Talk:Iddah

Assalamulikum My question is when wife taking khula.and husband giving to his wife mehr.as a gift.then also wife how many month she has sit iddat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:3A80:6C0:6688:E487:48EF:2B48:84F4 (talk) 12:56, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Clean up

This article requires major clean up and more referencing. I have no clue what the author did here. I'll try to improve it as much as I can, until then, I'm posting a "clean up" image. Taus33 15:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Does the term apply to both the period for divorced women and for widows ? - if so the intro needs altering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beardo (talk • contribs) 18:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Term does apply to both death and divorce. I changed the intro and added a citation, but article still needs considerable cleanup. VirJenia (talk) 00:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

No reference for the following comment "With the advent of genetic testing to establish paternity, this tradition is expected to be revised in due course, once Islamic scholars are able to review and amend it.

Husbands should make a will in favor of their wives for the provision of one year’s residence and maintenance, unless the wives themselves leave the house or take any other similar step."

Ie. The reference goes to Qur'anic verse and notthe opinion of the scholars. No reputable scholars to my knowledge are going in the direction of DNA testing versus the Qur'anic words.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Iddah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070403024603/http://www.renaissance.com.pk/Marislaw2y4.html to http://www.renaissance.com.pk/Marislaw2y4.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:01, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Child marriage

It's possible that the content Smatrah wants to remove is somewhat undue. I noticed that the child related points were bold, which I've corrected. Encyclopedia Britannica's entry on Iddah does not mention it (but it says that it's both for widows and divorced, a point Smatrah appears to have contested before). We also have articles about the topic like Child marriage#Islam. A possibility is also to keep some of the child-related material only that is considered in due weight. Input welcome, —PaleoNeonate – 12:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

References

I think giving three commentaries on a single verse and not giving even a single commentary of other verses shows that article have undue weight. The letters which were written in bold I myself removed first. I think giving one commentary of every related verse will make article better. Or if it is not so then verses are already clear no need of commentary. Pepperbeast is contesting so I expect him to reply here. Smatrah (talk) 13:50, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with some reduction or summarising. I just have a problem with wholesale deletion. PepperBeast (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Will it be fine if someone writes the 3 complete commentaries of the verse and also complete commentaries of other verses relating to iddah?

Smatrah (talk) 04:43, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

I don't see how that's necessary. PepperBeast (talk) 05:26, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes that’s the point it is not necessary to give 3 commentaries of any verse. So as per your view I’ll remove them. Smatrah (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

• Update: none of this material is extant since the only related paragraph was sourced to IslamQA, considered unreliable. Other sources would have to be used if restoring this. Related: Special:Diff/939418564, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 283 § IslamQA. —PaleoNeonate – 16:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Academic view in relation to patriarchy

The article discusses various Muslim scholarly views but currently has no information on third party analysis of the practice and context (i.e. including about why and how easy it is for women to fall into disrepute in the culture, etc). —PaleoNeonate – 12:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Why is there a section on children?

So I know that the person who decided to put that section in said to "watch it as it's a controversial topic", but having said section is an issue entirely because there is controversy on if said verse actually involves children or doesn't. Not to mention, it doesn't even say child in the original context, it solely says women (and child is used specifically in context during many verses). It seems as if certain tafsirs seem to delegate it to "young ones who have not menustrated", and if this is true then It would be necessary to put that in the article as it's a major distinction. However, in all instances it's not explicitly mentioning children in the original text.

Another case you have which contradicts this section is this verse:

O you who believe, when you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have marital relations, then you have no ‘iddah upon them… (Qur’an 33:49)

This verse implies that iddah is only applicable to women who are actually capable of having sexual relations (Which in classical jurisprudence is when they reach maturity), meaning that the verse can't apply to children.

https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askimam/5667 This explains what I mean in more detail.

My final point is, there are multiple different viewpoints on what people think of this ayah, and it is best if someone includes those viewpoints.

Sincerely, TuaamWiki (talk) 07:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)