Sahaba - The Blessed

find a solution in the Qur’ân al-kerîm, He would make a decision
in accordance with a hadîth-i-sherîf. When he could not find a
hadîth whereby to reach a decision, he would consult with the
Sahâba, asking them if anyone knew a similar case which the
Messenger of Allah had settled. When a unanimous answer was
obtained, he would make hamd (pay gratitude and praise to
Allâhu ta’âlâ) and then make a decision. When a report was not
given, he would convene the notables of the Sahâba, tell them
the problem, and make a decision in accordance with the
consensus.” Hadrat ’Umar commanded Qâdî Shurayh to follow
the same policy and to make a decision in accordance with his
own ijtihâd when all that process did not bring a solution.
Abdullah ibn Yazîd is quoted as having said, again, in Dârimî:
“When Abdullah ibn Abbâs was asked a question, he would give
an answer agreeable with the words of Hadrat Abû Bakr and
Hadrat ’Umar when he could not derive an answer from the
Qur’ân al-kerîm or from hadîth-i-sherîfs. If he could not extract
a solution from their words, either, he would reach a conclusion
by employing his own ijtihâd and give an answer accordingly.”
According to another narration in Dârimî, Huzayfa said that
giving a fatwâ required knowing the âyats that were mansûkh as
well as those which were nâsikh. [1] When he was asked if there
were any people who knew them, he replied that ’Umar-ubn-ul-
Khattâb was one of them. In a narration written in Dârimî, Ziyâd
bin Jedîr relates: I was talking with Hadrat ’Umar. “What things
are destructive of Islam,” he questioned. With an apology, I
solicited that I would rather hear his definition. He explained,
“Things that will destroy Islam are: Religious authorities’ giving
wrong information (in the name of preaching Islam); hypocrites’
misguiding Muslims by attempting to prove their personal
heresies with the help of âyats and hadîths, (which they
misinterpret); and heretics’ occupying positions that enable them
to make decisions (about important religious matters).”
According to another narration which, again, is reported in
Dârimî, ’Amr bin Meymûn stated, “Two-thirds of knowledge
was gone with ’Umar’s death.” When this was reported to
Ibrâhîm, he said, “’Umar took away with him nine-tenths of it.”
[1] Some âyats invalidated the rules, principles, commandments and
prohibitions in other âyats previous to them. Those revocatory âyats
are called nâsikh, while the ones whose rules they cancel are called
mansûkh.
– 233 –