Examples of the Hanafis' expansion in the use of analogical reasoning: their statement that the milked-out animal should be returned along with the value of the milk, by analogy to the original principle.

The Shaykh : The second example: it is very unique from both perspectives; unique in the sense of abominable, as some poets said.
The student: You disobey Allah while you claim to love Him.

The Shaykh : Well said:
"You disobey Allah while you display your love for Him *** This, by your life, is unique in terms of analogy"
Meaning abominable.
"If your love were sincere, you would have obeyed Him *** For the lover is obedient to the one he loves"
The second example is unique in its literal sense because it is a Prophetic hadith, and conversely, it is unique in the context of their rejection of the hadith by opinion. Now listen to the hadith and their stance toward it.
The hadith is in the two Sahihs, narrated by Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: What did the analogizers who expanded in analogy do? They rejected this hadith and did not act upon it, saying that it contradicts the principles. Now look at what the principles are. They claimed that the buyer of the milked-out animal benefited from its milk, so it is not just to return the milked-out animal without the price of the milk. Therefore, they say: it is not permissible to accept this hadith; it must be interpreted. They interpreted it as follows, which is one of the most invalid interpretations they resort to when rejecting some authentic hadiths. They said that when the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered the buyer of the milked-out animal to return it with a sa' of dates, they claimed that this sa' of dates was an estimate at that time for the price of the milk in the udder. I think you know what a milked-out animal is, since you are Arabs; there is no non-Arab among you like me. This seller is a deceiver; he milked out the udder of a camel, cow, or sheep, kept it for two, three, or more days until its udder was full, then brought it to the market. The buyer was deceived by what he saw and bought it. When he milked it, he found its udder empty. He was forced to return it to the seller. The Exalted ordered that the buyer return the milked-out animal with a sa' of dates. Those who denied acting upon this hadith—I say acting upon this hadith, because they could not reject it, for it is authentic and the Ummah agreed to accept it because it came in the two Sahihs, and scholars continued to authenticate it. Some argued with it, and they are the majority, while others interpreted it, and they are the Hanafis. They could not deny its authenticity, so they interpreted it by saying that the sa' of dates at that time was, in the estimation of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), the value of the milk that had been milked out of the udder. Now look at these people who boast that they are people of opinion, meaning correct understanding. Look at the weight of their understanding. The milked-out animal may be a camel, a cow, or a sheep, and without doubt, the udders of these types and the milk in them differ from camel to cow to sheep in quantity. How can they attribute to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he made a sa' of dates a substitute for all these udders, with the milk in them differing? This is from one perspective.
From another perspective, if we were to be precise, one camel differs from another, even if they are milch camels, and one cow differs from another, especially in the present age, where a milch cow is bought for thousands. Even if it is not milked-out, the milk of one cow differs from another. How can it be said that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made the sa' of dates a substitute for these types of milk in these types of milked-out animals? This cannot be attributed to an ordinary Muslim, let alone to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). When they interpreted this hadith with their opinion and did not notice their error in what they attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), they said: "Therefore, we return the milked-out animal with the price of the milk."
Now we say to them: How can the buyer of the milked-out animal know the estimate of the milk and thus the price of the milk? Is it customary for every buyer of a milked-out animal, when he milks it, to weigh the milk and estimate its value? This is not the usual custom; rather, he milks it to buy it or to distribute it among his relatives or neighbors. Therefore, by this interpretation, they fell into what they deny, which is the known principle among the Maturidiyyah. They are Maturidiyyah in creed, unlike the Asha'irah. The Maturidiyyah agree with the people of the Sunnah in the statement of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He): As for the Asha'irah, they said and dared to say that Allah can burden His servants with what they cannot bear. We find that the Hanafis here have fallen into a contradiction with their creed, in which they opposed the Asha'irah, and the Hanafis were correct in that matter. But now they burden the buyer of the milked-out animal with what he cannot bear, because he is unable to know the price of the milk that was milked from the camel, cow, or sheep. As for the hadith, it is exactly on its point.
I say: If the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) had ordered the buyer of the milked-out animal to return it without anything, would we have had any say with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)? Far be it from Allah. Rather, if the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had ordered the buyer to return the milked-out animal without anything, this would have been a punishment for that deceiver, because he deceived this Muslim by milking out his cow or camel and selling it, thereby deceiving the Muslim. As a punishment for him, there is no objection at all to the Shari'ah stating that the purchased item, by which the buyer was deceived, is returned exactly as it is: This is your merchandise, it has returned to you. If the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not order the buyer to return the milked-out animal as it was, but with a sa' of dates as a form of compensation that cannot be regulated, as we mentioned earlier, you see here that the analogizers denied this hadith and did not act upon it. They did not deny its narration, but they denied its knowledge, claiming that it contradicts the principles. What contradicts the principles? That a person drank, for example, a kilogram of milk or an ounce, and its price is, for example, a riyal, so he must pay a riyal. This is correct if the drinking was a natural and ordinary matter. But if the drink was obtained through the seller's deception, it has another ruling. The hadith came ordering the buyer of the milked-out animal to return it with a sa' of dates. This is the truth.
"So this is the truth, with no obscurity *** So leave me alone from the intentions of the road"
Therefore, analogical reasoning is a middle ground between those who deny it and those who exaggerate in it. The statement of Imam al-Shafi'i summarizes this middle ground for us: "Analogical reasoning is a necessity" If a necessity compels us to use analogical reasoning, we do so; otherwise, the texts suffice us.