Wednesday, 29 April 2026 (12 Dhuʻl-Qiʻdah 1447 AH)
Question: A man afflicted with diabetes, hypertension, and an enlarged heart divorced his wife—first, then second, then third. Is there any solution to this, bearing in mind that were we not to “break the hazelnut’s shell,” he would kill whichever of his sons opposed him?
The answer—and Allah is the One who grants success: If diabetes and hypertension have taken away his intellect, then his divorce at that time carries no legal effect, for he is in the ruling of the insane.
The loss of his intellect is known by matters:
1. A physician’s determination that that degree of diabetes and hypertension removes the intellect.
2. That the afflicted person does actions which rational people customarily are ashamed to do.
The proof of this sign’s validity is that the intellect, as has been said, is so named because it restrains its possessor from venturing upon what ought not be done.
What ought not be done falls into two categories: one that rational people may do in anger and sharp temper—such as striking and breaking household items and the like; and a second that only the insane do—such as murder and exposing the private parts in public.
Our concern is the second category, which only the insane do—like murder and exposing the private parts in public—and similar acts or statements. If the diabetic or hypertensive reaches this level, his intellect has departed; at that point, neither his divorce nor any of his legal acts has effect.
If it be said: Hypertension and diabetes are not insanity; they are the uprising and intensification of the bodily humors, without a defect in the intellect.
We say: If the uprising of the humors reaches the point that the intellect is lost, it takes the ruling of insanity; but if the intellect retains authority, it does not take the ruling of insanity. Concerning what we have mentioned, there is the ḥadīth: “There is no divorce in ighlāq,” narrated by a group of ḥadīth scholars. Ighlāq has been explained as: that a person’s heart is shut such that he does not intend the speech, or is unaware of it; it has been said: constricted breast and little patience; it has been said: anger; it has been said: insanity; and it has been said: coercion.
I say: These explanations revolve around a single meaning—namely, that ighlāq is when a person speaks without intent and without awareness of what he is saying.
Source : Min Thimār al-ʿIlm wa al-Ḥikmah vol.1