1. Is it true that a woman's claim of divorce without evidence is not considered a divorce, and that evidence consists of two witnesses? What is the ruling if the woman is truthful in her claim despite the lack of evidence? 2. Is it not supposed to be that the husband is believed if he claims divorce, and why are witnesses required from him and the marriage considered still valid in this case? 3. Is the statement quoted by the questioner from the book "Ash-Sharh Al-Mumti'" by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen regarding divorce correct and approved by the people of knowledge?

In summary, the Sheikh's words pertain to claims and oaths. If a woman claims her husband divorced her, and he denies it, then his word is taken due to the absence of evidence. For testimony regarding divorce, two just male witnesses are required; the testimony of one man and two women is not accepted. Similarly, if a man claims he divorced his wife a long time ago to avoid paying alimony, his claim is not accepted without evidence. This is the intended meaning, not whether a divorce has occurred or not, or what a woman should do if she is certain of her divorce.