A Marital Settlement Agreement Or Legal Separation Agreement (Collectively Referred: Fill & Download for Free

I got divorced in PA.Divorce:no fault. Irreconcilable differences is enough.No time limit for finalizing the divorce - I knew people who were separated for decades without a property settlementProperty settlement, child support, and child custody are three different ordersProperty settlement:Assets held even for a very short amount of time regardless of how the asset was purchased is marital property. Even though I used premarital assets to buy our home and pay the mortgage, it was considered marital property and the proceeds were shared 50/50.Alimony is not considered unless the marriage is over 10 years in durationChild Custody:The default is 50/50 parenting time and 50/50 legal custodyThe judge ruled I was not allowed to relocate for a new job even though it would not have impacted the child visitation schedule.Custody orders can be changed whenever there is a material change in circumstances.The non-custodial parent is not required to meet the visitation schedule. The custodial parent can be found in contempt of court and subsequently jailed if the child is not produced according to the visitation schedule.If there is private transportation involved in the child exchange, the custodial parent must turn over the child regardless of the driver’s legal capacity to drive the vehicle (like insurance or valid driver’s license) or the legal operation of the vehicle on state roads (like inspection or registration)Child support:Child support is proportional to both parent’s income or imputed incomeI was 5 months pregnant and a stay at home mom by marital agreement for my first child at the time of separation. I was imputed an income based on the job I had left 2 years prior.Basic child support includes the first $250 of out of pocket costs.As the custodial parent, I was required to carry full medical insurance for the children. The premium is not a part of my contribution.Income records are not verified by the support officer. If required documentation is missing, the officer makes a ruling with the parties’ verbal assertion of income.Child support is not enforced.Attempts to find absentee payors are weak (the court found an old woman in a stroke rehab center and said she was my 35 year old ex-husband)The payor is considered compliant unless there has been no payment in the past three consecutive months. Then they wait another 30 days.The enforcement officer and the arresting officer work M-F 8–4:30 and will only serve documents or make an arrest in the home county of the payor. If the payor is working it is unlikely s/he’ll be found at home during regular business hours.Arrears are stated due in full IMMEDIATELY on the order but they are in fact collected at a very leisurely pace. The ten years of accumulated arrears are ordered to be collected over the next 93 years.There is a self-support reserve of a little less than $1000 for the payor to prevent too much being withheld from a garnished paycheck.Psychiatric care (like ADHD or other learning or social disorders even when referred by the child’s pediatrician or school) is not an allowed medical cost even if allowed by insurance.The payee pays the state collections unit $25 a year

Apartheid is defined as a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.The most classic example of this of course was South Africa and it was the success of the global boycott against South Africa that provided the enticement for an absurd strategy of reverse application (to Israel), where the comparison is made simply because of the success of the anti-Apartheid campaign.There is a simple and undeniable fact, that everyone in Israel votes, which in itself dispels the Apartheid myth completely; but let’s go even further.Take as an example two Arab brothers who were living in Akko in 1947; then during the civil war in 1948 caused by the Arab rejection of partition, one left the area to escape the troubles and the other didn’t.Today, one of these brothers is Israeli, with full citizenship; the other is a Palestinian living in a refugee camp. However you choose to look at this and whatever separates these two brothers, it cannot be race.(The lies and the myths of the anti-Israeli crowd)Israel is the opposite of an apartheid state. It is a multicultural democracy and the only free country in the Middle East. Labeling Israel as practicing “apartheid” justifiably offends Israelis and many victims of real apartheid regimes. Israeli law enshrines equal rights for all citizens, and minorities participate fully in public life. While Israel, like other multi-ethnic democracies, struggles with minority disadvantages, its laws try to eradicate inequality. Nor does Israel practice apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza. ‘Palestinians’ are not citizens of the jewish state, and the vast majority do not want to be. They are governed by their own leaders—Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.(16 Things That Give Israel a Bad Name But Aren't Really True)Apartheid Laws that are Explicitly Illegal in IsraelSouth AfricaImmorality Amendment Act, Act No 21 of 1950; amended in 1957 (Act 23) - Prohibited adultery, attempted adultery or related immoral acts (extra-marital sex) between white and black people.Israel|Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty - All citizens are equal before the law. In regards to universal concepts of human dignity and liberty, religious and ethnic groups are not referenced at all, only people. There are no laws governing sexual activity within or without the bounds of marriage between consenting adults.South AfricaGroup Areas Act, Act No 41 of 1950 - Forced physical separation between races by creating different residential areas for different races. Led to forced removals of people living in “wrong” areas, for example Coloureds living in District Six in Cape Town.IsraelIt is illegal to discriminate against potential home-buyers based on race, religion or other factors in Israel. - There are no laws designating where Jews and non-Jews can or can not live. The Israel National Planning Council does designate new towns or cities as being developed for a specific community, but this is only designed to meet the needs of that community and has no bearing on who can actually live there. As such, the INPC may plan a new “haredi city,” but all Israeli citizens are free to move