According to Abu Hanifah—may Allah have mercy on him—if he likens her to his mother’s belly, private parts, or thigh, it constitutes zihar; but if he likens her to any other part of her body, it does not constitute zihar. If he says, “You are to me like my mother,” or, “Like my mother’s soul,” intending esteem and honor thereby, it is not zihar unless he intends zihar. If he likens her to his grandmother, saying, “You are to me like my grandmother’s back,” it constitutes zihar. The same applies if he likens her to a woman permanently forbidden to him through blood relationship, such as saying, “You are to me like my sister’s back,” or “my paternal aunt’s back,” or “my maternal aunt’s back”; or if he likens her to a woman permanently forbidden to him through fosterage. This is the soundest of the reported views.

“And those who pronounce zihar upon their wives and then wish to go back on what they said must free a slave before the two touch one another. That is what you are instructed by; and Allah is All-Aware of what you do.” (3)

“And those who pronounce zihar upon their wives and then wish to go back on what they said must free a slave.” The ruling of zihar is that, after pronouncing it, the husband is forbidden to have intercourse with his wife until he offers expiation. The expiation becomes obligatory upon returning after zihar, due to His saying: “Then wish to go back on what they said; they must free a slave.”

The scholars differed concerning the meaning of “returning.” The Literalists held that it means repeating the wording of zihar. This was also the view of Abu al-Aliyah, based on His saying: “Then they return to what they said,” meaning, they repeat what they said another time (1). If he does not repeat the wording, then no expiation is due from him.

Others held that expiation becomes obligatory by the very pronouncement of zihar itself, and that “returning” means returning to the practice of zihar that they had followed in the pre-Islamic period. This was the view of Mujahid and al-Thawri.

Others said that “returning” means intercourse. ⦗155/b⦘ This was the view of al-Hasan, Qatadah, Tawus, and al-Zuhri. They said that no expiation is due from him unless he has intercourse with her. Others said that it means resolving to have intercourse; this was the view of Malik and the proponents of juristic reasoning.

Al-Shafi‘i held that returning means that, after pronouncing zihar, he retains her for a period in which he is able to separate from her but does not do so. If he divorces her immediately after pronouncing zihar, or if either of them dies during that interval, then no expiation is due from him, because returning to one’s statement means acting contrary to it. Ibn Abbas explained “returning” as regret, saying: “They regret it and return to intimacy.” This carries the same meaning.

Al-Farra’ said (2): One says, “So-and-so returned to what he said,” meaning, concerning what he said; and it is also said regarding the reversal of what he said, meaning: