Revisiting the Juridical Scope of the Third Solution of Verse on Wife's Disobedience (Nushuz) in Case of a Disobedient Woman

One of the issues regarding a husband's treatment of his wife during her disobedience is his authority to discipline her in order to assert his masculine authority. It is widely agreed upon that, according to the third solution of the verse on disobedience, the husband has the right to resort to physical discipline. However, the manner and quality of the physical discipline in the rulings of jurists are limited by conditions such as not causing severe harm, not shedding blood, not causing physical disfigurement, not corrupting the skin and flesh, not breaking bones, and avoiding excessive force. The present study seeks to examine the evidence from previous viewpoints and, by considering the social understanding of punishment, sit in judgment on its inhibitory and corrective aspects. The author believes that the conditions for restricting physical punishment in the verse are inconclusive and not proven, and the mentioned restrictions are not only inadequate but also lack credibility if they are based on the interpretations of "non-excessive" punishment in narrations. On the other hand, considering the rational approach to the philosophy of disciplinary and corrective discipline and its boundaries, as well as the exclusion of this verse within the confines of rational considerations, it suggests the permissibility of this punishment within those rational limits. Moreover, blood money (diyah) and guarantee (zaman) are not applicable in this context.