[The ruling on swearing by ḥarām and divorce]

Answer – and Allah is the One who grants success: What I hold is that this does not constitute divorce, because divorce is not ruled as having taken place until it is made to fall upon the wife, and in these expressions there is nothing stating that divorce is upon the wife; rather, the import of the second expression revolves between two meanings:
1. The first: that divorce and ḥarām are issued by the wife; and the divorce pronounced by the wife upon her husband or upon someone else is of no legal consequence.
2. The second – and it is far-fetched – is that the meaning is that he is divorced from his wife, i.e., separated from his wife. This is not sound and carries no legal weight, because divorce applies to women, not to men; thus it is not valid for a man to divorce himself.
If it is said: The wording mentioned in the question is an expression by which the people of those regions swear, believing that divorce occurs thereby.
We say: No consideration is given to such a thing if it does not conform to the Sacred Law.
If it is said: Then let it at least be among the implicit expressions (kināyāt) of divorce, so that intention is taken into account in it.
We say: The nature of kināyah is that it indicates divorce by necessary implication, such as their saying, “Put on your veil,” or “Observe your waiting period,” for veiling on the part of the wife and observing the waiting period only occur due to divorce; whereas here there is nothing that indicates that divorce has fallen upon the wife.
And in the commentary and its marginal notes it is stated that “ʿalayya aṭ-ṭalāq min zawjatī (Divorce from my wife is upon me)” or “yalzamunī aṭ-ṭalāq (Divorce becomes binding upon me)” are among the implicit expressions of divorce.
Sayyid Idrīs at-Tihāmī and Imām Yaḥyā said that these two are neither explicit formulae nor kināyah. Imām al-Mahdī said: And that is, in my view, the closer [to the truth].
I say: Among the conditions of kināyah is that both the wording and the meaning are intended. On that basis, the one who swears by these kināyāt does not intend separation from his wife; rather, he intends to compel or convince his opponent.
And this is assuming that what is mentioned in the question is among the kināyāt – which is far-fetched; for the one who pronounces the wording mentioned in the question intends thereby an oath, such that it is as if he said: “I swear by ḥarām and by divorce from my wife that I will do such-and-such.”
The proof of the soundness of this interpretation is that the answer to the oath comes immediately after (the words) “ḥarām and divorce.”

Source: Min Thimār al-ʿIlm wa al-Ḥikmah vol.2