there, it just happens that because the plans will include special designations to meet the needs of the haredi community (additional space for synagogues, yeshivas, mikvahs…) making it more attractive to haredi citizens. INPC designations are merely guidelines and do not prevent citizens of any religion or ethnicity from living in any area.South AfricaSuppression of Communism Act, Act No 44 of 1950 - Outlawed communism and the Communist Party in South Africa. Communism was defined so broadly that it covered any call for radical change. Communists could be banned from participating in a political organisation and restricted to a particular area.IsraelBasic Law: The Knesset, Section 7A “Prevention of participation of candidates list - The only way a candidate list can be prevented from running for Knesset is if they reject Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, incite racism, or violence against the state by an enemy state or terror organization. Despite the fact that no Arab party currently in the Knesset recognizes Israel as a Jewish State, they have never been prevented from running in elections or serving in the Knesset. While there have been legal attempts to disqualify Arab parties for violating this law, each attempt was blocked by the Supreme Court. The only parties ever successfully banned from running for the Knesset were Kach and Kahane Chaiand they were subsequently banned outright after being reclassified as terrorist organizations.As for the law relating specifically to Communists, the Israeli Communist Party is currently in the Knesset as a faction of the Hadash Party which is part of the Joint Arab List.South AfricaNative Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act of 1953 - Prohibited strike action by blacks.IsraelCollective Agreements Law - 1957* and *the Settlement of Labour Disputes Law - 1957 (among others) - The right to strike by all workers, regardless of religion or ethnicity, is enshrined in law. General strikes by the Arab sector in Israel have occurred many times in the past as acts of protest.South AfricaReservation of Separate Amenities Act, Act No 49 of 1953 - Forced segregation in all public amenities, public buildings, and public transport with the aim of eliminating contact between whites and other races. "Europeans Only” and “Non-Europeans Only” signs were put up. The act stated that facilities provided for different races need not be equal.Israel:Discrimination based on religion or ethnicity is illegal in Israel - Jews and Arabs use the same public amenities, buildings and transport and it is illegal for a business not to serve a customer because they are an Arab or a Jew. The fact that occasionally the news will report about people or businesses discriminating (as happens at times in every country) is proof that they are law-breakers not policy makers.South AfricaGroup Areas Development Act, Act No 69 of 1955 - Helped to effect the purpose of the Group Areas Act of 1950, namely to exclude non-Whites from living in the most developed areas, which were restricted to Whites. It was later replaced by the Community Development Act of 1966.IsraelThere are no restrictions on where a citizen can live regardless of religion or ethnicity.South AfricaNatives (Prohibition of Interdicts) Act, Act No 64 of 1956 - Denied black people the option of appealing to the courts against forced removals.IsraelAny citizen can appeal an eviction notice before the courts. Even non-Israeli Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria can sue in the Israeli Supreme Court (and win) if they believe they are being deprived of their land unjustly. Arabs, both citizens and non-citizens, have the right to appeal to the court system for anySouth AfricaBantu Investment Corporation Act, Act No 34 of 1959 - Provided for the creation of financial, commercial, and industrial schemes in areas designated for black people.IsraelThere are no areas designated as only for Arabs (or Jews only) in Israel and no “financial, commercial or industrial schemes” specifically for those non-existent areas. The Industrial Parks or Zones in Israel and Judea and Samaria make no distinction between Jew or Arab or Israeli or Palestinian.South AfricaExtension of University Education Act, Act 45 of 1959 - Put an end to black students attending white universities (mainly the universities of Cape Town and Witwatersrand). Created separate tertiary institutions for whites, Coloured, blacks, and Asians.IsraelThere are no restrictions on university admission based on religion or ethnicity. On the contrary, there are affirmative action programs designed to aid disadvantaged students - Arab, women, the disabled… - in gaining admission.South AfricaPromotion of Bantu Self-Government Act, Act No 46 of 1959 - Classified black people into eight ethnic groups. Each group had a Commissioner-General who was tasked to develop a homeland for each, which would be allowed to govern itself independently without white intervention.IsraelArabs (like Jews) do fall into many categories in Israel - Muslim, Christian, Bedouin, Druze - but they are all equal before the law. There are no Bantu areas in Israel and no Israeli citizen can be deprived of their citizenship.South AfricaColoured Persons Communal Reserves Act, Act No 3 of 1961 - Effectively of lowered wages by denying Africans rights within urban areas and by keeping their families and dependents on subsistence plots in the reserves.IsraelIt is illegal to discriminate between employees based on religion or ethnicity, including in regards to their salaries.South AfricaPreservation of Coloured Areas Act, Act No 31 of 1961 - Created a legal loophole for land in “coloured areas” to be seized and paid for to white “Guardians” in place of the original owners who may or may not have registered their claims.IsraelThere are no areas specifically for Jews or non-Jews and in the case of eminent domain, only the legal owner would be compensated. All land-owners must have documentation to prove their ownership.South AfricaUrban Bantu Councils Act, Act No 79 of 1961 - Created black councils in urban areas that were supposed to be tied to the authorities running the related ethnic homeland.Israel:City councils are elected by the citizens of the municipality without regard to religion or ethnicity.South AfricaBantu Homelands Citizens Act of 1970 - Compelled all black people to become a citizen of the homeland that responded to their ethnic