His statement, “or anger”: that is, a state of anger even without a dispute. For instance, he tells her to do something and she does not do it, so he becomes angry and says, “Go to your family”; divorce takes effect even if he did not intend it.

His statement, “or in answer to her request”: that is, she says, “Divorce me,” and he replies, “Go to your family”; divorce takes effect.

Divorce takes effect in these three situations because they are contextual indications that he intended divorce. Hence he says:

“If, in these situations, he did not intend it, or intended something else, his claim is not accepted judicially. Through an evident allusive expression, three divorces take effect when accompanied by an intention, even if he intended only one; while through a subtle allusive expression, whatever number he intended takes effect.”

His statement, “If he did not intend it”: that is, divorce in this situation, such that he says, “I did not intend divorce.”

His statement, “or intended something else in these situations”: for example, he says, “By my words, ‘Go to your family,’ I meant that my anger should subside and that her anger should subside; I did not intend divorce.”

His statement, “his claim is not accepted judicially”: if she brings the matter before a judge, the judge will rule that he has divorced her. As between him and Allah, however, no divorce takes effect.

But the sound view is that divorce does not take effect through an allusive expression except with intention, even in these situations. A person may say, “Get out,” or something similar in anger, while having no intention whatsoever of divorce; rather, he only wants her to leave his sight so that both of their anger may subside. She may also persistently say to him, “Divorce me, divorce me,” and he replies, “You are divorced,” without intending divorce; rather, he means, “freed from a bond,” or, “You are divorced if I divorce you,” thus qualifying it with a condition. In any case, the sound view is that it takes effect only with intention.