What is the ruling on a divorce oath sworn by the husband to his wife that his son would not enter the house, knowing that he was very angry at the time of the oath, and the son returned to the house after reconciliation?

The majority of scholars hold the view that a conditional divorce takes effect upon the fulfillment of the condition, and this is the most preponderant opinion. If the husband swore by divorce that his son would not return home, and the son did return, then divorce has occurred according to the majority of scholars, unless the husband intended a specific period and the son returned after its expiration, in which case there is no breach of his oath. In the event that divorce occurs, the husband can reconcile with his wife before the completion of her iddah (waiting period) if this is not the third divorce. As for the madhhab (school of thought) of Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, the divorce is not effective if the husband did not intend divorce, and he must offer an expiation for breaking an oath (kaffarat yamin) when he breaches it. The divorce of an angry person takes effect unless his anger is so severe that he does not comprehend what he is saying.