If a man divorces his wife three times in one sitting; is this permissible? And how is it counted?

The questioner : If a man divorces his wife three times in one sitting; is this permissible? And is it counted, and how is it counted for him; is it three, or one, or something else?

The Shaykh : First, it is not permissible for him to do so; because it is an innovated divorce. Second, only one divorce takes effect from him; so he has the right to take her back in a manner that returns to the correct Sunnah, which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) died upon, and which is established and decisive. Then Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) acted upon it throughout his righteous caliphate; two and a half years. Then 'Umar ibn al-Khattab followed it for a portion of his righteous caliphate - likewise - then it occurred to him, from the perspective of discretionary punishment and observing what had newly arisen among the people of deviation from the Shari'ah, that he said, before making the divorce by the wording of three in one sitting count as three: "What if we implemented it upon them as three?" As if he was consulting. Then he resolved his matter and implemented it upon them as three. So this was from him in the capacity of the action of a knowledgeable, reasoning ruler. And there is no one like 'Umar in his knowledge, his independent legal reasoning, and his wisdom. It is sufficient for him that the Qur'an was revealed in agreement with him in more than one case. So if it occurred to him to punish the people for some of the new things that did not exist in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him), from the perspective of correcting what some of the people had corrupted; then the ruler has that right; on the condition that the people do not take that as a new Shari'ah to adopt as if it were the original, old Shari'ah. And with great regret, this is what happened to this ruling; where the majority of Muslims, over the years, forgot the Prophetic ruling, which - as I mentioned to you just now - Abu Bakr and 'Umar followed in the beginning of his caliphate. This Sunnah became a forgotten thing, and the Sunnah of 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), which we are discussing, took its place. It became an eternal Shari'ah until this era, until about a quarter of a century ago, when some judges or those who engage in sectarian jurisprudence; who do not base their rulings on the scriptural evidence from the Book and the Sunnah, but rather establish them on what they claim to be the benefit of the Ummah - they claim! - and not every benefit that a person claims is permissible to establish a ruling for, unless he is a jurist in the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). So when they saw the multitude of problems - I mean these jurists or judges - when they saw the multitude of problems that occur between spouses due to divorce that was not based on awareness and thought, and this divorce may be the result of an angry outburst that does not last; so incidents of divorce increased. They wanted to reduce them; so they found no way before them except - I do not say except returning to the Sunnah - for they had no knowledge of the Sunnah before, rather they were fighting the Sunnah explicitly; claiming that this Sunnah is like others, or like many of them, contrary to the four schools of jurisprudence. But here, when they made benefit the criterion, they dared to go against the four schools of jurisprudence, and they took not the Sunnah - I repeat this as a warning - but rather the school of Ibn Taymiyyah!
The school of Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) - as we know - in most of his fatwas - may Allah reward him for Islam with good - is based on the Book and the Sunnah. Among that is this issue. So he continued to issue fatwas on it among the majority of judges and muftis in his time, who were issuing fatwas as the judges did before this modification. So Ibn Taymiyyah does not fear the blame of any blamer in the matter of Allah. So his school spread in the present era, and became known even to these sectarian judges. So they found that the recurring problem of divorce is solved by adopting the school of Ibn Taymiyyah; even if the school of Ibn Taymiyyah were contrary - may Allah forbid! - to the Book and the Sunnah; they would adopt it, and not care about its contradiction with the Book and the Sunnah, even if it were obligatory; because by that the problem they touched with their own hands is solved. As for the truly knowledgeable Muslim jurist, he remains holding fast to the Sunnah throughout his life, not caring about the people at all, and not paying attention to them; whether they are pleased or angry. As was said about some of the Salaf:
"And I do not care when I am killed, a Muslim *** if what?
The audience: On which side.

The Shaykh : On whichever side my death is, it is for Allah."
So the important thing today is that the judges - and some of the muftis - have returned. Many muftis still issue fatwas that this divorce is a final, irrevocable divorce, , contradicting the correct Sunnah in that; preferring taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) over the Sunnah. And this is the calamity of the majority of the Ummah in this time. It goes back to two reasons: the first is their ignorance of the Sunnah, and the second is their partisanship for the school of jurisprudence more than their partisanship for the Sunnah. And this is a reversal of the truth that is never permissible.
Yes.