The ruling on taking back a wife after a triple divorce during anger

This is a man from the land of Bani Shahar who says: A man divorced his wife with three divorces, saying: "You are divorced, then divorced, then divorced," divorces after which I have no right to take her back. He was angry with his wife for disobeying his orders. Then, after a period of months, he took her back, and she bore him children. Please give us a ruling, may Allah make your abode Paradise?
Answer: If the man, when he divorced her with this divorce by saying: "Divorced, (then divorced, then divorced, divorces in which there is no right of return)," was overcome by intense anger, and the matter closed in on him, and he became closer to a state of unconsciousness, then his divorce does not take effect according to the more correct of the scholars' opinions, and there is no harm in his taking his wife back. However, it was obligatory for him to seek a ruling before that; it was obligatory for him to seek a ruling before he took her back; because divorce is serious, and not everyone can gauge intense anger and recognize it.
So it is obligatory for him to seek a ruling so that he may be cautious with his religion. If his anger was intense and overcame him, and the intensity of the anger prevailed over him such that he was unable to restrain himself from divorcing, rather he was compelled to divorce because of the intensity of the anger; because she insulted him, or they insulted each other, or they fought, or he heard from her words that caused intense anger, then the divorce does not take effect in his case. This is based on the famous hadith from 'A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , narrated by Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah, and al-Hakim graded it as authentic.
And "closing in" (al-ighlaq) was explained by the scholars as coercion and intense anger, and there are other proofs indicating that intense anger does not result in the divorce taking effect, and the person in that state is closer to one whose intellect is vanishing, like the insane or the mad, and the like thereof.
As for if his anger was ordinary and not intense, but rather it was ordinary anger, then the divorce takes effect. So "divorced, then divorced, then divorced," or "divorced, divorced, divorced," or "you are divorced, you are divorced, you are divorced" with three divorces, it takes effect, and he has no right to take her back except after another husband. If he divorced her in a state of contentment or in a state of light anger, then the divorce has taken effect, and he has no right to return to her except after another husband; because he divorced her three times with multiple words; so it took effect. This is based on the saying of Allah, the Exalted: [al-Baqarah: 230], and His saying: [al-Baqarah: 229]. So these are repeated divorces, and they took effect. Yes.
The presenter: But if this anger, I mean, was not "closing in" as you mentioned, what is the ruling on this taking her back, and the bearing of children after?
The Shaykh: This, in any case, is considered a greater error than that; because it is negligence. But what appears is that his children are attributed to him; because the doubt led him to take her back due to intense anger, so the children are attributed to him. But he did wrong and erred in that he gave himself a ruling and did not seek a ruling from the people of knowledge. It was obligatory for him to consult the judges around him and seek a ruling, so that they would give him a ruling and guide him. Yes.