Does Ibn Hazm consider a conditional divorce related to a past event to be an irrevocable divorce, and are there those who do not consider it so? And is acting upon Ibn Hazm's view on this matter considered following the dispensations (rukhsa) of the madhhabs? And what is the authenticity of attributing the statement to Al-Awza'i that whoever follows the dispensations of the madhhabs has committed kufr, and what type of kufr is this?

If the intention behind suspending a divorce on something in the past is the husband's statement: "If you did such and such, then you are divorced," we have not found any statement by Ibn Hazm specifically concerning this. However, what is known about him is that he does not consider a divorce to be valid unless it is explicitly and immediately pronounced, not contingent upon a condition or attribute. Ibn Hazm said: "Whoever divorces for a fixed term, or issues his divorce or manumission in the manner of an oath, has transgressed the limits of Allah Almighty, and none of that is a valid divorce." We do not know of anyone other than Ibn Hazm who says that a divorce suspended on something that occurred in the past does not take effect. It is not permissible to imitate Ibn Hazm in his view that a suspended divorce intended as a divorce does not take effect. If someone imitates a scholar in a disputed matter and is content with his opinion, then there is no harm in that. However, if he is following his whims or picking and choosing dispensations, then he is not permitted to do so. As for Al-Awza'i's statement, "Whoever pursues the dispensations of scholars becomes a heretic," it is transmitted in some books, and what is meant by it – and Allah knows best – is that whoever pursues the mistakes of scholars and picks and chooses dispensations in accordance with his whims, this leads him to weakness and corruption in his religion.