Abstract
One of the dynamic aspects of Shia jurisprudence is its jurisprudential Principles such as the rule of "Negation of Distress and Constriction" which has a special application in the family; Among other things, in the light of this principle, the wife can request a divorce by proving the difficulty and embarrassment of living with her husband. The views of jurists, about the revocability or irrevocability of this divorce and the ambiguities surrounding the nature of the revoke, have forced the writer to re-read this issue. Proving the nature of revoke in such a divorce is the main goal of this article. The researcher's theory in this article is that the revoke is the wife's right and that it is unjustified to give this right to the husband. One of the findings of the work, which was carried out in a descriptive-analytical way, is that it is not possible for a man to return to the marriage contract with the existence of hardship and distress; Because the principle of "Negation of Distress and Constriction" which is the neutralizing ruling on the monopoly of divorce by the man, governs the right of the revoke. Because revoke is one of the functions of the principle of divorce; So it should not be in the hands of men. Because if the hardship is personal and the person wants to refer to a man, this is a kind of challenge.