Ash-Shofi'iy usul al-fiqh ilmiga asos soldi, va bu ilm ortidan keladigan ulamo va fuqaholar tomonidan tekshirish va o'rganish orqali qabul qilindi. Shunda ular unga qo'shimcha qildilar va uning ichidagi bir qator masalalarni qayta ko'rib chiqdilar, natijada u izchil, aniq va o'ziga xos xususiyatlari bilan ajralib turadigan ilmga aylandi. Buning sababi shundaki, Imom Ash-Shofi'iy ushbu olijanob ilm uchun mustahkam poydevorni qat'iy qilib qo'ygan edi.

Ash-Shaafi’iy founded the ‘Ilm of Usool ul-Fiqh and this was received (well) by the ‘Ulamaa and Fuqahaa, who followed him, through examination and study. So they added to it and revised a number of issues within it until it became an ‘Ilm that was coherent, clear and distinguished in its features, due to the firm foundation that Al-Imaam Ash-Shaafi’iy laid down solidly for this noble knowledge.

Ash-Shofi'iy usul al-fiqh ilmini to'liq darajaga yetkaza olmadi, shuning uchun uning boshlagan binosini tugallash uchun boshqalar keldi. Ular orasida uning ortidan borib, izoh va batafsil bayon berganlar ham bor edi; yangi qoidalar qo'shganlar ham, ba'zi qoidalar yuzasidan unga e'tiroz bildirib, uning fikriga qarshi chiqqanlar ham bor edi.

Ash-Shaafi’iy did not reach the point of completion in respect to Usool ul-Fiqh and so others came to complete the building that he had begun. There were from amongst them those who followed him providing explanation and elaboration, there were also those who came adding new principles whilst others came critiquing and disagreeing with him in respect to some of the Qawaa’id (principles).

Ash-Shafi’iydan keyingi bu ilmiy yo‘nalishlar Usul al-fiqhning muayyan masalalari bilan cheklangan edi va ular Usul al-fiqhning butunligini qamrab olmas edi. Ular sharh, qo‘shimcha qilish va ixtilof jihatidan ayrim mavzular bilan cheklangan edi.

These areas of study after Ash-Shafi’iy were restricted to specific subjects in Usool ul-Fiqh and they did not deal with Usool ul-Fiqh as a whole. They were restricted to subjects in respect to explanation, addition and disagreement.

Ash-Shofeʼiyning "Ar-Risola" asaridagi usul al-fiqh bo‘yicha eng mashhur sharhlari quyidagilar edi:

The most prominent explanations (Shurooh) of Ash-Shaafi’iy’s Risaalah in Usool ul-Fiqh were:

1) Abu Bakr Muhammad As-Seerfiy (vafot etgan yili: 330 hijriy) tomonidan yozilgan sharh (izoh), u "Dalo'il al-I'lom" deb nomlangan.

1) The Sharh (explanation) of Abu Bakr Muhammad As-Seerfiy who passed away in the year 330 AH and it was called: ‘Dalaa’il Al-I’laam’.

2) Muhammad Al-Qaffaal Ash-Shaashiyning vafot etgan yili 365 hijriy bo‘lgan sharhi.

2) The Sharh of Muhammad Al-Qaffaal Ash-Shaashii who passed away in the year 365 AH.

3) Abu Muhammad Abdulloh ibn Yusuf al-Juvayniy vafot etgan 438 hijriy yilda yozgan sharhi.

3) The Sharh of Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Yousuf Al-Juwainiy who passed away in the year 438 AH.

Ash-Shofi'iydan keyin Usul al-fiqhning masoil (masalalar) bo'yicha yozgan eng dastlabki kishilar orasida:

From the earliest of those who wrote in Masaa’il (issues) of Usool ul-Fiqh after Ash-Shaafi’iy were:

1) Imom Ahmad ibn Hanbal o'zining "Ta'at ar-Rasul" kitobida, "An-Nosix va-l-mansux" kitobida va "Al-'Ilal" kitobida.

1) Al-Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his book: ‘Taa’at Ar-Rasool’, the book: ‘An-Naasikh Wa-l-Mansookh’ and the book: ‘Al-‘Ilal’.

2) Doʻud Azh-Zhohiriy "Ibtol al-qiyos" va "Al-xusus va-l-umum" kitoblarida, boshqalar qatori. Uning yozganlarining koʻp qismi Shofi'iyning usuliga qilingan tanqid edi.

2) Daawud Azh-Zhaahiriy in the book: ‘Ibtaal Al-Qiyaas’ and the book: ‘Al-Khusoos Wa-l-‘Umoom’ amongst others. Most of what he wrote was a critique of the Usool of Ash-Shaafi’iy.

3) Muhammad at-Tirmiziy, 255-yilda vafot etgan, "Ithbot al-‘ilal ash-shar‘iyya" kitobida.

3) Muhammad At-Tirmidhi who passed away in the year 255 in the book: ‘Ithbaat Al-‘Ilal Ash-Shar’iyah’.

Ko‘pchilik bu kitoblar yo‘qolib ketgan, ularning sarlavhalari va nomlaridan ayon bo‘ladiki, ular ixtilof yoki farqli qarashlar masalalarini yoritishga bag‘ishlangan bo‘lgan: yo Ash-Shofi‘iy tarafida bo‘lib, unga qarshi chiqqanlarga raddiya sifatida yozilgan, yoki muallifning o‘z mazhabini isbotlash va Ash-Shofi‘iy mazhabiga qarshi raddiya sifatida yozilgan.

Most of these books were lost and it is clear to us from their headings and titles that they were restricted to dealing with issues of disagreement or difference; either in support of Ash-Shaafi’iy and as a rebuttal to those who disagreed with him, or they were to establish the Madh’hab of the writer and as a rebuttal in opposition to the Madh’hab of Ash-Shaafi’iy.