在圣门弟子（Sahabah）时期发生了两件大事：第一件是关于‘Uthman的内战（fitna），第二件是‘Ulamā之间的辩论。这导致了对伊斯兰教法证据种类的分歧，进而出现了新的政治派别，而这些派别又促成了各种法学学派的产生。原因在于，‘Uthman遇害后，人们向‘Ali ibn Abi Talib宣誓效忠哈里发职位，而Mu'awiyya ibn Abu Sufyan与他发生争执，双方爆发战争，最终以两位仲裁者的裁决告终。这导致了新的政治派别的形成，而这些派别此前并不存在。这些派别逐渐形成了新的观点。这些观点最初在政治上涉及哈里发及哈里发制度，随后又涵盖了其余大部分的教法律例（aḥkām）。有一群穆斯林兴起，他们憎恶‘Uthman在其哈里发任内的政策，不满‘Ali接受仲裁（tahkeem），并对Mu'awiyya以武力夺取哈里发之位心怀愤怒。于是他们反叛了所有这些人。他们的观点是：穆斯林应当完全基于自由选择、不受强迫或武力，向穆斯林的哈里发宣誓效忠；凡是具备哈里发资格的人便有资格担任哈里发，穆斯林应向他效忠，只要他是男性、穆斯林且公正，哪怕他是埃塞俄比亚的奴隶，哈里发之位也应凭宣誓效忠而授予他；对哈里发的服从只有在其命令属于《古兰经》和逊奈的范围之内时才是必须的。这些人不采纳‘Uthman、‘Ali、Mu'awiyya所传述的圣训，也不采纳任何曾支持他们之中某人的圣门弟子所传述的圣训。他们否定了这些人的全部圣训、观点和教法裁决，并且优先采信他们所认可之人的传述。他们只考虑自己的观点和自己的学者，而排斥其他人。 他们有自己的fiqh,他们被称为哈瓦利吉派。穆斯林中又兴起另一个群体,他们敬爱阿里·伊本·阿比·塔利卜,热爱他的后裔。他们认为,他和他的后裔比其他任何人更有权担任哈里发,并认为他是先知ﷺ托付哈里发职位的瓦西(受托人)。他们拒绝了大多数圣门弟子所传的许多关于先知ﷺ的圣训。他们不依赖圣门弟子的观点和他们的法律裁决,只依赖他们的伊玛目和先知ﷺ家族所传的圣训,并依赖源自他们的法律裁决。他们有自己的fiqh,他们就是什叶派。至于大多数穆斯林,他们没有采纳上述群体所持的观点。他们认为,如果能找到一位古莱氏出身的哈里发,就应当向其效忠。他们对所有圣门弟子毫无例外地怀有极大的尊重、敬爱和忠诚,并把圣门弟子之间的分歧理解为对可推论的沙里亚律例进行的伊杰提哈德,这些律例与信仰(伊玛尼)或不信(库夫尔)无关。他们以任何一段由圣门弟子所传、经证实为可靠的圣训作为证据,不在圣门弟子之间有任何区别对待。因为在他们看来,所有圣门弟子都是可信赖的,他们接受圣门弟子的一切教法裁决和观点。正因如此,在一些问题上,他们的教律与其他政治派别的教律并不一致,原因在于他们在裁决、推导律例的方法以及证据的种类上存在分歧。

Two events took place during the time of the Sahabah: The first is the civil war (fitna) regarding ‘Uthman and the second are the debates which took place between the ‘‘Ulamā. This resulted in disagreements over the types of Sharī’ah evidences which led to the presence of new political groups which in turn led to the presence of various juristical schools of thought. That is because after ‘Uthman  was murdered and the bay’a (pledge) of the Khilafah was given to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib with whom Mu’awiyya ibn Abu Sufyan disputed and war broke out between the two factions and ended with the judgement of the two arbitrators. This resulted in the formation of new political groups which had not existed before. These groups came to have new opinions. The opinion began politically concerning the Khalifah and the Khilafah. Then it included most of the remaining ahkām. A group of Muslims arose who loathed ‘Uthman for his policies during his Khilafah and they resented Ali’s acceptance of arbitration (tahkeem) and they were angry over Mu’awiyyah for seizing the Khilafah by force. So they rebelled against all of them. Their view was that Muslims should give pledge to the Khalifah of the Muslims purely according to their choice without coercion or force. And that whoever qualifies for the Khilafah he is eligible to be the Khalifah. Muslims should give bay’a to him and the Khilafah will be contracted to him by the pledge as long as he is a man, Muslim and just even if he was a Ethiopian slave, and that obedience to the Khalifah is not obliged except if his matter was within the limits of the Qur’ān and Sunnah. These people did not take rulings reported in hadīth narrated by ‘Uthman, Ali, Mu’awiyya or if a hadīth was narrated by a Sahabi who supported any one of them. They rejected all of their ahadīth, opinions and legal verdicts and they outweighed what was narrated by those they approved of. They only considered their opinions and their own scholars to the exclusion of others. They had their own fiqh and they are called the Khawarij. Another group from the Muslim arose which adored ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib  and loved his descendants. They took the view that he and his descendants had greater right to the Khilafah over anyone else and they believed he was the wasi (trustee) to whom the Messenger  bequeathed the Khilafah after him. They rejected many ahadīth narrated about the Messenger  by the majority of the Sahabah. They did not depend on the views of the Sahabah and their legal verdicts. They only relied on the ahadīth narrated by their imams and the family of the Prophet  and relied on the legal verdicts originating from them. They had their own fiqh and they are the Shi’a. As for the majority of the Muslims they did not adopt the opinions adopted by the aforementioned groups. They took the view that the pledge should be given to a Khalifah from Quraysh if such a person was found, and they conveyed without a single exception, great respect, affection and loyalty to all the Sahabah. And they interpreted the disputes between them as being Ijtihād in speculative Sharī’ah rules which were not linked to belief (imān) or disbelief (kufr). They would use as proof every authentic hadīth narrated by a Sahābi without any discrimination between the Sahabah. Since for them all of the Sahabah were trustworthy and they accepted all the fatwas and opinions of the Sahabah. Due to this their ahkām did not accord with the ahkām of the other political groups in a number of topics due to their disagreement regarding ruling, method of istinbat (inference of rules) and in the types of evidences.