Abū Bakr, however, did not defer to them in matters for which there was no (1) explicit text from Allah and His Messenger. Rather, once that became clear to him, he paid no heed to those who disagreed with him. Do you not see that when [‘Umar] (2) disputed with him over fighting the apostates out of concern for the Muslims, and others disputed with him over fighting those who withheld zakat and dispatching Usāmah’s army, he did not yield to them? Instead, he explained to them how the text supported what he had done.

As for particular matters that need not be explicitly prescribed in the texts, but are intended to serve the common good, he is no greater in these matters than the prophets.

Fifth: These words of Abū Bakr only increased his honour and esteem among the Muslim community. After its Prophet, the community revered no one as it revered al-Siddīq, nor obeyed anyone as it obeyed him, without his offering them inducements or intimidating them with threats. Rather, those who had pledged allegiance to the Messenger beneath the tree willingly pledged allegiance to him, acknowledging his merit and his rightful claim. Moreover, we know of no instance during his rule in which they differed over a single matter of their religion [except] (3) that he resolved the disagreement through his explanations to them and their consulting him. This is something in which no one else shares his distinction.

‘Umar came closest to him in this respect, followed by ‘Uthmān.

As for ‘Alī, he fought them and they fought him (4); neither did he set them right, nor did they set him right. Which of the two leaders, then, more fully achieved the purpose of leadership? And which of the two leaders upheld the religion and brought the apostates back,