After the death of the Prophet (saw), the Muslims selected Abu Bakr (ra) as the Khaleefah. One of the first issues he faced was confusion on the part of Fatimah Umm Hasan (ra), daughter of the Prophet (saw), inheriting a piece of land, which the Prophet (saw) owned. Abu Bakr (ra) quoted the following Hadith, which resolved the matter.

“We (Prophet‟s) do not leave things for inheritance. Whatever we leave is charity.” (Bukhari & Muslim).

She then suggested to Abu Bakr (ra), letting her supervise the property and to distribute it the way the Prophet (saw) used to do. Abu Bakr (ra) refused saying, “I am not going to quit doing anything the Messenger (saw) used to do.” (Bukhari)

In another narration, Abu Bakr (ra) said, “I am in charge after the Messenger (saw).” Thus Abu Bakr (ra) pointed out to Fatimah Umm Hasan (ra) that if he (ra) gave her this authority then what is the point of having a Khaleefah. Moreover, it was not up to her to act on behalf of the Khaleefah.

At that time Abu Bakr (ra) gathered the Sahabah (ra) and asked them, where are you? Why are you leaving me? (Abu Bakr (ra) was referring to the Sahabah (ra) leaving for the newly liberated lands). If you want me to be the Khaleefah you cannot just appoint me and depart. Thus, Abu Bakr (ra) maintained this group of Sahabah (ra) with him (ra).

During this era, with the death of the Prophet (saw), the Sahabah (ra) began performing Ijtihad for problems that arose which were not explicitly expressed in the Qur‟an and Sunnah. The Sahabah (ra) compiled the Qur‟an, and many of them had already committed the whole Qur‟an to memory. The Ayah of the Qur‟an was also written on stones, tree barks, or pieces of leather, and were scattered amongst the Sahabah (ra) in general.

Additionally, most of the Hadith were not documented; rather they had been committed to memory. No one single person had memorised the entire Sunnah as they had memorised the entire Qur‟an. Nonetheless, the Qur‟an the Sunnah together served as the reference point for the solutions to the problems that the Sahabah (ra) faced as a whole. After a while they found that not every single person was capable of understanding Islam, and so they began a program of educating those Muslims who were incapable.

At the time of the death of the Prophet (saw), the Sahabah (ra) numbered in the thousands, however only about seven to ten of them used to give Fatwa more than the others, and were considered practical Fuqahaa, or people who were able to give the Islamic rule in practical, day to day problems. Included in this group were Umar, Ali, Ibn Umar, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas‟ood, Zayd bin Thabit, and Aisha bint Abu Bakr (ra). In their endeavour to determine the Hukm Shar‟i rules for problems, the Sahabah (ra) adhered to the Qur‟an and Sunnah; however, they still arrived at varying and different opinions.

For example, in the issue of divorce, Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar bin Al-Khattab (ra) had different opinions. Umar (ra) was of the opinion that if a man says to his wife “I have divorced you” three times in one sitting, then the man would have divorced her three times and could not remarry the woman until she married and was divorced by someone else. While Abu Bakr (ra) was of the opinion that this would result in only one divorce.

In another example, Abu Bakr (ra) used to distribute the spoils of war equally amongst the Sahabah (ra). When Umar (ra) became the Khaleefah, he did not give those who became Muslim recently and who had fought against the Prophet (saw) in the early wars, like Khalid bin Al-Walid (ra), as much as he gave to those who had accompanied the Prophet (saw) in those earlier wars.

The differences amongst the Sahabah (ra) were not only limited to the details of the Hukm Shar‟i, they also had differences in certain branches of the „Aqeedah.

However, these differences of opinions may exist in the branches of the „Aqeedah, mainly due to linguistic structure of the Arabic language. Whereas, in the core of the „Aqeedah there is only one correct understanding. For example, in an issue related to the „Aqeedah there is a difference of opinion regarding Isra‟, Allah (swt) says; “Glory be to He who took his „Abd on the Night Journey (Isra) from Masjid Al- Haram to Masjid Al-Aqsaa...” (TMQ al-Isra: 1)

Most of the Sahabah (ra) were of the opinion that the physical body of the Prophet (saw) made the night journey or the Isra. Aisha bint Abu Bakr (ra) was of the opinion that the physical body of the Prophet (saw) did not make the journey and that only his (saw) soul made it. Aisha bint Abu Bakr‟s (ra) justification was that he (saw) was not missed and no one remembers his (saw) body leaving.

