zihar. This is the view of Ibn Abi Layla and al-Layth, because the revealed law (al-shar') uses the term zihar in an absolute sense, and this [case] is not absolute, thus it resembles the case where one compares her to someone who is forbidden to him at one time but not another. Tawus said: If he performs zihar for a specific time, he is liable for expiation, even if he remains righteous [i.e., avoids the act]. Malik said: The time-limitation falls away, and it becomes an absolute zihar (51), because this is an expression that necessitates the prohibition of the wife, so when he specifies a time, it does not become limited, just like divorce. Our position is based on the hadith of Salamah ibn Sakhr and his statement: "I performed zihar (52) from (53) my wife until the month of Ramadan passes." He informed the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he had intercourse with her during the month, so he commanded him to perform expiation. He did not consider his time-limitation to be a factor. Furthermore, he forbade himself from her with an oath that carries expiation, so it is valid as a time-bound [act], like ila' (oath of abstention). It differs from divorce, for divorce terminates the ownership, while this [zihar] causes a prohibition that is lifted by expiation, so its time-limitation is permissible. The view of those who mandate expiation even if he remains righteous is invalid, because Allah Almighty only mandated expiation for those who return to what they said, and whoever remains righteous and avoids the 'return' during the time in which he performed zihar has not returned to what he said; therefore, no expiation is incumbent upon him. It differs from the comparison with someone who is never forbidden to him permanently, because her prohibition is not absolute; here, he prohibited her (55) for this period with a prohibition analogous to the prohibition of the back of his mother. Moreover, we dispute the legal ruling in that [hypothetical] case. If this is established, he does not become a 'returner' except by having intercourse during the period. This is what is explicitly stated by al-Shafi'i. Some of his companions said: If he does not divorce her immediately after the zihar, he is considered a 'returner' and expiation (56) is upon him. Abu 'Ubayd said: If he resolves to have intercourse with her during the time, expiation becomes incumbent upon him; otherwise, it does not, because the 'return' is the resolve to have intercourse. Our position is the hadith of Salamah ibn Sakhr, and that he did not deem the expiation incumbent upon him except by way of intercourse, and because it is an oath in which he has not broken the pledge, so its expiation is not incumbent upon him, just like an oath by Allah Almighty. Also, the one who performs zihar for a specific time is resolved to retain his wife during that time, so whoever mandates expiation for him based on that, his saying is like the saying of