Ibn Ḥazm al-Andalūsī (456H) said whilst dicussing the Khārijites who revolted against ʿAlī:

However, the predecessors of the Khārijites [referring to those who revolted against ʿUthmān] were bedouins who read the Qurʾān before they had gained understanding of the established Sunnah from the Messenger of Allāh (ﷺ). None of the jurists (fuquhāʾ) were amongst them, neither from the companions of Ibn Masʿūd, nor the companions of ʿUmar, nor the companions of ʿAlī, nor the companions of ʿĀʾishah, nor the companions of Abū Mūsā, nor the companions of Muāʿadh bin Jabal, nor the companions of Abū al-Dardāʾ, nor the companions of Salmān, nor the companions of Zayd, Ibn ʿĀbbās and Ibn ʿUmar. Hence, you will find them declaring each others disbelievers on the occasion of the smallest issue that arises between them which pertains to the minutest and smallest matters of jurisprudence. Thus, the weakness of these people and the strength of their ignorance manifests itself... Then Satan blinded them and Allāh misguided them with His knowledge [that they do not desire guidance]. So they dissolved their pledge of allegiance to the likes of ʿAlī, turned away from Saīʿd bin Zayd, Saʿd, Ibn ʿUmar and others from those who spent of their wealth and fought before the victory and they turned away (likewise) from the Companions who spent and fought after the victory... and they abandoned all of the Companions...

Source: Al-Faṣl Fil-Milal wal-Niḥal (Beirut: Dār al-Jayl) 4/237.
Abu Iyāḍ.@abuiyaadsp 20 Muḥarram 1438 / 21 October 2016

Note: In consideration of what Ibn Ḥazm said about how the Khārijites abandoned the Companions and had no jurists amongst them, we see today that the Khārijite movements are very similar. They abandoned the well-known scholars of the Muslims, in particular the Salafī scholars. They accused them with extreme innovations, if not outright disbelief. This leads to the point that despite the fact that the Egyptian takfīrī jamāʿāt of the 1970s, the takfīrīs in the Afghānī jihād, those nurtured upon the books of Quṭb and al-Mawdūdī, Ayman al-Zawāhīrī, Usāmah bin Lādin, al-Qaeda, ISIS and their spiritual leaders such Abū Qatādah, Abū Muḥammad al-Maqdisī and Sayyid Imām all bear the hallmarks, traits and characteristics of the Khārijites and reserve their greatest enmity for Salafī scholars, Western academics continue to ascribe these people to ‘Salafism’ which they obviously do not understand and grasp. This is because their understanding of what Salafism is is not drawn primarily from the Qurʾān, the Sunnah, and the authored works of the Salaf in the first three centuries, but rather what they have gleaned from the writings of the Khārijites in their books and statements. From the great manifestation of their ignorance in this regard is their belief that the Khāriijtes’ speech regarding Tawḥīd, the names and attributes, faith and various other issues of doctrine renders them followers of ‘Salafism’. In other words, they read the books of Khārijites who tried to deceptively weave their Takfīrī-Jihādī Khārijite doctrine into a Salafī mould, and not possessing any criterion (because they never understood ‘Salafism’ properly from the outset), these academics essentially got taken for a ride. There are thousands of Salafīs in various parts of the world who despite only being in their teens have a sounder, better, more accurate understanding of ‘Salafism’ than these highly-credentialed Western academics. Their categorisations (purists, politicos, jihādīs) do not change anything. They are operating upon flawed, inaccurate analyses that will prevent them from successfully combating the seed ideology that lies behind Khārijism and which fuels terrorism.