What is the ruling if the husband says 'You are forbidden to me' with no specific intention (neither divorce nor Zihar)?
Chapter on Explicit Divorce and Others
Al-Mughni
Book of Divorce
Primary text
If the husband says, "You are forbidden to me" and intends neither divorce nor oath, the established position from Imam Ahmad, according to a narration by a group, is that it is still Zihar. This is regardless of whether he intended divorce or not. This is based on the principle that the statement is an explicit act of forbidding the wife without divorce, thus requiring the expiation of Zihar, just as if he had explicitly stated the formula for Zihar.
Supporting text
A view reported from Masruq, Abu Salamah ibn Abd Al-Rahman, and Al-Sha'bi is that no legal consequence applies because the speaker is knowingly uttering a falsehood. However, this is refuted by the ruling on Zihar, which is considered reprehensible speech and falsehood, yet mandates expiation. Another argument is that since this construction implies the pronouncement of divorce, it should be treated like saying, "You are divorced."