What is the ruling on prohibiting one's wife to oneself via a mobile message with the wording: "You are forbidden to me, and you shall not go out for any errand"? And does divorce occur if the husband says: "If you do not get my right from her and restore my dignity, then you are divorced, divorced," if he was the one who initiated the insult?

Firstly: Prohibiting one's wife depends on the husband's intention. If he intended divorce, then it is a divorce. If he intended ẓihār (a pre-Islamic form of divorce by likening one's wife to a forbidden female relative), then it becomes ẓihār. If he intended an oath, or intended nothing, then an expiation for an oath becomes binding upon him.

Secondly: The husband's statement to his wife: "Divorced, divorced, if you do not restore my right and my dignity" results in a divorce if the wife does not fulfill the condition upon which it was suspended. The breach of a suspended oath that is not time-bound occurs after the impossibility of fulfilling it, such as by death or similar circumstances. If someone other than the wife restores the right, then the divorce depends on the husband's intention. If he intended the restoration of his right regardless of who restores it, then no divorce occurs. But if he intended that the wife herself be the one to restore it, then the act of someone else does not fulfill the condition.

Thirdly: The husband's statement to his wife: "Divorced, divorced" results in one divorce, unless he intended a repetition of divorces, in which case two divorces occur.

Fourthly: If the husband was the one who initiated the insult against the wife's relative, then he is the wrongdoer. He has no right to demand that she take responsibility for responding on his behalf or to link that to divorce. Forgiveness is better.

Fifthly: Muslims should preserve brotherhood and family ties. Marriage is a strong bond that should not be weakened by words of divorce for the slightest reason.