Does prohibition and divorce take effect, or is expiation obligatory for the wife if she swore to her husband that she would be forbidden to him and divorced by three if she touched his phones and searched them, and then she did so?

The majority of scholars hold that the suspension of divorce (ta'liq al-talaq) and the occurrence of three divorces upon uttering their words result in a divorce, and this is the prevailing fatwa. However, Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is of the view that if swearing by divorce is not intended to suspend it but merely to threaten, then its ruling is that of an oath, and an expiation for an oath (kaffarat yameen) becomes obligatory, and no divorce occurs thereby. If divorce is intended, then uttering the word "three" results in a single divorce.

As for swearing by the unlawfulness of the wife (tahreem al-zawjah), scholars have differed regarding it. Some have interpreted it as zihar (a pre-Islamic form of divorce akin to likening one's wife to one's mother), some have considered it a divorce, others an oath, and some have differentiated based on whether divorce, zihar, or an oath was intended. This last view is the prevailing fatwa.

Based on the prevailing fatwa, the wife has become irrevocably separated from her husband (baynunah kubra). If he intended by the unlawfulness an oath, then an expiation for an oath is obligatory upon him. However, according to Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah's opinion, if the husband did not intend divorce or zihar, then neither divorce nor zihar occurs, and he is obligated to offer an expiation for an oath.

Given the scholarly disagreement on this matter, it is advisable to present it to reliable scholars.