Examples of the Hanafis' expansion in the use of analogical reasoning: invalidating the prayer of one who spoke out of forgetfulness by analogy to one who spoke intentionally.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Especially in the manner of the Hanafis, who burdened people and restricted them in many jurisprudential matters due to their expansion in the use of analogical reasoning. Consequently, they were called the people of opinion, and that is only because positions emerged from them in which they prioritized opinion and independent legal reasoning over the explicit text. For example, from the famous examples, and I will follow it with a rare example, which is usually the case.
The famous example: They mentioned a consensus among them that speaking while forgetting or by mistake is among the things that invalidate the prayer. Thus, in their view, it is one of the invalidators of the prayer. They rejected clear and authentic hadiths indicating that the speech of the forgetful person and the speech of the ignorant person—and what unites them is the speech of the non-intentional person—does not invalidate the prayer. For instance, the hadith of Dhu al-Yadayn, the gist of which, without lengthening the answer, is that when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed the afternoon prayer in two units, Dhu al-Yadayn said to him: "Was the prayer shortened, or did you forget?" He (peace be upon him) said: "Neither of that happened." The hadith continued between him and his Companions: "Is Dhu al-Yadayn truthful?" They said: "Yes." So he prayed two more units and prostrated the prostration for forgetfulness. They rejected this authentic hadith. We do not need to delve into it now, as the discussion is as an example, not as a preference of one opinion over another. Similarly, there is the story of Mu'awiyah ibn al-Hakam al-Sulami, who spoke during the prayer when a man next to him sneezed and he said to him, "May Allah have mercy on you." They looked at him with the corners of their eyes, trying to silence him, but that only increased his anger and shouting. So he said while praying: "Woe to your mothers! Why are you looking at me?" They struck their thighs to silence him. He said: "When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) finished the prayer, he turned to me. By Allah, he did not humiliate me, nor did he strike me, nor did he curse me. He only said to me: 'Indeed, in this prayer, nothing of the speech of people is appropriate; it is only glorification, praise, magnification, and recitation of the Qur'an.'" The point is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) answered Mu'awiyah by stating that the original ruling is that this speech invalidates the prayer, where he said, "Nothing of the speech of people is appropriate in it." And what is not appropriate is defective and invalidates it. But since the man spoke without knowing that this speech invalidates the prayer, he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not order him to repeat the prayer. As for the Hanafis, they turned a blind eye to all these evidences and others, and they stated in their texts: "The prayer is invalidated by speech, whether intentional or out of forgetfulness." When the commentators commented on the word "out of forgetfulness," they said explicitly: "By analogy to intention." This analogy is one of the most corrupt analogies on the face of the earth, as Ibn Hazm says on other occasions, because it is of the category of analogizing the opposite to its opposite, analogizing the forgetful to the intentional, just as if an analogizer were to analogize the one who kills by mistake to the one who kills intentionally. This is the most invalid analogy on the face of the earth.
The famous example: They mentioned a consensus among them that speaking while forgetting or by mistake is among the things that invalidate the prayer. Thus, in their view, it is one of the invalidators of the prayer. They rejected clear and authentic hadiths indicating that the speech of the forgetful person and the speech of the ignorant person—and what unites them is the speech of the non-intentional person—does not invalidate the prayer. For instance, the hadith of Dhu al-Yadayn, the gist of which, without lengthening the answer, is that when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed the afternoon prayer in two units, Dhu al-Yadayn said to him: "Was the prayer shortened, or did you forget?" He (peace be upon him) said: "Neither of that happened." The hadith continued between him and his Companions: "Is Dhu al-Yadayn truthful?" They said: "Yes." So he prayed two more units and prostrated the prostration for forgetfulness. They rejected this authentic hadith. We do not need to delve into it now, as the discussion is as an example, not as a preference of one opinion over another. Similarly, there is the story of Mu'awiyah ibn al-Hakam al-Sulami, who spoke during the prayer when a man next to him sneezed and he said to him, "May Allah have mercy on you." They looked at him with the corners of their eyes, trying to silence him, but that only increased his anger and shouting. So he said while praying: "Woe to your mothers! Why are you looking at me?" They struck their thighs to silence him. He said: "When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) finished the prayer, he turned to me. By Allah, he did not humiliate me, nor did he strike me, nor did he curse me. He only said to me: 'Indeed, in this prayer, nothing of the speech of people is appropriate; it is only glorification, praise, magnification, and recitation of the Qur'an.'" The point is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) answered Mu'awiyah by stating that the original ruling is that this speech invalidates the prayer, where he said, "Nothing of the speech of people is appropriate in it." And what is not appropriate is defective and invalidates it. But since the man spoke without knowing that this speech invalidates the prayer, he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not order him to repeat the prayer. As for the Hanafis, they turned a blind eye to all these evidences and others, and they stated in their texts: "The prayer is invalidated by speech, whether intentional or out of forgetfulness." When the commentators commented on the word "out of forgetfulness," they said explicitly: "By analogy to intention." This analogy is one of the most corrupt analogies on the face of the earth, as Ibn Hazm says on other occasions, because it is of the category of analogizing the opposite to its opposite, analogizing the forgetful to the intentional, just as if an analogizer were to analogize the one who kills by mistake to the one who kills intentionally. This is the most invalid analogy on the face of the earth.