This differs from what I mentioned concerning the schools of Abū Hanīfah and al-Shāfiʿī, namely, the case in which someone swears using a formula that makes divorce binding, such as, “Divorce is binding upon me,” or similar wording. The disagreement within these two schools applies whether the divorce is pronounced with immediate effect, made conditional, or invoked in an oath. There are three opinions within the two schools: is this explicit wording of divorce, an allusive expression, or neither explicit nor allusive, so that no divorce takes effect through it even if he intends divorce? Within Ahmad’s school there are two opinions: whether it is explicit or allusive.

As for swearing an oath invoking divorce, or making divorce conditional with the intention of swearing an oath, other scholars dispute this concerning formulas other than this one.

Thus, anyone who claims that a scholar issuing a fatwa that divorce does not take effect in such a case has opposed scholarly consensus and every position within the four schools has erred and pursued that of which he has no knowledge. Allah Most High says:

“Do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge.”

Rather, the four imams, their followers, and all other imams of comparable standing agree that if a judge rules that divorce does not take effect in such a case, his judgment may not be overturned. If someone qualified to issue fatwas gives this ruling, he is entitled to do so. By agreement of the four imams and other imams of the Muslims, neither he nor anyone who follows his ruling may be censured.

Even if someone were to judge or issue a fatwa according to a tenable opinion outside the positions of the four imams concerning oaths, divorce, or other matters over which disagreement among Muslim scholars is established, he would be entitled to do so, provided that the opinion contradicts neither the Quran nor the Sunnah nor their import, and that the judge or mufti supports it with evidence recognized by Islamic law, such as evidence from the Quran and Sunnah.