as a report, it is a lie, because if he effectuates the single one, it occurs. This is the school of al-Shafi'i, and we do not know of any dissenter regarding it. If he says: "You are divorced, or not?" it does not occur; because this is an interrogation, and when it is connected to it, it departs from being a wording for effectuation, and it differs from what preceded it, for that is an effectuation. It is possible that it occurs, because its wording is the wording of effectuation, not the wording of interrogation, since interrogation is by the hamza or the like, so what he effectuated occurs, and it is not rescinded by what he mentioned after it, as with the one before it. If he says: "You are divorced one, or not?" then it is the same. Abu Hanifah and Abu Yusuf said this, and it is the qiyas (analogy) of al-Shafi'i's opinion. Muhammad said: It occurs as one; because his saying "or not" returns to what follows it of the wording, which is "one," not the wording of effectuation. This is not correct; because "one" is an attribute of the occurring divorce, so what is connected to it returns to it, making it like his saying: "You are divorced, or nothing."

Section: If he says: "You are divorced after my death or your death," or "with my death or your death," she is not divorced. Ahmad stated this, and al-Shafi'i said it, and we do not know of any dissenter regarding it; because she becomes irrevocably divorced by the death of either of them, so the divorce does not coincide with a marriage that it would dissolve. If he marries his father's slave woman, then says: "If my father dies, then you are divorced," and his father dies, the divorce does not occur. The Qadi chose this; because by death he gains ownership of her, so her marriage is annulled by ownership, which is the time of the divorce, so it did not occur, just as if he said: "You are divorced with my death." Abu al-Khattab chose that it does occur; because death is the cause of her ownership and her divorce, and the annulment of the marriage is contingent upon the ownership, so the divorce is found in the time of ownership that precedes the annulment, thus its ruling is established. If he says: "If I buy you, then you are divorced," then he buys her, it is inferred based on the two views. If the father says: "If I die, you are free," and the son says: "If my father dies, you are divorced," and she was to be covered by the third [of the estate], then the father died, the emancipation and the divorce occur together. And if she is not covered by the third, then some of her transfers to the heirs, so the son owns a part of her by which the marriage is annulled, so it is like owning all of her in annulling the marriage and preventing the occurrence of the divorce. If the heirs authorize her emancipation, then...