Al-Bukhārī also narrated in his Sahīh that Ibn ‘Abbās said:

“The polytheists fell into two categories in relation to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the believers: those at war, whom he fought and who fought him, and those under treaty, whom he did not fight and who did not fight him. When a woman emigrated from among those at war, no marriage proposal was made to her until she had menstruated and become pure. Once she became pure, she was permitted to marry. If her husband emigrated before she married, she was returned to him. If a male or female slave belonging to them emigrated, they became free and enjoyed the same rights as the emigrants.”

Then, regarding those under treaty, an account similar to Mujāhid’s report was mentioned: “If a male or female slave belonging to the polytheists under treaty emigrated, they were not returned, but their owners were reimbursed their value.”

This hadith establishes that a woman who emigrated from a territory at war was permitted to marry once she had menstruated and become pure. She was therefore required only to establish that she was not pregnant by waiting for one menstrual period, not three menstrual periods. Her waiting period followed intercourse with a husband, but her marriage to him had ended through her acceptance of Islam. This shows that separation resulting from a difference in religion—such as when a disbeliever’s wife accepts Islam—requires only one menstrual period to establish that she is not pregnant. Such a separation is an annulment, not a divorce.

This undermines the general claim that every separation during the spouses’ lifetimes, after consummation, requires a waiting period of three menstrual periods. The woman in this case is a free Muslim woman, although her waiting period follows intercourse with a disbeliever.