“turn them not out of their houses, nor shall they themselves leave, unless they commit a clear indecency” [al-Talaq 65:1]. Is citing this verse as evidence sound?

We say: It is not sound, because Allah, Exalted is He, forbade us to turn her out and forbade her to leave. It does not mean that she must observe mourning, refrain from perfume and adornment, and not make herself presentable for her husband.

Moreover, His saying, “Turn them not out of their houses, nor shall they themselves leave ...” does not mean that we confine her to the house, so that she may not go out even to visit her family. Rather, it means: do not evict them from their accommodation. As for her customary outings that she used to make before being divorced, they are permissible for her according to the preponderant view, although the school holds that she must remain in the house, just as a woman whose husband has died must remain there.

Note:

The author’s statement, “Nor is it obligatory for a revocably divorced woman,” does not mean that if her husband dies while she is in her waiting period, mourning is not obligatory for her. Rather, it means that if he divorces her revocably, mourning is not obligatory for her while he is alive. But if he dies while she is revocably divorced, then, as mentioned previously, her waiting period changes to that of a widow, and mourning becomes obligatory for her.

His statement, “and a woman with whom intercourse occurred under a mistaken assumption,” means that if a man has intercourse with a woman under a mistaken assumption, it has already been explained that she must observe a waiting period. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, holds that this is merely a period to establish that the womb is free of pregnancy. Such a woman is not required to observe mourning, even if we hold—as is the position of the school—that she must observe a waiting period like that of a divorced woman.