A Question on Swearing an Oath of Divorce

This is a message we received from Kamil Kamil Hasan, an Egyptian national working in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. He says in his message: We have in Egypt scholars to whom a man goes when he swears an oath of divorce. He places his hand in the scholar's hand, and the scholar says words to him which he repeats. After that, the scholar tells him: "It is done, the oath has been dissolved." Please inform us about the validity of this. May Allah reward you.
Answer: This statement you mentioned, O questioner, is unreasonable! Placing the hand in the hand and the words the professor or scholar says, saying "the divorce is dissolved," this is not reasonable! And its basis is unknown. But if he is seeking a ruling from him, and he rules that he should do such and such, ruling according to the Shari'ah, telling him: "Your divorce has taken place" or "Your divorce has not taken place because the conditions for its occurrence were not met," this is a matter for consideration. That is to say, one must know what the professor says when he places his hand in his hand. What does he say to him? What ruling did he give him? How did the divorce occur? Details are necessary.
So if the person seeking a ruling asked the scholar, "I said to my wife: You are divorced if you do such and such, if you talk to so-and-so," and the scholar said to him: "If she did not talk to so-and-so, the divorce did not take place," this is correct.
Or if he said: "You are divorced if you eat such and such," or "if you drink such and such," and she did not drink or eat that thing which he forbade her from, the divorce did not take place.
Or if he said to her: "You are divorced if you visit the family of so-and-so," intending to prevent her, and the scholar said to him: "You owe an oath expiation. If his intention was to prevent her, according to the correct opinion of the scholars, there is an oath expiation. Its ruling is the ruling of an oath, because he did not intend to effect the divorce, but rather intended to prevent her from the visit, for example. In this case, there is an oath expiation according to a group of scholars, and that is the correct view. So the result is that details are necessary, and knowing what the scholar says to this person seeking a ruling. As for placing the hand on the hand and reciting something, or choosing words that have no connection to the ruling, this does not dissolve anything, and the removal of the ruling of divorce does not follow from it. Yes.
The presenter: May Allah reward you.