is dearer to him than his wealth?

If it is said, “The second husband has acquired a right over her,” the answer is: the first husband’s right precedes that of the second, and the grounds upon which the second became entitled to have her as his wife have proved invalid. What, then, requires that the second husband’s right be respected rather than the first husband’s?

The correct ruling, therefore, is that delivered by the Commander of the Faithful, ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb. If the Companions are shown to be correct in difficult questions such as these, on which scholars such as Abū Hanīfa, Mālik, and al-Shāfiʿī disagreed with them, then they are all the more likely to be correct on matters in which these scholars agreed with them.

I have examined as many questions of this kind as Allah has willed, and I have found the Companions to possess the greatest understanding of the religion and the greatest knowledge in this community. This may be seen in questions concerning oaths involving vows, manumission, divorce, and other matters, as well as questions concerning divorce made contingent upon conditions, and similar issues. In my writings, I have explained that the views transmitted from the Companions on these matters are the soundest, both as legal rulings and in terms of analogical reasoning. They are supported by the Quran and the Sunnah, as well as by clear analogy. Every other view is inconsistent in its analogical reasoning and contrary to the scriptural texts.

The same applies to other questions, such as that concerning the son of a woman who has undergone mutual imprecation, and that concerning an apostate’s inheritance. In as many questions as Allah has willed, I have found no views better than those transmitted from the Companions.