Is a wife forbidden to her husband if he says to her: "You are forbidden to me," intending by it to threaten her into not abandoning prayer, and not intending divorce or Zihar (a form of pre-Islamic divorce where the husband declares his wife to be like his mother's back), and what are the consequences of abandoning prayer intentionally or forgetfully after this statement?

If a man says to his wife: "You are forbidden to me," the ruling depends on his intention. If he intended divorce, then it is a divorce. If he intended ẓihār, then it is ẓihār. If he intended an oath or did not intend anything, then it is an oath requiring an expiation for an oath.

If the husband made the prohibition conditional on his wife abandoning prayer, and the separation between the two statements was only a slight pause that does not harm, such as a cough or breathing, then he is not required to pay expiation unless she abandons prayer. If the abandonment was due to forgetfulness, there is a difference of opinion among scholars, and the preferred view is that there is no breaking of the oath in this case. However, if he separated the two statements with a long silence, then the prohibition becomes immediate, and expiation is required at once.

For the validity of the conditional statement, it is required that the husband intends it before finishing the utterance, and that the speech be continuous, either literally or legally. Thus, a slight interruption for a sneeze or the like, or by regular speech, does not harm. But if he interrupted it with a long silence or irregular speech, then the prohibition takes effect immediately.

It is obligatory to preserve prayer and not to be complacent about it, for it is a great pillar of the religion.