It is said that Shaykh Al-Albani agrees with Ibn Hazm in the principles of jurisprudence, and it is said that he has a specific methodology in the principles; is this correct?

The questioner: Your Eminence, the father - may Allah preserve you - , it is said thatThe Shaykh : Al-Albani agrees with Ibn Hazm in the principles of jurisprudence, and it is said that he has a specific methodology in the principles; what is the truth in this? And is there an intention to write on this, and may Allah reward you with good?

The Shaykh: As for the intention, I have not reached it. As for my agreeing with Ibn Hazm, that is the furthest thing from the truth; because I often point out his rigidity in some texts, where understanding the jurisprudence in them reveals Ibn Hazm's rigidity in some of his rules. Then I give an example of some rigid contemporaries who fall into the same rigidity as Ibn Hazm, even though they claim to be free, and claim that they are cultured, and that they want a reasonable Islam; until their affair reaches, because of this tendency they lean toward, making the rulings of the Shari'ah reasonable to all minds. Their affair has reached the point where they denied authentic and famous hadiths. And despite the revolution that the Ghazali of the present age stirred up, and those who responded to him because of his denial of authentic hadiths in "the two Sahihs" and others, except for those like these people who, on one hand, you see them exaggerate in denying some hadiths that do not suit their desires, and I do not say their minds, and on the other hand, they fall into a contradiction of sound logic due to their rigidity on some texts and their imitation of the Zahirism of Ibn Hazm. And I, in many occasions, criticize Ibn Hazm for his rigidity. But perhaps the reason for this question is that I sometimes say: this is an analogy, and this analogy is one of the most invalid things on the face of the earth. So I quote from the words of Ibn Hazm, who says: "All analogy is invalid, and if there were any truth in it, this would be the very essence of falsehood from it." Some people make strange and very strange analogies, so I argue with this word of Ibn Hazm, who exaggerated and denied analogy, and this is part of his rigidity. But he is truly, in some cases, refuting the analogizers and the opinion-followers who establish some rulings by way of analogy, and it is indeed the most invalid analogy on the face of the earth. For example:
Some schools of jurisprudence say: speaking in prayer invalidates it, even if it is by mistake. What is the evidence? They say: analogy to intentional speech. And you have just heard in the story of Mu'awiyah ibn al-Hakam al-Sulami, who spoke in his prayer by mistake, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) only taught him and did not order him to repeat the prayer; so how is it correct to say: that the speech of one who speaks by mistake or ignorance invalidates the prayer by analogy to the speech of the intentional one? I say on this occasion: this is an analogy, as Ibn Hazm says: "And if there were any truth in analogy, this would be the very essence of falsehood from it." So perhaps some people understand from this that I agree with him in denying analogy and follow his school, and that is not the case.
And I give an example - indeed more than one example - of my dissatisfaction with some of the principles of Ibn Hazm, among which is not looking deeply into understanding the hadith, but rather he sees rigidity on the wording of the hadith. For example, the famous hadith that if a virgin wants her guardian to marry her, he must seek her permission. He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . All the jurists understand from this noble saying: ; meaning: it is sufficient that the virgin daughter, if her guardian consults her, remains silent, and her silence is a sign of her consent. But Ibn Hazm came with a very strange matter, where we can point out this rigidity, not to mock Ibn Hazm, for he has passed to the mercy of his Lord - Blessed and Exalted is He - and he is a great imam, we do not deny that at all. But he has some deviations, among which is what is known as his Zahirite school. This is part of his rigidity on the apparent text; if the daughter says: I consent, it is not valid, and she must remain silent. While the other scholars - and this is the truth in which we have no doubt - understood the hadith that his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): is a consideration by the Lawgiver for the nature of the virgin; where shyness predominates in her. But this was in the past. As for today, the matter does not need clarification, for most women are characterized by boldness and frankness beyond what the Shari'ah requires! So the wise Lawgiver considered the nature of the virgin daughter, and for that reason Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) described our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with his saying: . So for this shyness, the wise Lawgiver was content with the virgin remaining silent. But if she says: I consent, that is light upon light; because in many cases, the indication of silence is presumptive. But if she is explicit and says: I consent; that is stronger. But Ibn Hazm obligated her to be silent and not say: I consent; due to his rigidity on this wording, and his dissatisfaction with what the majority of scholars understood that his saying: is a consideration for the feeling of the shy girl, who is the virgin.
Likewise, for example, from the rigidity of Ibn Hazm, and here the example is for some contemporaries; he says in the hadith of Abu Hurayrah which was narratedThe Shaykh : in "their two Sahihs": "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade urinating in stagnant water." And this hadith is clear in all clarity that the prohibition of urinating in stagnant water is intended to preserve, at least, the purity of the water, and at most, its ritual purity. So what did Ibn Hazm say? He said: "So if he urinated in a vessel - meaning: empty - and then poured this urine from the vessel into stagnant water, it is permissible." Why? Because he did not urinate directly in the stagnant water. This is a rigidity that the majority of scholars did not accept; because he did not consider in this saying the purpose of the Lawgiver in prohibiting urinating in stagnant water. And the meaning of this Zahirite philosophy is that if someone urinated in a pipe or a tube; whether it was of wood or of cast iron, and then this urine went to the stagnant water, it is permissible. So what is the difference between urinating directly or by means of a connection like this connection? This is an unacceptable rigidity.
But has this rigidity planted its horn in the present age, or did the application of sound logic lead them not to be rigid like the Zahirites?
The answer - unfortunately - is: that many of the contemporaries and Islamic writers fall into this kind of rigidity. And the clearest example of that, and on this occasion, I say what I said earlier about Ibn Hazm: the saying of some philosophers of the present age who claim the difference between three-dimensional images, which are forbidden, and non-three-dimensional images, which are permissible. Then there is no difference for them in the second category of images that are not three-dimensional, like those on paper or on walls or on curtains or the like of what has no volume and no shadow when light is shone on it. This is a saying that some of the early scholars said, but the scholars explicitly stated its invalidity; due to the coming of many hadiths that clarify that the images of this second type are - also - forbidden. And the clearest and strongest evidence is what came in "the two Sahihs" from the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), when he returned from a journey of his, and wanted to enter Aisha's room, his gaze fell on a curtain of hers in which there were images. He said: . She said: A curtain I bought for you, O Messenger of Allah. As if she was saying: I adorn with it to welcome you. So he (peace and blessings be upon him) said, pointing to the images on the curtain - meaning: the curtain: .
-- ... the 'Isha' prayer? ... --
We are content with this amount now so that you may leave and pray with the congregation - if Allah wills - .