Another example is where Aisha bint Abu Bakr (ra) was told by a Sahabi (ra) that the deceased person would be punished because of the wailing and loud crying, performed by his family. Aisha bint Abu Bakr (ra) rejected this claim because she understood that it contradicted the Ayah that says:

“No-one will bear the burden of another...” (TMQ Al-Isra: 15)

Imam Baghawi in his book “The Lights of the Sunnah” remarked that Abu Bakr (ra) used to look to the Book of Allah (swt) to solve his problems. If he couldn‟t find a solution there, he would ask some of the Fuqahaa among the Sahabah (ra) for their Ijtihad in the particular issue. Imam Baghawi goes on to say that Umar (ra) used to consult the Sahabah (ra) even though he was himself a well-known Faqih.

Even though the Sahabah (ra) disagreed, their disagreement was well within the guideline of understanding the text and this was considered normal. Imam Muhammad Abu Zahrah, while discussing the era of the Sahabah (ra), said that it is important to remove two misconceptions.

A. The first is that some people said that the Sahabah (ra) used to disregard the authentic Hadith and based their judgments on their mind or own rational thinking. Imam Zahrah said that it should be understood that none of the Sahabah (ra) left the text for their own rational opinion; rather their opinions were based and influenced entirely by the texts. He uses an example from the Khaleefah Umar bin Al Khattab (ra), when he delayed cutting off the hand of the thief. Some people use this instance as an example that Umar (ra) did this solely due to his own thinking.

This claim is incorrect, since there is a Hadith narrated by Ali (ra) where the Prophet (saw) said: “Don‟t implement the Hudood in the cases of doubt”. There is also another Hadith narrated from Makhul (ra) in which the Prophet (saw) stated:

“There is no cutting in a famine”. And Madinah was in fact experiencing a famine at the instance when Umar (ra) postponed implementing the Hadd.

B. Some tried to classify the Sahabah (ra) into two groups: Those who adhered strictly to the traditions (Ahlel-Hadith), and those who did not adhere to texts, called Ahlel-Ra‟ee. They claim that the first group did this because they were Classical Traditionalists, while the second group was Revivalists.

This claim is incorrect, since both Ahlel-Hadith and Ahlel-Ra‟ee adhered to the text. Imam Zahrah cited the example, which they use, regarding the stray animals in the State. The Prophet (saw) said to leave them and they will reach their owner. But Umar (ra) acted differently in this regard. He put them in one place and allowed the owner to identify them and take them.

It should be clear that Umar‟s action was in line with the Prophet‟s (saw), in that the objective was to allow the wandering animals to reach their owner. The Prophet‟s (saw) style or means in solving the problem was to allow the animals to wander.

However, during Umar‟s (ra) time, when the State had expanded to the areas of Sham and North Africa, the tactic of putting the animals in one location was used to solve the same problem of returning the stray animals to their owners, and there is no conflict. So what Umar (ra) did was part of his responsibility, which requires adopting some administrative procedures. These administrative decisions can be changed.

It should be understood that there is a difference between an administrative order and a legislative order. Ordering a person to do his Salah if he made a mistake is a legal order, while tying up a wandering camel is an administrative order.

The text sometimes could be understood in different ways due to the structure of the Ayah, and / or the structure of the Arabic language. For example, Allah (swt) says:

“The divorced woman should wait for three periods (Quru)” (TMQ Al-Baqarah: 228)

The word Quru‟ in the Arabic language can mean the time when the woman begins her menstruation, or the post menstruation period. The difference between three cycles beginning with the purity period is about 7 to 15 days.

Sometimes a Sahabi would issue a Fatwa without having heard of a Hadith related to that issue, and which another Sahabi knew. However, these cases were usually resolved later.

How they viewed the texts and the methodology of interpretation. An example deals with the inheritance of the grandfather. Abu Bakr (ra) said that if one dies leaving a father, brothers, a wife and children, the presence of the father, who is considered the grandfather of the deceased person‟s children, would prevent other brothers from inheriting the wealth. Umar (ra) said that he would give the brothers and the grandfather the same amount after discussing this issue with Zayd bin Thabit (ra) who was the foremost Sahabi in the area of inheritance.