group, regardless of whether they’d ever lived there or not, and removed their South African citizenship.IsraelArab citizens of Israel cannot be stripped of their citizenship without their consent. While critics of Israel frequently label the Palestinian Authority as a “Bantustan” this is for propaganda purposes and does not fit the comparison at all. Rather than creating the Palestinian Authority to deprive Arab Israelis of their citizenship, Israel was essentially forced into establishing it as part of the Oslo Accords. The creation of the PA had no effect on Arab citizens of Israel and while some Knesset Members have floated the idea of ceding some Israeli Arab towns to the PA as part of a peace treaty, such suggestions were never part of Israel’s past peace offers.Palestinian AuthorityMahmoud Abbas has made it clear that under any final peace deal, he would not allow a single Jew to remain in the Palestinian State. This means that all Jews living in Judea and Samaria outside of areas annexed by Israel would not even get the option of Palestinian citizenship. Just like Blacks in South Africa, they would be unable to get citizenship where they live and instead would have to look toward their ethnic homeland for citizenship before being expelled.South AfricaThe Natives (Urban Areas) Act of 1923 - Laid the foundations for residential segregation in urban areas. This led to all Black South Africans being required to carry a Pass or ID card at all times.IsraelThere is no segregation - residential or otherwise - in urban or other areas. Segregation based on religion or ethnicity is illegal. All Israelis, regardless of religion or ethnicity, are required to carry their National ID Card at all times.Israeli Laws with Superficial Similarities to Apartheid LawsSouth AfricaProhibition of Mixed Marriages Act, Act No 55 of 1949 - Prohibited marriages between white people and people of other races. Between 1946 and the enactment of this law, only 75 mixed marriages had been recorded, compared with some 28,000 white marriages.IsraelReligious Marriage and Recognition of All Foreign Marriages - In regards to marriage, Israel maintains the law established by the Ottomans and continued by the British Mandate in which all marriages are conducted by separate religious establishments. All people are free to change their religious status for marriage or personal choice. All foreign civil marriages are recognized by the state without regard to religion, race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.Palestinian AuthorityThe PA also has no Civil Marriage and all marriages are carried out through separate religious establishments. There is no recognition or protection for same-sex couples.South AfricaPopulation Registration Act, Act No 30 of 1950 - Led to the creation of a national register in which every person’s race was recorded. A Race Classification Board took the final decision on what a person’s race was in disputed cases.IsraelRegistration of Inhabitants Ordinance No. 50 OF 5709-1949 and Population Registry Law, 5725-1965 - The State of Israel’s registration authority does collect data on citizen’s religion and ethnicity under the these laws, but this is merely for statistical purposes, as stated in Section 3 of the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2004. Many if not most countries around the world do the same. The laws list “religion” and “ethnicity” but makes no distinction between them and does not call for members of a certain group to be treated differently. Israeli ID cards have not shown the barer’s religion/ethnicity/nationality since 2005.Palestinian AuthorityAll Palestinians have their religious affiliation included on their identification papersas well.An example of an Israeli ID card (note the ******** under the nationality section so the barer’s ethnicity/nationality is not shown.)South AfricaBantu Education Act, Act No 47 of 1953* - Established a Black Education Department in the Department of Native Affairs which would compile a curriculum that suited the “nature and requirements of the black people”. The author of the legislation, Dr Hendrik Verwoerd (then Minister of Native Affairs, later Prime Minister), stated that its aim was to prevent Africans receiving an education that would lead them to aspire to positions they wouldn’t be allowed to hold in society. Instead Africans were to receive an education designed to provide them with skills to serve their own people in the homelands or to work in labouring jobs under whites.|asdfasdfasd|IsraelSignatory to Convention against Discrimination in Education and Numerous Israeli Universal Education Laws - The Ministry of Education runs an Arab education system for the Arab minority in Israel that makes special recognition of Arab heritage and culture. This includes instruction in Arabic and lessons in Arab history and literature. There are also many joint Jewish-Arab schools throughout the country.In order to address gaps between the level and quality of education between Jewish and Arab students, the Israeli government has initiated numerous affirmative action campaigns and increased budgets for the Arab community. This has had mixed results. Despite the problems Israel faces with ensuring students in minority and poor student get a proper education (something every country has difficulty with) Christian Arabs have flourished in Israel in terms of education. Far from intending to prevent Arabs “from receiving an education that would lead them to aspire to positions they wouldn’t be allowed to hold in society” (none such positions exist in Israel), the Arab Education system of the Ministry of Education is designed to incread the educational standards in Arab schools while celebrating and teaching Arab culture and history.Arab students in IsraelSouth AfricaNatives Resettlement Act, Act No 19 of 1954 - Permitted the removal of blacks from any area within and next to the magisterial district of Johannesburg by the South African government. This act was designed to remove of blacks from Sophiatown to Soweto.IsraelIt is illegal to remove anyone, regardless of religious or ethnic background, from their legally owned homes. - If a citizen does not own their home or property or built their home without a legal permit, only then can they be evicted, but these evictions can be fought in court. The most common occurrences deal with Bedouin squatting on State Land and Jews who establish outposts in Judea and