What is the ruling on intention in an oath of divorce if the one swearing is quick to anger and unaware of what he says at the time of rage, and does a divorce occur if the husband swears by divorce not to do something and then does it, claiming that his intention was for a part of the matter, not the whole of it?

If a husband swears by divorce not to do a specific thing, and then does all of it, claiming he only swore concerning a part of it, he has broken his oath. This is because doing the whole thing includes doing its parts. The majority of scholars hold that breaking the oath necessitates the occurrence of divorce, and he may take his wife back before the 'iddah (definition) expires, unless this divorce completes the third divorce. Ibn Taymiyyah holds that an expiation for breaking an oath (kaffarat yamin (definition)) is required if the husband did not intend divorce. The divorce of an angry person does not occur if his anger is so severe that he is unaware of what he is saying.