Second: if he intends to make a declaration, then if he intends an oath, it is an oath; and if he intends divorce, it becomes a divorce. This is because this expression may validly be intended as divorce, for divorce renders the wife forbidden. Thus, he may intend divorce by it, on account of the Prophet’s saying: “Actions are only by intentions, and every person shall have only what he intended.” (1) Here, he has intended a meaning to which this expression applies. And if he intends ẓihār, it is ẓihār, because it can bear all of these meanings.
Third: that he says, “You are forbidden to me,” as a statement reporting that she is forbidden to him—that is, “You are forbidden to me rather than being lawful to me.” In this case, we say to him: “You are lying,” unless she is in a state in which intercourse with her is forbidden to him, such as when she is menstruating, experiencing postnatal bleeding, or in consecration for Hajj or ‘Umrah, and he means intercourse by it. Then we say: “You are telling the truth.” There is no expiation in this category, because he is either lying or telling the truth, and thus there is no breach of an oath. This is the sounder view in this issue.
His words, “or like a carcass”: If he says, “You are like a carcass,” and says, “I meant the carcass of a fish,” while the carcass of a fish is lawful, this is contrary to the apparent meaning. For when “carcass” is said without qualification, what is meant is the prohibited carcass. Thus, his claim is accepted as binding upon him before Allah, but not judicially. We have previously explained that when we say his claim is accepted in this sense, we consider the husband’s circumstances: if he is a truthful man who fears Allah, it is not permissible for the woman to take him to court; but if his situation is the opposite, she must take him to court.
Moreover, there may be an indication that disproves his claim that he meant the carcass of a fish. This would be the case if there were anger between him and his wife and he said, “You are to me like a carcass,” then said, “I meant the carcass of a fish.” Here, the contextual indication exposes him as lying.
His words, “and blood”: He says, “You are to me like blood.” Blood is prohibited, but