Points derived from these hadiths

1 – Ḥadith number (930) shows that when the three divorces are pronounced in a single utterance, they are counted only as one divorce. If it is not the husband’s final allotment of three, he retains the right to take his wife back. This ḥadith is the chief proof for those who hold this position.

2 – Ḥadith number (931) indicates that three divorces unaccompanied by a return or a new marriage constitute an unlawful, innovated form of divorce (ṭalāq bidʿah).

3 – It further indicates that tampering with the rulings of Allah and transgressing His limits ranks among the major sins, for the Prophet ﷺ would not become angry except over a grave act of disobedience.

4 – Tampering with the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger is forbidden—even after his ﷺ passing—and he spoke in such terms only out of surprise at how swiftly circumstances had changed.

5 – As for ḥadith number (932), the versions reported by Abū Dāwūd and Aḥmad agree with ḥadith (930): the triple divorce uttered at once counts as a single divorce, and the husband may take his wife back so long as it is not his final allowable divorce.

6 – The second report in Abū Dāwūd shows that a divorce declared with the formula al-batta (“irrevocably”) is governed by the husband’s intent: if he meant three, it counts as three; if he meant one, it is a single revocable divorce.

7 – Shaykh Bakhīt al-Muṭīʿī said that Rukānah divorced his wife with the wording al-batta. This is a euphemism for divorce: it counts as one if he intended one and as three if he intended three.

8 – The wording “he divorced her al-batta” in the ḥadith of Rukānah is used by the majority as evidence that pronouncing three divorces in a single phrase constitutes an irrevocable, major separation (baynūnah kubrā); there is no right of return unless she first marries another husband.

Scholarly disagreement

The scholars differed regarding one who pronounces the three divorces all at once, or pronounces them