Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:227

"And if they determine divorce"—that is, if they become firm in their intent for it, by failing to return (fay’) and persisting in the Ila’ (oath of abstention).

"Indeed, Allah is Hearing"—of their Ila’, which has become an irrevocable divorce (talaq ba'in) upon the completion of the waiting period ('iddah).

"Knowing"—of their purpose behind this Ila’; thus, He will recompense them according to their intentions.

This is the interpretation upon which the Hanafis rely regarding this verse. They stated: Ila’ from a wife consists of a man saying, "By Allah, I will not approach you," for a duration of four months or more—restricted by months—or saying, "I will not approach you," without restriction. It does not constitute Ila’ for anything less than that according to the Four Imams and the majority of scholars, in opposition to the Zahiris, An-Nakha’i, Qatadah, Hammad, Ibn Abi Hammad, and Ishaq, who hold that a man becomes a muli (one under the oath of Ila’) whether the duration is short or long.

The ruling for the muli is: if he returns to her within the duration through intercourse (if possible), or by speech (if he is incapable of it), the return is valid. The one who is able incurs the expiation for an oath (kaffarat al-yamin), while no expiation is required of the one who is incapable. If the four months pass, she becomes irrevocably divorced by a single talaq without the wife needing to demand the husband to perform it or a judicial decree.

The Shafi’is said: There is no Ila’ except for a duration longer than four months. If he says, "By Allah, I will not approach you for four months," it does not legally constitute Ila’ according to them, nor does its ruling apply. Rather, it is an oath like all other oaths; if he breaks it, he expiates, and if he fulfills it, there is nothing upon him. The muli is permitted to delay during this period, and he is not required to return or divorce. If he returns during the oath (by breaking it), "Indeed, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful"—forgiving the sin of his breaking the oath when he expiates, as per the Jadid (new Shafi’i position), or forgiving what he intended by the Ila’ of harming the woman and the like, through the return which is akin to repentance.

"And if they determine divorce, indeed Allah is Hearing"—of his divorce—"Knowing"—of his intention. When the duration ends and he has neither returned nor divorced, he is required to do one of the two. If he refuses both, the judge performs the divorce on his behalf.

They (the Shafi’is) supported the view that the duration must be longer than four months by arguing that the 'fa' (in fa-in—"then if") in the verse denotes sequence, indicating that the ruling of Ila’ regarding the return and divorce follows after the passing of four months. Therefore, Ila’ during this period is not a legal Ila’, as its ruling is absent. This is how they object to the Hanafis. They also object to them by stating that if there were no need for a divorce after the duration passes, it would necessitate a divorce occurring without an act of divorce, whereas the text indicates that it is "heard"—and if she becomes divorced without an utterance of divorce, there would be nothing heard here.

The response to the first objection is that the 'fa' denotes the sequence of mention. The response to the second is that what is "heard" is the discourse, argumentation, and inner promptings that accompany that abandonment, just as the whispers of Satan are heard regarding the injustice or the Ila’ they persisted in, which became an irrevocable divorce upon the passage of time. This is more appropriate to His saying, Exalted is He: "And if they determine divorce," where He sufficed with the mere determination, contrary to what the Shafi’is say about it requiring a divorce after the duration passes, for that would require estimation, and after that, the word "determine" would not be necessary, or it would require treating "determine divorce" as a metonym for it. Thus, the claim that the verse in its literal sense supports the Shafi’i position is groundless. Abu Hanifah and many of the Imamiyyah have followed what has been stated.

'Abd bin Humayd extracted from Ali (may Allah honor his face) that he said: "There are two types of Ila’: Ila’ in anger and Ila’ in contentment. As for Ila’ in anger, if four months pass, she is irrevocably divorced from him. As for that which was in contentment, he is not held accountable for it."

'Abdur-Razzaq extracted from Sa'id bin Jubayr (may Allah be pleased with them both) that he said: A man came to Ali (may Allah honor his face) and said: "I swore that I would not approach my wife for two years." He said: "I see you have only sworn an Ila’." He said: "I only swore because she is breastfeeding my child." He said: "Then no (it is not Ila’)."

It was reported from Ibrahim: "I only know Ila’ to be in anger, because of His saying, Exalted is He: 'And if they return'—and fay’ (return) is only from anger." This was also reported from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both).

The general application of the verse is used as evidence for the validity of Ila’ from a disbeliever, regardless of the oath used, whether there has been prior consummation or not, for a minor, and for a castrated man. It is also used as evidence that for a slave, the four months are set just as they are for a free man. The specification of this ruling for the muli is used as evidence that whoever abandons intercourse out of harm without an oath, nothing is required of him.

As for what was reported from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) that she said while admonishing Khalid bin Sa'id al-Makhzumi, when it reached her that he had abandoned his wife: "Beware, O Khalid, of a long abandonment, for you have heard what Allah, the Exalted, has granted the muli in terms of a respite," it is interpreted as a desire to incline towards kindness and a warning against resembling Ila’.