Question: He pronounced it three times—does that mean three separate divorces have taken place?

Answer: If when uttering it he intended divorce, then it counts as three divorces—three distinct pronouncements.

Question: And does his wording, “she is forbidden to me like my mother or my sister,” not also constitute ẓihār (the pre-Islamic formula of spousal estrangement)?

Answer: Yes. In that case it is both a divorce and ẓihār. If his purpose was to suspend either ẓihār or divorce on her going—indeed, if he meant both—then he is simultaneously a divorcer and one who has made ẓihār. If, however, he intended neither but only wanted to stop her from going, then, as we have said, he must offer the expiation for an oath.

Question: Suppose he really did mean both divorce and ẓihār but now wishes to retract?

Answer: If he has issued three divorces, she has become irrevocably separated from him.

Question: Would it not be counted as a single divorce because it all occurred in one sitting, in a single situation?

Answer: No. He repeated it himself. Had the three been uttered in one wording, that is an issue over which the scholars differ; the majority say it counts as three, and that is the correct view. In his case he articulated three separate statements, so by consensus it amounts to three divorces. Someone might object that he was angry. If his anger reached the point where he lost awareness and could not comprehend what he was saying, then nothing is binding upon him—neither oath, nor divorce, nor ẓihār—because he was not conscious. But if his anger was less than that and he understood what he was saying, then the ruling is as we have explained.