Is an oath of divorce invalidated if the intention was to threaten, and an expiation is made for it, or does it remain valid? And what if the forbidden act is repeated before expiation?

If a man makes his wife's divorce contingent upon an action, then according to the majority of scholars, divorce occurs when that action takes place, and this is the preferred view. However, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah holds that an expiation for a broken oath (kaffarat yameen) becomes obligatory if the husband did not intend divorce.

If the wife has performed the action upon which the divorce was contingent, then according to the majority of scholars, divorce occurs, and an expiation for a broken oath is of no avail. The divorce does not recur with the repetition of the action if the wording of the oath does not imply repetition (such as "if").

According to the view that divorce occurs, the husband may take his wife back (raj'a) before her 'iddah expires, provided this divorce does not complete the three divorces.

As for the opinion of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, a single expiation for a broken oath becomes obligatory if the husband intended to threaten or prevent, whether the wife repeated the action or not, because the oath is dissolved upon the first breach.