His statement, “the number of divorces takes effect unless he intends a valid emphasis or clarification”: tawkīd is more eloquent than taʾkīd (emphasis), as Allah says: “Do not break your oaths after confirming them” [al-Naḥl: 91]. Nevertheless, taʾkīd is also permissible in Arabic.

Thus, if he intends a valid emphasis or clarification, the number of divorces does not take effect. Note his words, “a valid emphasis.” When is emphasis valid? It is valid subject to two conditions:

First: it must be expressed using the wording of that which is being emphasized, even if only in meaning.

Second: it must be connected to it without interruption.

Therefore, if he says, “You are divorced; you are divorced; you are divorced,” three divorces take effect. But if he says, “I intended emphasis,” his claim is accepted, and only one divorce takes effect, because the emphasis here is valid: the wording is the same and uninterrupted.

If he says, “You are divorced; you are divorced; you are divorced,” and says, “I intended to emphasize the first by the third,” then three divorces take effect, because he has separated the first sentence from the third by the second, so the emphasis is invalid.

Likewise, if he says, “You are divorced,” then speaks to her about something else, then says, “You are divorced,” then speaks to her about something else, then says, “You are divorced,” and claims, “I intended emphasis,” his claim is not accepted, because of the interruption.

If he says, “You are divorced; you are separated; you are released,” or words to that effect, the emphasis is valid, because the meaning is the same.

If he says, “You are divorced; you are divorced; you are divorced,” and says, “I intended to emphasize the first with the second,” then two divorces take effect. The emphasis here is valid, so when he emphasized the first with the second, they became one; then the third came and became the second.