[indicates that she is divorced three times]. Al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, the scholars of opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y), and Malik said something similar; because [the single utterance] entails one divorce, so if it is repeated, it entails three, like the utterance of divorce.

Section: If he says to his wife, 'Divorce yourself,' and intends a number, it is according to what he intended. If he speaks in absolute terms without an intention, she does not own anything but one; because the absolute command encompasses the least of what the name applies to. The ruling is the same if he appoints a stranger as an agent, saying, 'Divorce my wife.' The ruling is according to what we have mentioned. Ahmad said: If he says to his wife, 'Divorce yourself,' and intends three, then she divorces herself three, it is three. If he intended one, it is one. This is because divorce can be one or three, so whichever he intended, he intended by his expression what it admits, even if he did not intend to cover the oath, which is the single one. If she divorces herself, or the agent divorces her during the session or after it, the divorce occurs; because it is an agency (tawkil). The Qadi said: If he says to her, 'Divorce yourself,' it is restricted to the session; because it is a delegation of divorce to her, so it is restricted to the session, like his saying, 'Choose.' We hold that it is an agency in divorce, so it is on the basis of delay (tarakhi), like the agency of a stranger, similar to his saying, 'Your affair is in your hand.' It differs from 'Choose,' for that is an option (takhyir). What he [the Qadi] mentioned is invalidated by his saying, 'Your affair is in your hand.' It is permissible for her to effect the divorce with the explicit wording or with the metonymy, along with the intention. Some of the companions of al-Shafi'i said: It is not for her to effect it with the metonymy; because he delegated it to her with the explicit wording, so it is not valid for her to effect other than what he delegated to her. We hold that he delegated the divorce to her, and she has effected it, so it occurs, just as if she had effected it with the explicit wording. What he mentioned is not correct; for the agency in a thing does not necessitate that its execution must be with the wording of the command from his direction, just as if he said to his agent, 'Sell my house,' it is permissible for him to sell it with the wording of transfer of ownership. If he says to her, 'Divorce three,' and she divorces one, it occurs. Ahmad stated this. Malik said: Nothing occurs; because she did not comply with his command. We hold that she was granted the power to effect three, so she was granted the power to effect one, like the appointed agent, and because if he said, 'I have gifted you these three slaves,' and she said, 'I have accepted one of them,' it would be valid. Thus it is here.