“If this bird is a dove, then Hind is divorced; and if it is a crow, then Daʿd is divorced,” but the bird flies away and we do not know what it was, then neither is divorced. This is because it is possible that it was neither a crow nor a dove; thus, we would be uncertain whether either of them had been divorced.

But if he says, “If this bird is a crow, then Hind is divorced; and if it is not a crow, then Daʿd is divorced,” then one of them must have been divorced, for the bird is either a crow or not a crow. How, then, do we identify her? We identify her by drawing lots.

If he says to his wife and to a woman who is not his wife, both of whom are named Hind, “One of you,” or, “Hind,” “is divorced,” then his wife is divorced. If he says, “I intended the woman who is not my wife,” his statement is not accepted judicially unless supported by an indication. If he says to someone whom he believes to be his wife, “You are divorced,” then the wife is divorced; and likewise the reverse applies.

His statement: “If he says to his wife and to a woman who is not his wife, both of whom are named Hind, ‘One of you,’ or, ‘Hind,’ ‘is divorced,’ then his wife is divorced.” This is like a man who finds his wife with another woman and says, “One of you is divorced.” His wife is thereby divorced, because it is known that a divorce cannot take effect upon a woman who is not his wife.

Thus, there are two women named Hind: his wife is named Hind, and the other woman is also named Hind. If he says, “Hind is divorced,” the divorce takes effect upon his wife, because he has no authority to divorce the Hind who is not his wife.

If he has been appointed as an agent to divorce a woman named Hind, while he himself has a wife named Hind, and he says, “Hind is divorced,” then one of them is divorced, as determined by drawing lots. In this case, however, it is more likely that he intended the woman whose divorce he was appointed to carry out, since there is no dispute between him and his own wife. Therefore, the statement is understood to refer to the woman whose divorce he was appointed to execute—unless he had a particular intention, in which case it is taken according to what he intended.

His statement: “If he says, ‘I intended the woman who is not my wife,’ his statement is not accepted judicially unless supported by an indication”: If