学者们对于圣门弟子（Sahaabiy）的言论（Qawl）是否具有证据效力（Hujjiyah）存在分歧。他们的分歧并非绝对的，以下是与此相关的一些细节：

The ‘Ulamaa differed in respect to the Hujjiyah (evidential validity) of the Qawl of the Sahaabiy. They did not differ absolutely and the following are some details related to this:

1 – 关于沙里尔（Shar‘iyah）中那些理性无法理解、又没有经文（Nass）依据的事项，圣门弟子（Sahaabiy）的言论被大多数学者（Jumhoor）视为证据（Hujjah），并且有义务依其而行。他们的理由是，圣门弟子必定是从先知穆罕默德ﷺ那里听来的。哈乃斐派（Ahnaaf）举例说明，其中包括信士们的母亲阿伊莎（ra）所传述的一句话：“怀孕在母亲腹中停留的时间不超过两年。”

1 – The Qawl of the Sahaabiy in respect to that which has no text (Nass) for it from the matters of the Shar’iyah that are not understandable by the ‘Aql, was considered to be a Hujjah by the ‘Ulamaa and obligatory to be worked with or utilised in accordance to the view of the Jumhoor (majority). They reason this opinion of theirs by stating that the Sahaabiy must have heard it from the Messenger (saw). The Ahnaaf presented examples of that including that which was narrated from the mother of believers ‘Aa’ishah (ra): “The pregnancy does not remain in the stomach of the mother for more than two years”.

2 ——《圣门弟子的言论》中，若诸圣门弟子就某一言论达成一致，则该言论被视为具有法理效力的证据（Hujjah Shar'iyah），因为它代表了圣门弟子的一致意见（Ijmaa'）。同样，若未知有人持反对意见的圣门弟子的言论，则被视为出自Ijmaa' As-Sukootiy（默许的一致），对于主张Ijmaa' As-Sukootiy的学者而言，它同样是具有法理效力的证据（Hujjah Shar'iyah）。

2 – The Qawl of the Sahaabiy upon which agreement has taking place over it is considered to be a Hujjah Shar’iyah because it represents an Ijmaa’ of the Sahaabah. Similarly, the Qawl of the Sahaabiy for which opposition is not known is regarded to be from the Ijmaa’ As-Sukootiy which also represents a Hujjah Shar’iyah for those who uphold Ijmaa’ As-Sukootiy.

3 – 一位圣门弟子的“圣门弟子之言”(Qawl as-Sahaabiy)，对于像他这样的另一位圣门弟子并不具有约束力。这是因为我们看到，圣门弟子们在各种事务上彼此存在分歧，而其中一人的意见或伊지تهاد(Ijtihaad)并未被要求对其他人具有约束力。

3 – The Qawl of the Sahaabiy is not considered to be binding upon a Sahaabiy like him. That is because we have seen the Sahaabah (rah) differing in matters amongst themselves in the case where the opinion or Ijtihaad of one of them was not made binding upon the other.

4 – 关于某段意见（Ra’y）与 Ijtihaad 的 Sahaabiy 之言：

4 – The Qawl of the Sahaabiy about a Ra’y (opinion) and Ijtihaad:

这里所说的"分歧"发生在哪些情况下？它对后来者是否构成"Hujjah"（证据）呢？

This is in which difference has taken place. Does it represent a Hujjah for those who come after them or not?

以下是学者们对此问题的观点：

The following are the opinions of the ‘Ulamaa in respect to that:

A – 部分学者认为，源于个人见解（Ra’y）和独立判断（Ijtihaad）的圣门弟子（Sahaabiy）的观点可以作为证据（Hujjah），其中包括伊玛目马立克及其追随者、哈乃斐学派的大多数学者，以及拉齐（Ar-Raaziy）和沙特比（Ash-Shaatibiy）。

A – The opinion of the Sahaabiy emanating from a Ra’y and Ijtihaad was considered by some of the ‘Ulamaa as a Hujjah and this included Al-Imaam Maalik, his followers and the majority of the Ahnaaf in addition to Ar-Raaziy and Ash-Shaatibiy.

