You are divorced two halves of a divorce,' two divorces occur; for two halves of a thing constitute the whole, so it is as if he said: 'You are divorced two divorces.' If he says: 'You are divorced half of three divorces,' she becomes divorced by two divorces; for half of them is one divorce and a half, then the half is completed, so they become two divorces.

Section: If he says: 'You are divorced a half, a third, and a sixth of a divorce,' one divorce occurs; for these are parts of a divorce. If he says: 'You are divorced half of a divorce, a third of a divorce, and a sixth of a divorce,' our companions said: Three occur; because he conjoined a part of a divorce to a part of a divorce, so its manifest meaning is that they are distinct divorces. Furthermore, if the second were the same as the first, he would have brought it with the definite article (lam al-ta'rif), saying: 'A third of the divorce and a sixth of the divorce.' Indeed, the scholars of Arabic grammar have said: If a term is mentioned, then repeated indefinitely (nakiran), the second is other than the first; but if it is repeated definitely (mu'arrafan) with alif and lam, the second is the same as the first, as in His, the Almighty's, saying: {For indeed, with hardship [comes] ease. Indeed, with hardship [comes] ease.} The second 'hardship' is the first, because it was repeated definitely; and the second 'ease' is other than the first, because it was repeated indefinitely. Hence it is said: 'A hardship will never overcome two eases.' It is also said: If he intended the first by the second, he would have referred to it with a pronoun; because that is more appropriate. If he says: 'You are divorced half of a divorce, a third of a divorce, a sixth of a divorce,' she is divorced by one divorce; because he did not conjoin them with the conjunctive particle 'wa' (and), which indicates that these parts are from one, non-distinct divorce. Also, because here the second becomes a substitute (badal) for the first, and the third for the second, and a substitute is the same as that for which it is substituted or a part of it, so it does not necessitate distinctness. Based on this reasoning, if he said: 'You are divorced a divorce, half of a divorce,' or 'a divorce, a divorce,' she is only divorced by one divorce. If he says: 'You are divorced a half, a third, and a sixth,' only one divorce occurs; because these are parts of a divorce, unless he intended a part from each divorce, in which case she is divorced three times. If he says: 'You are divorced a half, a third, and a quarter,' she is divorced by two divorces; for he adds to the divorce a half of a sixth, then it is completed. If he intended a part from each divorce, she is divorced three times. If he says: 'You are a divorce,' or 'You are half of a divorce,' or 'You are half of a divorce'