The ruling on one who says to his wife when divorcing her: “You are in the place of my mother”

We return at the beginning of this session to the letter of our brother Adam Muhammad Uthman, a Sudanese resident in Iraq. Our brother asks in this episode and says: Some people, when they divorce their wives, say: “You are in the place of my mother.” What is the ruling if he takes her back? Is he entitled to take her back or not?
Answer: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, and may Allah send blessings and peace upon the Messenger of Allah, upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow his guidance.
To proceed: If the divorce is revocable, meaning if he divorced her with one or two divorces, he has the right to take her back as long as she is in the waiting period. If she exits the waiting period before he takes her back, it is permissible for him to return to her through a new marriage contract with the conditions considered valid in the Shari'ah, namely the guardian, the witnesses, and consent, as is well known.
As for his saying, “You are in the place of my mother,” after he has divorced her, this depends on his intention. If his intention was that she is precious and honorable to him and that he values her, then this is nothing, there is no blame on him, and it is not zihar in any way; it is merely a misleading phrase.
However, if his intention in saying “You are in the place of my mother” was that you are forbidden to me, and you are haram to me like my mother, then this is called zihar. If the divorce is revocable, she is not lawful to him until he performs the expiation. He must not touch her, even if he takes her back. It is permissible for him to take her back, or to contract a new marriage with her if she has exited the waiting period, but he must not touch her until he performs the expiation for zihar, which is freeing a believing slave. If he is unable to do so, he must fast for two consecutive months. If he is unable to do that, he must feed sixty poor people with thirty sa' (a dry measure of about 3 kg). Each sa' is divided between two people, so each person receives half a sa' of dates, rice, wheat, or the staple food of the land. This is what is obligatory. He has no right to touch her until he discharges this expiation. After he takes her back or after he contracts a new marriage with her, he has no right to touch her, meaning he has no right to have intercourse with her, until he discharges this expiation.
First: a slave—freeing a believing slave—if he is able.
Second: fasting for two consecutive months, if he is unable to free a slave.
Third: feeding sixty poor people with thirty sa' of the staple food of the land, if he is unable to fast. After this, he may have intercourse with her.
As for if the divorce is final, meaning he divorced her with the last divorce—the third—then she is not lawful to him until she marries another husband. She must marry another husband in a lawful marriage, not a marriage for the purpose of facilitating remarriage (tahlil), and the second husband must also have intercourse with her. If he divorced her with the last divorce—the third—then she is forbidden to him temporarily as long as she has not married. If she marries in a lawful marriage and the new husband has intercourse with her, and then he divorces her or dies, she becomes lawful to the first husband, provided the marriage was lawful and not a marriage for the purpose of facilitating remarriage. As for marrying her for the purpose of facilitating remarriage to the first husband, this is an invalid marriage and is not permissible. However, if the new husband marries her with the intention of desiring her, but Allah does not grant him that desire, and he divorces her after entering into her, meaning after having intercourse with her, or dies, then she becomes lawful to the first husband with a new contract, a new contract with its conditions considered valid in the Shari'ah.
And if he said to her after divorcing her with the last divorce: “You are in the place of my mother,” this has no effect, even if he intended to forbid her, because she has become a stranger. She has become a stranger, so forbidding her does not constitute the forbidding of zihar. If it is after the last divorce and he says, “You are in the place of my mother,” intending to forbid her, intending to make this a forbidding of her, or says, “You are like the back of my mother,” or “You are forbidden to me,” then this does not apply to her as it would to a wife. However, an expiation for an oath is required, similar to the expiation for forbidding food and drink and the like, because she has become a stranger after the last divorce. If he says to her, “You are forbidden to me,” or “You are like the back of my mother,” after the final divorce, then it is treated as the forbidding of food, clothing, and drink. That is, he makes it lawful for him by the expiation for an oath. The expiation for an oath is sufficient: feeding ten poor people or clothing them. It does not become zihar, because zihar only occurs with women, with wives, as Allah the Exalted said: [Al-Mujadilah: 3]. After the last divorce, she is no longer among the women [in the context of marriage]; she has become a stranger. So his forbidding of her is like the forbidding of clothes, food, and the like, and the expiation for an oath applies. Yes.
The presenter: May Allah reward you with good.