Samaria on property they have not legally acquired. In both cases, the residents may appeal their evictions to the Supreme Court. The only example of Israeli citizens being forced from their legally owned homes is of Jews who were forcibly removed from Sinai, Gaza and Samaria as part of the peace treaty with Egypt and the 2005 Disengagement Plan.Palestinian AuthorityMahmoud Abbas has made it clear that under any final peace deal, he would not allow a single Jew to remain in the Palestinian State. This means that any Jews living in the area designated for a Palestinian State would be expelled in the same way Jews were previously expelled from Sinai, Gaza and Northern Samaria.South Africa:Terrorism Act of 1967 - Allowed for indefinite detention without trial and established BOSS, the Bureau of State Security, which was responsible for the internal security of South Africa.Israel:British Mandate 1945 Law on Authority in States of Emergency as amended in 1979, or Administrative Detention - (From Wikipedia)Within Israel, the Defense Minister has the authority to issue Administrative Detention orders for up to 6 months in cases where there is a reasonable chance that the person harms the security of the state. The same Minister has the authority to renew such orders. Likewise, the Chief of the General Staff can issue such orders, but valid for only 48 hours. Law enforcement authorities have to show cause within 48 hours (in a hearing behind closed doors). Administrative Detention orders can be appealed to the District Court and, if denied there, to the Supreme Court of Israel. The District Court can annul such orders if it finds the administrative detention occurred for reasons other than security (e.g., common crimes, or the exercise of freedom of expression). Overall supervisory authority on the application of the relevant law rests with the Minister of Justice.More importantly, this law applies to all terrorism suspects. Suspected Jewish terrorists are subjected to the strictures of the law exactly as are Arab terrorists. It just happens that there are fewer Jewish terrorists (Thank God!) and therefore fewer Jews placed in administrative detention. Importantly, it is only very rarely used against Israeli citizens, Arab or Jew.This law is not perfect and, like any law, can be abused. However, the number of prisoners held in such an arrangement has a direct correlation with the terror level. In June 2012, there were 285 Palestinians in detention but by December 2013, this number was cut by more than half to 140. To put this in perspective, as of 2011, Jordan had 11,345 prisoners in Administrative Detention 81 times the number in Israel, with a significant proportion of those detained being Palestinian.South AfricaThe Natives Land Act, No 27 of 1913 - Made it illegal for blacks to purchase or lease land from whites except in reserves; this restricted black occupancy to less than eight per cent of South Africa's land.IsraelArabs can and do purchase and lease land from Jews and there are no restrictions on them doing so. It is illegal to discriminate between buyers based on religion or race.When confronted with this fact, many people then point to the Jewish National Fund, which only allows Jews to buy, mortgage or lease its land. There are two important things to take into consideration in regards to the JNF:In 2005, Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz ruled that the Israel Lands Administration could not comply with the JNF's Jews-only policy as it directly contravened Israel's anti-discrimination laws. Therefore, the JNF would be required to sell, lease or rent land to anyone regardless of religion or ethnicity.The Jewish National Fund was founded in 1901 in order to help Jews settle in the land of Israel at a time of growing global anti-Semitism. It was an NGO dedicated to aiding Jews regain territory in their ancestral homeland. This was akin to establishing Indian Reservations in the US or Aboriginal land rights in Australia however it was established and funded by the Jews themselves rather than the ruling government. It is understandable that such areas are run by and in many cases, restricted to, members of the native tribes who were kicked off their land so many years ago and that need these areas to maintain their cultural traditions. There are many laws in the United States, like the Dawes Act and the Indian Reorganization Act that deal specifically with setting aside land only for members of the tribes while Australia has the Indigenous Land Corporation whose sole purpose is to aid Aboriginal Australians gain and manage their land. If Australia were to elect an Aborigines Prime Minister, it would still be necessary and just to have land set aside specifically for Aboriginal use and settlement. The same is true for Israel and the Jewish National Fund.Palestinian AuthorityIt is illegal to sell land to Jews - Any Palestinians who sells land to Jews is not only subject to intense social pressure leading to most claiming they were misled as to the real buyers, but the PLO’s Revolutionary Penal Code (1979) applies the death penalty to anyone “transferring positions to the enemy.” While this was strictly enforced in the 1990s, Abbas has not authorized executions for land sales since 2004. Instead, Palestinians convicted of selling land to Jews are now sentenced to hard labor for life.Technically these laws refer either to "enemy states" or "Israelis," however in practice, this is only ever applied to land deals with Jews. There has never been a case where Palestinians were prosecuted for selling land to Israeli Arabs, despite the fact that many buy homes in the PA. Additionally, since all Jews were ethnically cleansed from Judea and Samaria by Jordan and Gaza by Egypt in 1948, there are no Jewish citizens of the Palestinian Authority (other than token citizenship for famous Israeli "peaceniks" like Daniel Barenboim who don't actually live there) who could buy land or property without being members of an "enemy state." The effect is that it is illegal to sell or rent land to Jews in the Palestinian Authority.(Apartheid Law vs. Israeli Law)Above: South African racial discrimination signBelow: Israeli busAbove: South AfricaBelow: IsraelAbove: South AfricaBelow: IsraelAbove: South AfricaBelow: IsraelAbove: South African racial segregation signBelow: Israeli townPrime Minister Netanyahu shaking hands with Ayman Oudeh, Head of the Joint Arab List, in the KnessetA strike by Israeli workers (if you can tell which are Arabs and which are Jews, be sure to let me know as I certainly cannot tell the difference).An Arab student at Ben Gurion University of the NegevArab workers in IsraelArab voting in an Israeli electionOn Jerusalem's light RailOn Israel Train

