Is it authentic from you that you reject analogical reasoning? And what is your statement regarding Ibn Hazm's rejection of analogical reasoning?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The questioner asks: Is it authentic from you that you reject analogical reasoning, and what is your statement regarding Ibn Hazm's rejection of analogical reasoning?
The Shaykh : I do not know how people understand this, while we always say that analogical reasoning is one of the principles of the Shari'ah. However, people have divided into three groups regarding this analogical reasoning:
One group rejected it in its entirety, such as Ibn Hazm, and I do not agree with his view.
Another group affirmed it but restricted it, stating that it is a dire necessity, and that analogical reasoning is not resorted to except in cases of dire necessity.
A third group among those who affirmed it expanded in its use to an undesirable extent, establishing rulings by analogical reasoning that are contrary to the explicit texts of the Shari'ah. Recently, we mentioned a view in the Hanafi school of jurisprudence that if one speaks during the ritual prayer while in a state of forgetfulness, his prayer is invalid. What is the evidence for this?!
They said: By analogy, comparing the one who forgets or makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally. Here, we mention a word of Ibn Hazm, but some people seem to misunderstand the speech; they take a part of it and leave the other part, falling into misunderstanding, and then they attribute to people what they are innocent of. We say: Ibn Hazm rejects analogical reasoning in its entirety and in detail. We do not agree with him on that. But what led Ibn Hazm to this extremism, causing him to reject analogical reasoning in its entirety?
When he saw some of those who use analogy comparing the opposite to its opposite, comparing the one who forgets or makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally, as we gave an example earlier with the intentional killer and the one who kills by mistake. Are they equal in the example of Allah?!
They are not equal. One is punished and the other is not punished. The difference is that one is intentional and the other is not intentional. So when Ibn Hazm saw the extremism of some of those who use analogy in their analogies, he went to the extreme in the other direction and said: All analogical reasoning is invalid. Then he proceeded with a phrase of his when he argues with his opponents regarding some of their analogies, refuting them with the following. He says: "All analogical reasoning is invalid, and if there were any truth in it, this would be the very essence of falsehood". So, the analogy of the one who speaks by mistake or forgetfulness to the one who does it intentionally, Ibn Hazm would tell you: If there were any valid analogy, this would be the very essence of falsehood.
And I say, in truth, regarding the second part: I say that analogical reasoning has a basis, and we have explained this in some gatherings. But this kind of analogy, comparing the one who makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally, is the very essence of falsehood because it contradicts explicit hadiths from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) and his teaching. As for his saying (peace and blessings be upon him), it is:Sunan Ibn Majah 2045Sahih (Darussalam), and the story of Mu'awiyah ibn al-Hakam al-Sulami, who spoke during the prayer and raised his voice loudly. He said, while he was praying, on the occasion of sneezing of one of the sneezers in the prayer, he said to him: . He did not tell him to repeat your prayer. Why? Because he was not intentional. But that school of jurisprudence says: The prayer of the one who speaks is invalid, whether he was intentional or in a state of forgetfulness. If intentional, that is their evidence. If in a state of forgetfulness, what is their evidence? They said: The analogy of the one who forgets to the one who is intentional. This is the worst analogy on the face of the earth. So we acknowledge analogical reasoning, but we say as Imam al-Shafi'i said: "Analogical reasoning is a dire necessity", and we do not go beyond that.
The Shaykh : I do not know how people understand this, while we always say that analogical reasoning is one of the principles of the Shari'ah. However, people have divided into three groups regarding this analogical reasoning:
One group rejected it in its entirety, such as Ibn Hazm, and I do not agree with his view.
Another group affirmed it but restricted it, stating that it is a dire necessity, and that analogical reasoning is not resorted to except in cases of dire necessity.
A third group among those who affirmed it expanded in its use to an undesirable extent, establishing rulings by analogical reasoning that are contrary to the explicit texts of the Shari'ah. Recently, we mentioned a view in the Hanafi school of jurisprudence that if one speaks during the ritual prayer while in a state of forgetfulness, his prayer is invalid. What is the evidence for this?!
They said: By analogy, comparing the one who forgets or makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally. Here, we mention a word of Ibn Hazm, but some people seem to misunderstand the speech; they take a part of it and leave the other part, falling into misunderstanding, and then they attribute to people what they are innocent of. We say: Ibn Hazm rejects analogical reasoning in its entirety and in detail. We do not agree with him on that. But what led Ibn Hazm to this extremism, causing him to reject analogical reasoning in its entirety?
When he saw some of those who use analogy comparing the opposite to its opposite, comparing the one who forgets or makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally, as we gave an example earlier with the intentional killer and the one who kills by mistake. Are they equal in the example of Allah?!
They are not equal. One is punished and the other is not punished. The difference is that one is intentional and the other is not intentional. So when Ibn Hazm saw the extremism of some of those who use analogy in their analogies, he went to the extreme in the other direction and said: All analogical reasoning is invalid. Then he proceeded with a phrase of his when he argues with his opponents regarding some of their analogies, refuting them with the following. He says: "All analogical reasoning is invalid, and if there were any truth in it, this would be the very essence of falsehood". So, the analogy of the one who speaks by mistake or forgetfulness to the one who does it intentionally, Ibn Hazm would tell you: If there were any valid analogy, this would be the very essence of falsehood.
And I say, in truth, regarding the second part: I say that analogical reasoning has a basis, and we have explained this in some gatherings. But this kind of analogy, comparing the one who makes a mistake to the one who does it intentionally, is the very essence of falsehood because it contradicts explicit hadiths from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) and his teaching. As for his saying (peace and blessings be upon him), it is: