

The hadith of Rukana (RA) on triple divorce being counted as one has been graded authentic by some scholars, but a significant number of renowned muhaddithin have classified it as weak or unreliable. The primary issue lies with the narrator Dawud bin Husayn and his chain of transmission.

Thus, caution must be exercised in deriving rulings from this narration, and stronger evidence should be prioritized in such matters of jurisprudence.

وما علینا إلا البلاغ

(Our duty is only to convey.)