What is the ruling when a husband says to his wife, 'You are forbidden to me' (Anta 'alayya haram), without any further qualification?
Chapter on Explicit Divorce and Others
Al-Mughni
Book of Divorce
Primary text
If a husband says to his wife, "You are forbidden to me" and expresses it without qualification, it constitutes Zihar (a form of improper divorce/separation). This view is held by many jurists. For instance, it is established concerning Imam Ahmad that if this phrase is used, it is Zihar, irrespective of whether the husband intended divorce or not. This ruling is also attributed to Uthman ibn Affan, Ibn Abbas, Abu Qilabah, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, Maymun ibn Mahran, and Al-Batti. The justification is that since the phrase is explicit in forbidding the wife, it functions as Zihar, analogous to saying, "You are to me as my mother's back," which necessitates the expiation of Zihar. If he did not intend divorce, it is not divorce because it is not explicit in divorce, and thus requires the expiation of Zihar as it is a prohibition of the lawful.
Supporting text
The Shafi'i school holds that nothing is incumbent upon him. Another opinion within the Shafi'i school suggests that the expiation of an oath (yamin) is due, although it is not strictly an oath. Abu Hanifa holds that it is an oath, a view supported by reports from Abu Bakr, Umar ibn Al-Khattab, and Ibn Mas'ud. Furthermore, some jurists, including Ibn Mas'ud, Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyib, and Sa'id ibn Jubayr, derive support from Quranic verses such as {You have forbidden for yourself what Allah has made lawful for you} (Quran 66:1) and {Allah has ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths} (Quran 66:2), interpreting the forbidden utterance as an oath.