Islam does not hold Triple Talaq as LawfulThere is a common misconception that a man can say Talaq, Talaq, Talaq to his wife in a row and it will lead to Talaq. This is totally an unIslamic practice.While marriage is the rule of life, and divorce only an exception, the latter must also be accepted as a reality. Indeed there already exist commandments to deal, accordingly, with such cases in both divine and human laws.The only true, authentic representation of divine law now exists in the form of the Qur’an, it having been preserved in its entirety by God and free, therefore, from all human interpolations. In the Qur’an, and in the Hadith, there are various commandments regarding divorce, the main point being that divorce should be sought only under unavoidable circumstances. The Prophet spoke of it as being the most hateful of all the lawful things in the eyes of God, and said that when it does take place, it should be done in an atmosphere of good will. In no way should one harbor ill will against the other. Abu Dawud, Sunan, Kitab at-Talaq, 2/255Just think of couples wasting away the whole of their lives in mental torment only because the conditions of separation and its consequences are hard to meet. It is as unnatural as anything can be.Islam is a natural religion. Such a situation has not developed in Muslim communities because Islamic law on marriage and divorce provides for all, or almost all, eventualities. For example, when a woman wishes to divorce her husband, she has to put her case before a religious scholar, or a body of religious scholars. They then give consideration to her circumstances in the light of the Qur’an and the Hadith, and, if they find that there are reasonable grounds for separation, they decide in her favor. The reason that the woman must have scholars to act on her behalf is that women are more emotional than men-as has been proved by scientific research-and it is to prevent hasty and ill-considered divorces taking place that she is thus advised. If we seldom hear of Muslim women committing suicide, or being murdered by their in-laws, it is because they have the alternative - separation.Separation, of course, is strongly advised against in the case of minor provocations. Are we not commanded by God to be tolerant and forgiving? It is meant only as a last resort, when it has become truly unavoidable.Islamic law is thus fair to both husband and wife, unlike occidental law, which places an undue burden on the man, while Hindu society forces the woman into familial rejection, destitution and social ostracism.Divorce in IslamNature demands that men and women lead their lives together. The ideal way of leading such a life is, according to the shari‘ah, within the bonds of marriage. In Islam, marriage is both a civil contract entered into by mutual consent of the bride and groom, and a highly sacred bond to which great religious and social importance is attached.However, in the knowledge that an excess of legal constraints can lead to rebellion, such injunctions have been kept to a realistic minimum and have been formulated to be consistent with normal human capabilities. Moreover, their enforcement is less relied upon than the religious conditioning of the individual to ensure the maintenance of high ethical standards and appropriate conduct in marital affairs and family life.The state of marriage not only lays the foundations for family life, but also provides a training ground for individuals to make a positive adjustment to society. When a man and woman prove to be a good husband and a good wife, they will certainly prove to be good citizens in the broad spectrum of their social group. This has been aptly expressed in a Hadith: “The best of you is one who is best for his family.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab an-Nikah, 1/636The family being the preliminary unit for the training of human beings, its disintegration has an injurious effect on the society to which those human beings must individually make a positive contribution, if collectively they are to form a good and just nation. If the family no longer exists, it is the whole of humanity, which suffers.Once a man and a woman are tied together in the bonds of matrimony, they are expected to do their utmost, till the day they die to honor and uphold what the Qur’an calls their firm contract, or pledge. (Qur’an, 4:21) To this end, the full thrust of the Shariah is leveled at preventing the occurrence of divorce; the laws it lays down in this regard exist primarily, therefore, as checks, not incentives.Islam regards marriage as an extremely desirable institution, hence its conception of marriage as the rule of life, and divorce only as an exception to that rule. According to a Hadith, the Prophet Muhammad said, “Marriage is one of my Sunnah (way). One who does not follow it does not belong to me.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab an-Nikah.When a man and a woman live together as husband and wife, it is but natural that they should have their differences, it being a biological and psychological fact that each man and each woman born into this world are by their very nature quite different from each other. That is why the sole method of having unity in this world is to live unitedly in spite of differences. This can be achieved only through patience and tolerance; virtues advocated by the Prophet not only in a general sense, but, more importantly, in the particular context of married life. Without these qualities, there can be no stability in the bond of marriage. According to Abu Hurayrah, the Prophet said, “No believing man should bear any grudge against a believing woman. If one of her ways is not to his liking, there must be many things about her that would please him. “Muslim, Sahih, Kitab ar-Rada’, 2/1091It is an accepted fact that everyone has his strengths and his weaknesses, his plus points and his minus points. This is equally true of husbands and wives. In the marital situation, the best policy is for each partner to concentrate on the plus points of the other, while ignoring the minus points. If a husband and wife can see the value of this maxim and consciously adopt it as the main guiding principle in their lives, they will have a far better chance of their marriage remaining stable.However, it sometimes happens, with or without reason, that unpleasantness crops up, and goes on increasing between husband and wife, with no apparent indication of their being able to smooth things out by themselves. Their thinking about each other in a way that is conditioned by their maladjustment prevents them from arriving at a just settlement of their differences, based on facts rather than on opinions. In such a case, the best strategy according to the Qur’an is to introduce a third party who will act as an arbiter. Not having any previous association with the matters under dispute, he will remain dispassionate and will be able to arrive at an objective decision acceptable to both parties.For any arbiter to be successful, however, the husband and wife must also adopt the correct attitude. Here is an incident from the period of the four pious Caliphs, which will illustrate this point.When ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib reigned as fourth Caliph, a married couple complaining of marital discord came to him to request a settlement. In the light of the above-mentioned Qur’anic guidance ‘Ali ordered that a board of arbiters, one from the husband’s family and one from the wife’s family, be set up, which should make proper enquiries into the circumstances and then give its verdict. This verdict was to be accepted without argument by both sides.As recorded in the book, Jami’ al-Bayan, by at-Tabari, the woman said that she gave her consent, on the book of God, whether the verdict was for or against her. But the man protested that he would not accept the verdict if it was for separation. ‘Ali said, “What you say is improper. By God, you cannot move from here until you have shown your willingness to accept the verdict of the arbiters in the same spirit as the woman has shown.”This makes it clear that a true believer should wholeheartedly accept the arbiters and their verdict in accordance with the Qur’anic injunctions. Once their verdict is given, there should be no further dispute.Two Ways of DivorcingHowever, it has to be conceded that life does not always function smoothly, like a machine. Despite all safeguards, it sometimes does happen that a couple reaches a stage of such desperation that they become intent on separation. Here the Shariah gives them guidance in that it prescribes a specific method for separation. The Qur’an expresses it thus: “Divorce may be pronounced twice, then a woman must be retained in honor or allowed to go with kindness.” Qur’an, 2:229This verse has been interpreted to mean that a man who has twice given notice of divorce over a period of two months should remember God before giving notice a third time. Then he should either keep his spouse with him in a spirit of goodwill, or he should release her without doing her any injustice.This method of divorce prescribed by the Qur’an, i.e. taking three months to finalize it, makes it impossible for a man seeking divorce suddenly to cast his wife aside. Once he has said to his wife (who should not at this time be menstruating), “I divorce you,” both are expected to think the situation over for a whole month. If the man has a change of opinion during this period, he can withdraw his words. If not, he will again say, “I divorce you,” (again his wife should be in a state of “purity”) and they must again review the situation for a further month. Even at this stage, the husband has the right to revoke the proceedings if he has had a change of heart. If, however, in the third month, he says,“I divorce you,” the divorce becomes final and the man ceases to have any right to revoke it. Now he is obliged to part with his wife in a spirit of good will, and give her full rights.This prescribed method of divorce has ensured that it is a well-considered, planned arrangement and not just a rash step taken in a fit of emotion. When we remember that in most cases, divorce is the result of a fit of anger, we realize that the prescribed method places a tremendous curb on divorce. It takes into account the fact that anger never lasts -- tempers necessarily cool down after some time-¬and that those who feel like divorcing their wives in a fit of anger will certainly repent their emotional outburst and will wish to withdraw from the position it has put them in. It also takes into account the fact that divorce is a not a simple matter: it amounts to the breaking up of the home and destroying the children’s future. It is only when tempers have cooled down that the dire consequences of divorce are realized, and the necessity to revoke the decision becomes clear.When a man marries a woman, he has to say only once that he accepts her as his spouse. But for divorce, the Qur’an enjoins a three-month period for it to be formalized. That is, for marriage, one utterance is enough, but for a divorce to be finalized, three utterances are required, between which a long gap has been prescribed by the shari‘ah. The purpose of this gap is to give the husband sufficient time to revise his decision, and to consult the well-wishers around him. It also allows time for relatives to intervene in the hopes of persuading both husband and wife to avoid a divorce. Without this gap, none of these things could be achieved. That is why divorce proceedings have to be spread out over a long period of time.All these preventive measures clearly allow frayed tempers to cool, so that the divorce proceedings need not reach a stage that is irreversible. Divorce, after all, has no saving graces, particularly in respect of its consequences. It simply amounts to ridding oneself of one set of problems only to become embroiled in another set of problems.Despite all such preventive measures, it does sometimes happen that a man acts in ignorance, or is rendered incapable of thinking coolly by a fit of anger. Then on a single occasion, in a burst of temper, he utters the word “divorce” three times in a row, “talaq, talaq, talaq!” Such incidents, which took place in the Prophet’s lifetime, still take place even today. Now the question arises as to how the would-be divorcer should be treated. Should his three utterances of talaq be treated as only one, and should he then be asked to extend his decision over a three-month period? Or should his three utterances of talaq on a single occasion be equated