What is the ruling on pronouncing three divorces in a single utterance?

Question:
We have two questions, and we ask the questioners for permission. One has just arrived, and it seems to be urgent. Honorable Shaykh, a man says: I divorced my wife three times in a single utterance, and I wrote a paper to that effect which was sent to the wife, and I bore witness to it. After a short time, I regretted it and took her back. Is she lawful to me, or what? Knowing that the wife has three children, and that the divorce occurred in a state of anger. Please give us a ruling, may Allah reward you with the best reward.

Answer:
Or the three in a single word, such as saying "So-and-so is divorced with three," or "divorced with three," or "the divorce is upon her with three." There is disagreement among the scholars. Most of the scholars in the time of Abu Bakr and 'Umar, and after them, say that it is carried out and executed, and she does not become lawful to him except after another husband. This is what most of the scholars said. And this is the opinion of some of the scholars in the time of al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), or in the early part of 'Umar's caliphate. The situation in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was that the three in a single utterance are considered one, and it is made a revocable divorce. This is what I have issued a ruling on, that it is one revocable divorce. A group of scholars from the time of Ibn 'Abbas and after him have issued rulings on this. It is established from Ibn 'Abbas in a narration from him (may Allah be pleased with him), and he issued a ruling on it, and he issued a ruling according to the opinion of the majority. It is established from a group of his companions in their rulings that it is one. Abu al-'Abbas Ibn Taymiyyah, the Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him), and al-Tirmidhi, who is the scholar Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him), wrote about this. His opinion is stronger based on a little hadith that it is one, unless the judge rules to carry it out. The judge's ruling removes the disagreement. If the husband has gone to the court, and the court has ruled that this divorce is carried out, and that she has become separated, then the ruling removes the disagreement, and it becomes irrevocable, unless the judge retracts his ruling and sees that it should be made one, and permits others to do so, then there is no harm. The point is that the correct view is that it is one. But if one of the legal judges rules to carry it out, following the opinion of the majority, and that she does not become lawful except after another husband, then this is an opinion that has its basis. The scholars mentioned that al-Hafiz Ahmad removed the disagreement, and he has the right to overturn it if he sees that the scriptural evidence requires it, or to permit other judges or muftis to overturn it if he sees that the evidence requires it, then there is no harm. This is the answer to this issue. Yes. Now, anger does not change the anger.
There is a distinction here. So, ordinary beating, and beating is of three types. Ordinary beating does not prevent the divorce. And severe beating that changes a person's state and intention, and he is not able to perform the legal divorce with it, rather his intention is obscured to him, and his path is obscured to him due to the length of the dispute, and the severity of the dispute, and the fighting, for example, between them, or the racing and problems between them. This, if the anger becomes severe, the divorce does not take place with it, according to the correct view as well.
And the third case is that the anger causes a lack of awareness, and that he is like the other insane and deranged, where the anger has driven him into the corners of the mind so that he does not understand what he says. This divorce does not take place according to all the scholars. He is in the position of the deranged and the insane in this case, so his divorce does not take place if the anger has put him in this state. Yes. And there is no need.