[Machine] That the manifestations have prohibited his wife from him with zihar, so if a certain period passes after the statement of zihar, he does not prohibit her with the divorce that she is prohibited with, nor with anything that has an outlet from which she can be prohibited. The expiation of zihar becomes obligatory upon him, as if they are going towards the fact that when he holds onto what he has prohibited upon himself, that it is permissible, he has returned to what he said is contradictory, so he allows what he has prohibited. He said, "I do not know any meaning more appropriate to it than this." Al-Shafi'i, may Allah have mercy on him, said, "I do not know of any contradiction in that the expiation of zihar is obligatory upon him, even if he does not return with another manifestation. Therefore, it is not permissible to say unless I know of a contradiction in that it is not in the meaning of the verse."  

أَنَّ الْمُظَاهِرَ حَرَّمَ امْرَأَتَهُ بِالظِّهَارِ فَإِذَا أَتَتْ عَلَيْهِ مُدَّةٌ بَعْدَ الْقَوْلِ بِالظِّهَارِ لَمْ يُحَرِّمْهَا بِالطَّلَاقِ الَّذِي تُحَرَّمُ بِهِ وَلَا بِشَيْءٍ يَكُونُ لَهُ مَخْرَجٌ مِنْ أَنْ تُحَرَّمَ بِهِ فَقَدْ وَجَبَتْ عَلَيْهِ كَفَّارَةُ الظِّهَارِ كَأَنَّهُمْ يَذْهَبُونَ إِلَى أَنَّهُ إِذَا أَمْسَكَ مَا حَرَّمَ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ أَنَّهُ حَلَالٌ فَقَدْ عَادَ لِمَا قَالَ مُخَالَفَةٌ فَأَحَلَّ مَا حَرَّمَ قَالَ وَلَا أَعْلَمُ لَهُ مَعْنًى أَوْلَى بِهِ مِنْ هَذَا قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ رَحِمَهُ اللهُ لَا أَعْلَمُ مُخَالِفًا فِي أَنَّ عَلَيْهِ كَفَّارَةَ الظِّهَارِ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَعُدْ بِتَظَاهُرٍ آخَرَ فَلَمْ يَجُزْ أَنْ يُقَالَ مَا لَمْ أَعْلَمْ مُخَالِفًا فِي أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ بِمَعْنَى الْآيَةِ