持此观点者以与“圣门弟子的共识”（Ijmaa' As-Sahaabah）之可据性（Hujjiyah）相关的证据来支持其观点。其中包括真主至高者的话：

Those who held this view used the Adillah (evidences) related to the Hujjiyah (legal validity) of Ijmaa’ As-Sahaabah to support it. This included the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

B – 至于穆尔太齐赖派、部分辩士（Mutakallimeen）、沙斐仪（Ash-Shaafi’iy）、艾哈迈德·本·罕百勒（Ahmad Bin Hanbal）、阿玛迪（Al-Aamadiy）和沙WK尼（Ash-Shawkaaniy），他们认为圣门弟子的主张（Madh’hab）不能作为具有法律效力的证据（Daleel）。

B – As for the Mu’tazilah, some of the Mutakallimeen, Ash-Shaafi’iy, Ahmad Bin Hanbal, Al-Aamadiy and Ash-Shawkaaniy, then they held that the Madh’hab of the Sahaabiy is not legally valid as a Daleel.

他们以若干证据支持其论点，其中包括：圣门弟子（Sahaabiy）与其他任何穆扎希德（Mujtahid）一样，也是穆扎希德，因此他可能正确，也可能犯错。这样一个人的意见不具有约束力。至于《古兰经》经文和圣训中对圣门弟子的赞誉与称颂，它们所证明的是他们集体共识（Ijmaa'）的可信性（Hujjiyah），而不是证明他们中某一个人的意见及其学说（Madh'hab，即归于其名下的一系列观点）的可信性。

They used evidences for their argument which included that the Sahaabiy is a Mujtahid just like any other Mujtahid where it is possible for him to be right or make an error. The opinion of the one like this cannot be binding and as for the praise and commendation of the Sahaabah that has been mentioned in the Aayaat and the Ahaadeeth then they represent a Daleel for the Hujjiyah of their Ijmaa’ (consensus) and not a Daleel for the Hujjiyah of the opinion of one from amongst them and his Madh’hab (i.e. host of opinions attributed to him).

夏菲仪在其著作《Al-Umm》中说：“如果经文和逊奈中没有相关的依据，我们就会转向圣门弟子（愿真主喜悦他们）的言论，或是其中某一位的言论。然后是阿布·伯克尔、欧麦尔或奥斯曼的观点，此时我们会更倾向于或更喜欢模仿（Taqleed）。这是指，如果我们在分歧中找不到能指引到最接近《古兰经》和逊奈的那一方的依据，从而去遵循那个带有明确含义（Dalaalah）的观点。”

Ash-Shaafi’iy said in his book ‘Al-Umm’: “If it is not within the Kitaab and the Sunnah, we have gone to the statements of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) or one from amongst them. Then it was to the opinion of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar or ‘Uthmaan when Taqleed has become most preferred or likable to us. That is if we have not found an indication in the difference that guides to the closest difference from the Kitaab and the Sunnah in order to follow the opinion that has alongside it an indicated meaning (Dalaalah)”.

这里阿什-沙菲仪的话表明，他以《古兰经》和逊奈为依据，其次是圣门弟子一致同意的意见（公议，Ijmaa'）。至于圣门弟子意见有分歧的情况，他则从他们的各种见解中选取与《古兰经》和逊奈联系最紧密的那一种。如果其中最有力的意见并不明显，他就采取正确引导的伊玛目们所遵行的那一种。

The speech of Ash-Shaafi’iy here indicates that he takes by way of the Kitaab and the Sunnah and then what the Sahaabah have held a consensus upon (Ijmaa’). As for what they have differed upon then he takes from their opinions the one which is most strongly connected to the Kitaab and the Sunnah. Then if the strongest is not apparent he takes that which the rightly guided Imaams acted upon.

阿什-沙瓦卡尼在其著作《Irshaad Al-Fuhool》（《指导精通者》）中，就圣门弟子的学说（Madh'hab As-Sahaabiy）作了如下论述：

Ash-Shawkaaniy has said in his book ‘Irshaad Al-Fuhool’ in respect to the Madh’hab As-Sahaabiy: