and if he is asked—purely for information—“Did you divorce her?” and he answers, “Yes,” that reply constitutes an acknowledgment. Should he then add, “I was referring to a divorce that took place earlier and I have already taken her back,” he is believed if he swears to it. If the question itself was meant only as an invitation to marital relations and he answered, “Yes,” one opinion counts this as an explicit pronouncement of divorce, while another regards it as an indirect (allusive) expression.

Section

1. If he suspends the divorce on her eating an entire loaf of bread or a whole pomegranate, and the loaf’s soft core or even a single seed remains, the divorce does not occur.
2. If both of them eat dates and mix the pits, and he says, “If you cannot separate out your own pits you are divorced,” then she places every pit by itself, the divorce is ineffective—unless he intended that she identify each specific pit.
3. Should she have a date in her mouth and he makes one divorce depend on her swallowing it, another on her throwing it away, and a third on her keeping it, and she hastens—once her mouth is empty—to eat part of it and cast part away, no divorce takes effect.
4. If he suspects her of theft and says, “If you do not tell me the truth you are divorced,” and she replies, “I did steal,” the divorce is not effected.
5. If he says, “If you do not inform me of the number of seeds in this pomegranate before it is broken open, you are divorced,” she may begin with a number that is known the fruit cannot be fewer than, then add one by one until she reaches a number it cannot exceed; in both this case and the one before it the husband was not seeking real information.
6. If he addresses three wives, saying, “Whoever of you fails to tell me how many obligatory rakʿahs there are in a day and a night is divorced,” and one says, “Seventeen,” another, “Fifteen—on Friday,” and the third, “Eleven—for a traveller,” no divorce takes place.
7. If he says, “You are divorced ila hīn (until a time), or zamān (for a term), or baʿda hīn (after a while),” the divorce is effected after the passing of a single moment.
8. If he suspends the divorce on her seeing Zayd, touching him, or slandering him, the condition is satisfied whether Zayd is alive or dead, unlike suspending it on striking him, which is possible only while he is alive.
9. If she insults him with words he dislikes, such as “You fool!” or “You despicable man!” and he retorts, “If you are as you say, you are divorced,” then—if his aim is merely to requite her by making her hear what she dislikes—the divorce takes effect; but if the described qualities do not in fact apply to her, the description itself is determinative, and the same holds where he had no particular intention, according to the sounder opinion. In this context, foolishness means a lack of full legal capacity for financial disposition, while “despicable” has been defined as one who sells his religion for worldly gain; it may also be said that it is anyone who engages in what is beneath him. The ruling differs in other situations.