Is an unstated condition or time frame legally binding in divorce?
Chapter on Explicit Divorce and Others
Al-Mughni
Book of Divorce
Primary text
Specifying a condition or time frame, such as 'if you enter the house' or 'after one month,' is legally binding if explicitly uttered. If such specificity is intended privately but not uttered verbally, it binds the person privately before God, though its acceptance in a legal ruling is subject to two narrations.
Supporting text
One narration holds that an unstated intention, such as swearing not to enter a house and intending privately 'for one month,' is accepted. Similarly, if one says, 'If you enter so-and-so's house, you are divorced,' and intends that specific hour or day, the intention is accepted. The second narration rejects this, stating that if one says, 'You are divorced,' and intends privately 'after one year,' the divorce is not effective, and the intention is disregarded if unstated. The reconciliation between these views is that acceptance applies to the private religious ruling (*dīn*), while rejection applies to the formal legal ruling. The difference from preceding issues is that intending a specific instance under a general term is common, whereas intending a condition without mentioning it is not generally accepted and is closer to an exception.