The limited knowledge that I may have suggests, tawfid al talak is perfectly acceptable in Islam, which clearly states the husband can delegate the sole right of one talak to the wife. Now keeping in mind the emotional driving force most speak of, the husband is equally free to delegate the right of talak with fair conditions applied for it to be considered valid as well. For example, a certain number of people assigned and with mutual consent of the husband and the wife to go through with the reasons for which the wife called it quits.
Thoughts?
Now, I’m really not doubting anyones knowledge regarding the aforementioned issue in hand, rather just a slave of seeking knowledge/understanding of things we all may have to deal with at some point of our lives.
Indeed your knowledge MashaAllah in this matter is far better than mine to have stated such things above … I have however a few points to make …
a) The husband delegates
b) One talak delegated
c) Group consent
If I had any thoughts on this matter then it appears from a) the choice or option is not a normal condition but a concession. Secondly the woman has the right to separate but not the right to divorce according to b) and even then it is by group agreement …
If this is the case then it is even less than what I have been entertaining … either way my point stems from the basis of what is “preferable and normal” not what is “acceptable within the limits”.
I have not been saying that it is not allowed … I have been saying that it is generally not wise to allow it … with such tight regulation on “tafwid al talaq” it confirms my point.
The condition that was provided was just a mere example of the endless others (whatever the husband/wife deem right and on a mutual consent’ial basis) that can be utilized at the time of signing the contract. It may look tough/complicated to some but it may just come as a pleasant and worthwhile experience to the one eventually benefiting from it.
So according to what I understand, providing/delegating the right of talak to the wife is completely acceptable and hence if a wife asks for it. She’s free to have it. Regardless of all the complications involved.
My question to you was simply in response to the endless disagreements/confusions that somehow were misguiding a few (including me) to believe that the right to delegate the right of talak to a wife was somehow a religiously non preferable act.
I do not believe I ever suggested/proposed the template of the nikkah nama was deceiving women from any angle. What I was merely speaking about was the clause predefined within the nikkah nama, which according to you/my sister/myself and the general consensus found suggests that delegating the RIGHT of talak to a wife is completely permissible, acceptable and rightful. Regardless if the clause/provision is defined within the template of the contract/nikkah nama found in Pakistan or not.
So I was suggesting that there is a preferable format … that of the talak to be with the man and not with the woman, deviation to which is considered acceptable concession. I was not saying that it is not preferable, but that it is not the preference.
Whereas … Are you saying that whether the talak right is given to the woman or not or for that matter with the man or not, it is only considered permissible if both parties agree and there is no such thing as a preferable or standard format where this option exists?
If the Wife asks, it is the husbands call if he wants to provide the wife with the right to divorce herself or not. With or without stipulating conditions. It may not be the preferable practice to us (men), but it sure is a right to the women who seek for it.
Agreed … there is no real difference in this than any other conditional nikkah … First of all I have now read up about Talaq Tafwid and it is something which is brought out of ijtehad and not from the Sunnah.
Furthermore I have learned that tafwid is only valid if the husband gives the right to the wife … otherwise it is not valid, she may seek it and it may get rejected. It is then her choice to proceed with the marriage or not … while in a marriage where she has not got this right written in to the contract then she does not have automatic right to it. My whole initial argument has been about automatic right that cannot be overturned …
Mahr must be given it cannot be overturned
A man always has automatic right to give talaq and cannot be revoked, but the woman to have that right must have it written on the nikkah contract after being given permission by the husband at the time of drawing the contract.
Also a woman may have other things written on the contract as a condition to the marriage … if the man does not uphold them then she can seek khula …
It is not about what is preferable to men … holding on to a sour relationship is as bad for a man as a woman … I am trying to gauge the divine guidance of nikkah … there are in my understanding two aspects:
a) The Divine Rules
b) The Mutual Agreement
The Divine Rules cannot be overturned in any marriage contract … however aspects of mutual agreement (of which tafwid is one) becomes binding … but it is possible that two people mutually agree on something which is harmful to them but it is still binding since there is a contract in place … The Divine Rules however will never be harmful … or rather never be the greater of two possible harms.
Furthermore the basic nikkah will still be valid if all divine rules are followed and no conditions attached.
First and foremost, worth appreciating/commendable is the fact that we’ve finally reached upon a mutual agreement of opinions/views. Comes as no less than a fresh/pleasant breath of air. However do forgive the Brother for any mistakes he may have managed to make along the way unintentionally.
The ultimate right indeed lies with the Husband principally and primarily, there was no denying (as obvious in my previous post) about it. However the wife as well has been left with a few credible options to choose from, which clearly would be to seek for the rights she’s been given.
According to the tafwid, the husband not only has the authority to hand over the right to delegate to the wife, he can also to a 3rd party and on mutual consent of the husband and the wife. Even though it ought to be the most least preferable right to be given to some of us, it is however something he could do if both choose to go ahead with it.
The divine rules you mentioned of are indeed unquestionable and harmless to mankind. Conversely however, there are no reasons for us not to take up or utilize the benefits of the “mutual agreements” you also mentioned. I just believe it leaves room for the women to feel less insecure and more powerful, maybe not entirely on an even scale but reasonable amounts is indeed harmless and rightfully for their own very sake.
Thought I’d share a few excerpts that may well have the potential to enlighten us all about the very subject being discussed.
The fact that they’re given this right says a lot in itself. As for why. The Quran states it’s because they’ve been made to ‘excel’ over women, apart from being their protectors and maintainers. “Sahih” Hadiths (unanimously accepted unless you’re a ‘progressive revisionist’) testify to women being emotional, irrational, and mentally deficient. That’s why 2 of us equal 1 man in legal testimony, why a nation led by a woman is cursed, why we comprise the bulk of Hell’s occupants.
All religions are patriarchal, it’s just a matter of degree. Islam is no exception.
SubhanAllah ya akh there is nothing to forgive if anything you have come to me as a guide and gave to me from your knowledge.
In the context of women being held in sour marriages then it is a gift to have it … But I fear those marriages that are likely to end up sour will not be the sorts where the husband gives that option anyway.
If the husband gives the option then it may be taken up by the wife. Initially it will give the woman a safety net for entering a marriage … And hence promote getting married … Conversely it will also be a means for exiting a marriage even when there has been poor to little attempt to reconcile them.
Also, by the Hadith that you mentioned, a layman like myself can’t put the same criteria … Imagine that … If you stay in marriage with me you will earn paradise, but if you wanna go free … I’ll send you away with handsome profit …
According to the Hadith the prophet (SAW) gave this right after he was in the marriage … He was not held on a condition of nikkah for it.
Yet by him (SAW) giving this option … The scales did tip in their favour … To choose to come out of marriage … However, those women also never the had the option to re-marry as they are the mother of believers.
Then the ills of modernity are also present amongst us today … I’m not sure how much experience you have in marriage … but my experience is that the word divorce is on the lips of people ready to be uttered.
For example, it is haram to draw up a contract that is based on rib’a even if both parties agree to it. Likewise, there are parts of nikkah which are not allowed to be drawn up … even with mutual consent.
Just cos a woman asks for right of divorce, does not mean she’s planning on using it.
After all a man has an unwritten right of divorce (unwritten in Nikahnama but it’s there isn’t it?)
If there was a clause in the written nikah nama
clause 18b = husband granted right to divorce ______________
and they say yes to it, does that mean the guy is looking to divorce? the nikahnama is very badly worded tbh, why bother putting clause 18 there and letting it be a cause of conflict?
”