Would one be sinful for adopting Ibn Hazm's view regarding the non-occurrence of conditional divorce and the absence of expiation therein, after research and deliberation?

Most scholars are of the view that if a husband makes his wife's divorce conditional upon an event, then if that event occurs, she is divorced, regardless of whether the husband intended to enact the divorce or merely to threaten, emphasize, or prevent something. This is the fatwa we adhere to.

Some scholars, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, are of the opinion that if the husband did not intend to enact a divorce but rather intended to threaten, emphasize, or prevent something, then the divorce does not occur upon the fulfillment of the condition, but rather he is required to pay an expiation for breaking an oath (kaffarat yameen).

As for a conditional divorce where the intention is to enact the divorce, it is undoubtedly effective upon the fulfillment of the condition. Some scholars have reported a consensus on its occurrence.