Several reports describe Companions reasoning about new cases in the light of established rules and legally relevant similarities. They show concern for the effective legal rationale rather than a merely verbal comparison.
Limit of inference: It would be inaccurate to say that every disagreement among the Companions was only about qiyas. Texts, transmitted precedents and other considerations were also relevant. Certain reported cases nevertheless illustrate the legitimacy of carefully structured analogy.
The analyst must identify the original problem, the proposed ruling and the legally relevant connection between them.