with the three utterances of talaq made separately over a three-month period? There is a Hadith recorded by Imam Abu Dawud and several other traditionists which can give us guidance in this matter: Rukana ibn Abu Yazid said “talaq” to his wife three times on a single occasion. Then he was extremely sad at the step he had taken. The Prophet asked him exactly how he had divorced her. He replied that he had said “talaq” to her three times in a row. The Prophet then observed, “All three count as only one. If you want, you may revoke it.” Fath al-Bari, 9/275A man may say “talaq” to his wife three times in a row, in contravention of the shari‘ah’s prescribed method, thereby committing a sin, but if he was known to be in an emotionally overwrought state at the time his act may be considered a mere absurdity arising from human weakness. His three utterances of the word talaq may be taken as an expression of the intensity of his emotions and thus the equivalent of only one such utterance. He is likely to be told that, having transgressed a shari‘ah law, he must seek God’s forgiveness, must regard his three utterances as only one, and must take a full three months to arrive at his final decision.In the first phase of Islam, however, a different view of divorce was taken by the second Caliph, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab. An incident that illustrates his viewpoint was thus described by Imam Muslim.In the Prophet’s lifetime, then under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and also during the early period of the Caliphate of ‘Umar, three utterances of talaq on one occasion used to be taken together as only one utterance. Then it occurred to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab that in spite of the fact that a system had been laid down which permitted the husband to withdraw his first, or even second talaq, men still wanted to rush into divorce. He felt that if they were bent on being hasty, why should not a rule be imposed on them binding them to a final divorce on the utterance of talaq three times in a row. And he proceeded to impose such a rule.This act on the part of the second Caliph, apparently against the principles of the Qur’an and Sunnah, did not in any way change the law of the shari‘ah. To think that this led to any revision of Islamic law would be to misunderstand the situation: the Caliph’s order merely constituted an exception to the rule, and was, moreover, of a temporary nature. This aptly demonstrates how the Islamic shari‘ah may make concessions in accordance with circumstances.Each law of the shari‘ah may be eternal, but a Muslim ruler has the power to make exceptions in the case of certain individuals in special sets of circumstances. However, such a ruling will not take on the aspect of an eternal law. It will be purely temporary in nature and duration.It is a matter of Islamic historical record that when any such person was brought before ‘Umar for having uttered the word talaq three times on one occasion, he held this to be rebellious conduct and would order him to be flogged on the back. Fath al-Bari, 9/275Perhaps the most important aspect of this matter is that when ‘Umar gave his exceptional verdict on divorce being final after the third utterance on a single occasion of the word talaq, his position was not that of a powerless ‘alim (scholar) but of a ruler invested with the full power to punish-as a preventive measure-anyone who went against Qur’anic injunctions. This was to discourage haste in divorce. By accepting a man’s three talaqs on the one occasion as final and irrevocable, he caused him to forfeit his right to revoke his initial decision, thus leaving him with no option but to proceed with the divorce.On the other hand, the Caliph had it in his power to fully compensate any woman affected by this ruling. For instance, he was in a position to guarantee her an honorable life in society and if, due to being divorced, she was in need of financial assistance, he could provide her with continuing maintenance from the government exchequer, baitul mal, etc.Today, anyone who cites ‘Umar’s ruling as a precedent in order to justify the finality of a divorce based on three utterances of the word talaq on a single occasion should remember that his verdict will remain. Unenforceable for the simple reason that he does not have the powers that ‘Umar, as Caliph, possessed. ‘Umar’s verdict was that of a powerful ruler of the time and not just that of a common man. It is necessary at this point to clear certain misunderstandings which have arisen about the extent of agreement which existed on ‘Umar’s ruling. Of all the Prophet’s Companions who were present at Medina at that time, perhaps the only one to disagree was ‘Ali. As a result of this, certain ‘ulama have come to the conclusion that the Prophet’s followers (Sahabah) had reached a consensus (‘ijma) on this matter. Rawai’ ai-Boyan, 1/334But the consensus reached was not on the general issue of divorce, but on the right of Muslim rulers to make temporary and exceptional rulings, as had been done by ‘Umar. It is obvious that the Companions of the Prophet could never have agreed to annul a Qur’anic injunction or to modify for all time to come a prescribed system of divorce. All that was agreed upon was that exceptional circumstances warranted exceptional rulings on the part of the Caliph. He was entitled to punish in any manner he thought fitting, anyone who digressed from the shari‘ah. This right possessed by the ruler of the time is clearly established in the shari‘ah. Many other instances, not necessarily relating to personal disputes, can be cited of his exercise of this right.The Meaning of ProvisionIn Islamic jurisprudence, the material arrangements that a man makes for his divorced spouse are termed “divorce provision.” There is a consensus among Muslim scholars that this provision in no way means life-long maintenance, there being absolutely no basis for this in the divine scriptures. The concept of maintenance for life is, in fact, a product of modem civilization. It was never at any time enshrined in divine laws, either in Islam, Judaism or Christianity. In material terms ‘provision’ simply takes the form of a gift handed over by the man on parting, so that the woman’s immediate needs may be catered for, and in all cases, this is quite commensurate with his means.But the Qur’an makes it explicit that the parting must above all be humane and