More specifically, there is his statement:

“Follow the example of the two who come after me: Abū Bakr and Umar.”

Thus, he commanded that these two be followed as examples, while commanding adherence to the Sunnah of the rightly guided caliphs. This distinguishes Abū Bakr and Umar in two respects. First, “Sunnah” refers to what they established as a practice for the people, whereas following their “example” also includes following them in actions they did not establish as a Sunnah. Second, he attributed the Sunnah to the caliphs, not to each of them individually. It might therefore be said that this concerns what they agreed upon, rather than what some of them adopted individually. Following their example, however, specifically means following each of these two. This second argument is open to question.

It may be understood from this that there is no command to follow Uthmān and Alī in those exercises of independent judgment in which Abū Bakr and Umar had previously adopted a better course—whose superiority is supported by the scriptural texts and the agreement of the majority of the Muslim community—and which were prompted by the community’s division. Such actions do not belong to the Sunnah of the caliphs.

Abū Bakr and Umar governed the community through incentives and deterrence, and remained free of interpretive judgments concerning bloodshed and wealth. Uthmān, may Allah be pleased with him, placed greater emphasis on incentives and acted on interpretive judgments concerning wealth. Alī placed greater emphasis on deterrence and acted on interpretive judgments concerning bloodshed. Abū Bakr and Umar were wholly detached from wealth and leadership. Uthmān was wholly detached from leadership, and Alī was wholly detached from wealth.