and no indication of the situation, and we do not know of any disagreement regarding the phrase "you are free" being a metonym. As for when he slaps her and says, "This is your divorce," many jurists have said: This is not a metonym, nor does divorce take effect through it, even if he intends it; because this does not convey the meaning of divorce, nor is it a cause for it, nor is there a ruling concerning it (1), so it is not valid to use it as an expression for it, like his saying: "May God forgive you." Ibn Hamid said: Divorce takes effect through it without intention because its implication is: "I have caused divorce to befall you, this striking is on account of it," and according to his opinion, this would be explicit. The statement of al-Khiraqi is also susceptible to this, and it is possible that he only causes it to take effect if it is in a state of anger, so the anger stands in place of the intention, just as it stood in place of it in his saying: "You are free." It is also possible that his slapping her is a circumstantial evidence that stands in place of the intention, because it arises from anger, so it follows the same course. The correct view is that it is a metonym for divorce, because it is possible (2) by the interpretation mentioned by Ibn Hamid, and it is possible that he means it is a cause for your divorce, due to the fact that divorce is tied to it, so it is valid to use it as an expression for it, yet it is not explicit because it required interpretation; had it been explicit, it would not have needed that. Furthermore, it is not coined for it, nor is it used for it legally or by convention, so it resembles other metonyms. By analogy, this applies if he feeds her, gives her a drink, or clothes her, and says: "This is your divorce." Or if the woman performed an action of standing or sitting, or he performed an action and said: "This is your divorce." This is the same as slapping her, except that slapping indicates the anger that stands in place of the intention, so it also stands in place of it from one perspective, while what they (3) mentioned does not stand in place of the intention for those who require it.

The second section: That if he uses a metonym in a state of anger, [without an intention] (4), al-Khiraqi mentioned in this place that divorce takes effect. The Qadi, Abu Bakr, and Abu al-Khattab mentioned two narrations regarding this. One of them is that divorce takes effect. It is stated in the narration of al-Maymuni: If he says to his wife: "You are