Shaykh Albaani said, “…If some person, [let’s say he’s called] Zaid, makes a mistake then it is upon us [the Salafis] to clarify his mistake to him in the best manner and not the worst manner [with harshness or rudeness], and all of those who differ [with each other, should] tread this path, because we all claim that we are Salafis, that we follow the guidance, manhaj and behaviour that the Salaf as-Saalih [righteous predecessors] were upon. As we know that they differed in many issues but these differences [of opinion] were never a cause for them to split or for them to treat each other as enemies.

There are some statements which have been authentically reported from some of the Salaf as-Saalih which if today someone were to mistakenly adopt, because it has no angle from which it is correct, a great outcry would arise against him. But such a huge furore did not arise against that Companion who in a certain opinion or ruling, took an unsual stance which, was completely different from the ruling [on that particular matter] which the other [Companions] had adopted.

Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab, may Allah the Most High be pleased with him, used to prohibit performing the tamattu type of Hajj [Umrah with Hajj] and after him Uthmaan Ibn Affaan, may Allah be pleased with him, followed him in this prohibition. When Uthmaan performed Hajj during his caliphate he also prohibited the pilgrims from performing the tamattu type of Hajj.

So Ali Ibn Abi Taalib, may Allah the Most High be pleased with him, stood in his face, an individual from the Ummah, and he would be the Khalifah after him, [he stood in his face and] said to him, “Why do you prohibit something which we did in the time of Allah’s Messenger” [and then he announced the talbiyyah for the tamattu type of Hajj] “Here I am, O Allah, performing Umrah with Hajj!”

That person [i.e., Uthmaan] was prohibiting performing the Umrah with Hajj [called Hajj tamattu] and this person [i.e., Ali ibn Abi Taalib] is declaring [his intention to do it] in his face, [saying] that the Sunnah is like this.

Despite [Ali’s actions] the people did not split around them [Ali and Uthmaan], on the contrary they continued to respect each one’s opinion, and they [the people] may have leaned towards the Khalifah’s opinion [more than the other], because he was the Khalifah of the Muslims etc, [but] why [did the people not split into two different groups?]

Because when a dispute breaks out between the scholars it is fitting that it remains confined to them and that the dispute’s infection is not transmitted to the population [the students of knowledge and the laymen and women], because the people do not have the self control, the mental strenght and the mind to prevent/resist them from going to extremes in the dispute [which often leads to them boycotting and warning against each other or splitting into different groups ect].

Similarly, Uthmaan ibn Affaan used to hold the opinion that if a man has intercourse with his wife but does not emit any semen then it is enough for him to perform wudoo instead of ghusl, although this contradicts the authentic, clear hadith, ‘When the circumcised part meets the circumcised part ghusl becomes obligatory whether there is ejaculation or not.’

Despite this, no fitnah and no discord occurred between him and for example, Aaishah who is the one who narrated the hadith opposing Uthmaan’s statement, may Allah be pleased with her.

There are many examples…of this and the intent [here] is just to give an example and to bring [what I am trying to convey] closer, [which is the Companions differed but kept their brotherhood, unity and friendship they didn’t become enemies with hostility and animosity between themselves]…”

Ref: Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 799

Taken from ahlusunnahwaljamaah.com