that justice must be done: “Provide for them with fairness; the rich man according to his means, and the poor according to his. This is binding on righteous men. Do not forget to show kindness to each other... reasonable provision should also be made for divorced women. That is incumbent on righteous men.” Qur’an, 2:236.When divorce takes place before the settling of the dowry and the consummation of the marriage, even then the man must give the woman money or goods as a gesture of goodwill. In this instance the question of his repaying dowry money does not arise. The Qur’an is also quite explicit on this,“Believers, if you marry believing women and divorce them before the marriage is consummated, you have no right to require them to observe a waiting period. Provide well for them and release them honorably.” - Qur’an, 33:49.This “waiting period” (iddah) actually applies to a woman who has been married for some time and who may, subsequent to the divorce, discover that she is pregnant. This statutory waiting period of three months makes her position clear and then the man is required to pay her additional compensation if she is expecting his child. But again there is no question of maintenance for life, for the Qur’an seeks a natural solution to all human problems. It would, therefore, be wholly against the spirit of the Qur’an for a woman to be entitled to life maintenance from the very man with whom she could not co¬exist. Such a ruling would surely have created a negative mentality in society. The Qur’an again has the answer: “If they separate, God will compensate each of them out of His own abundance: He is Munificent, Wise.’’ - Qur’an, 4:130The munificence of God refers to the vast provision that God has made for his servants in this world.In various ways God helps such distressed people. For example, when a woman is divorced, it is but natural that the sympathy of all her blood relations should be aroused. And, as a result, without any pressure being put on them, they are willing to help and look after her. Besides, a new will power is awakened in such a woman and she sets about exploiting her hidden potentialities, thus solving her problems independently. Furthermore, previous experiences having left her wiser and more careful, she feels better equipped to enter into another marital relationship with more success.After DivorceThe question that arises immediately after divorce is of ways and means to meet one’s necessary expenses. . One’s answer is to resort to the Islamic law of inheritance. If women were to be given their due share according to Islamic law, there would be no question of a woman becoming destitute. But, sad to say, the majority of Muslim women fail to get their due share of inheritance from their deceased fathers and husbands as stipulated by Islamic law. If they could do so, this would be more than enough to meet such emergencies.However, Islam has not just left women’s financial problems to the vagaries of inheritance, because parents are not invariably in possession of property that can be divided among their children. Further arrangements have been made under the maintenance law, but this has no connection with the law of divorce. The answer to this question must be sought therefore in the Islamic law of maintenance. Here we shall briefly describe some of its aspects:1. In case the divorced woman is childless or the children are not earning, according to Islamic law, the responsibility for her maintenance falls on her father. That is, her situation will be the same as it was before marriage.To quote from Path al-Qadir (A standard book on Islamic Law):The Father is responsible for bearing the expenses of his daughter till her marriage, in the event of her having no money. The father has no right to force her to earn, even if she is able to. When the girl is divorced and the period of confinement is over, her father shall again have to bear her expenses.2. If the divorced woman has a son who is an earning member of the family, the responsibility for her maintenance falls entirely upon him.All that rightfully belongs to a wife will be the duty of the son to provide, that is, food, drink, clothes, house and even servants, if possible. Ibn ‘Abidin, Ramal-Mukhtar ‘ala ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, 2/7333. In the case of the father being deceased, and where even her children are unable to earn, her nearest relatives such as brothers or uncles are responsible for her upkeep. In the absence of even this third form, the Islamic shari‘ah holds the State Treasury (baitul mal) responsible for bearing her expenses. She will be entitled to receive the money for her necessities.Because of the number of provisions made under Islamic law for women it has never been the case in Islamic history that Muslim divorced women have been cast adrift, helpless, with no one to look after them.Indian columnist, Khushwant Singh has remarked that we do not hear of Muslim women committing suicide or being tortured like Hindu women, which is a proof that Islam has already given them adequate liberty and has- made enough provision for them to be supported in times of emergencies.A new dimension has been added to the issue since the women of this day and age can leave their homes to work, and are therefore not as entirely dependent on men as they used to be in the past: there is no need then to make laws which provide for them at the expense of their men folk. When they are earning like men, what is the point in making such a law? Only in exceptional cases, surely, do they need to be looked after, and ways and means of doing so can generally be worked out quite satisfactorily on a personal level.Notes1. Encyclopaedia Britannica (1984), vol. 7, pp. 163Q64.2. Ibid.3. Ibid.4. Bertrand Russell, Autobiography, (London, 1978), pp. 563-564.5. The Hindustan Times, (New Delhi), October 12, 1985.6. Abu Dawud, Sunan, Kitab at-Talaq, 2/255.7. Qur’an, 2:236.8. Qur’an, 33:49.9. Qur’an, 4:130.10. Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab an-Nikah, 1/636.11. Qur’an, 4:21.12. Ibn Majah, Sunan, Kitab an-Nikah.13. Abu Dawud, Sunan, Kitab at-Talaq, 2/255.14. Muslim, Sahih, Kitab ar-Rada’, 2/1091.15. Qur’an, 2:229.16. Fath al-Bari, 9/275.17. Fath al-Bari, 9/275.18. Rawai’ ai-Boyan, 1/334.19. A standard book on Islamic Law.20. AI-Shaokani, Fath al Qadir, 3/344.21. Ibn ‘Abidin, Ram al-Mukhtar ‘ala ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, 2/733.