When they considered it established that the leading Companions had enforced three divorces pronounced together, they said: “They would only enforce this if Islamic law required it.” Some held that this divorce was binding and that there was consensus on the matter, because they knew of no established disagreement—especially since the contrary view had become associated with the Shia, who have never differed from Ahl al-Sunnah on the basis of truth.

Those advancing the argument said: “The view held by some Shia and a group of speculative theologians—that pronouncing three divorces together has no effect whatsoever—is not known to have been held by anyone among the early generations. Rather, consensus had already been established regarding part of it. The question is only whether one divorce is binding or three take effect. Disagreement among the early generations on this point is established and cannot be dismissed.

“Those who make this a binding rule of Islamic law for the Muslim community have no evidence from the Quran, the Sunnah, or consensus that must be followed. Some have indeed argued for it from the Quran, others from the Sunnah, and others from consensus; some have invoked two or more of these grounds. Their opponent, however, demonstrates that all these arguments are weak, that the Quran, the Sunnah, and sound reasoning indicate that it is not binding, and that there is no consensus on the matter. Indeed, the authentic reports from the Companions who enforced three divorces pronounced together indicate that they did not regard this as a binding rule prescribed by the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, for his community, as he prescribed that a woman becomes forbidden to her husband after the third divorce. Rather, they exercised their independent judgment in imposing this as a punishment when the practice became widespread and people would not desist from it.”