Is it authentic from you that you reject analogical reasoning? And what is your statement regarding Ibn Hazm's rejection of analogical reasoning?

The questioner : He saysThe questioner : 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: a group that rejected it entirely, like Ibn Hazm, and I do not agree with his statement; a group that affirmed it but restricted it, stating that it is a dire necessity and that one does not resort to analogical reasoning except for a dire necessity; and another group among those who affirmed it expanded in its use in an undesirable manner, so they established rulings by analogical reasoning that are contrary to the explicit texts of the Shari'ah.
And recently we mentioned an opinion 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? He said: By analogizing 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, and they fall into misunderstanding, 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 differ on that. But what led Ibn Hazm to this action, so that he rejected analogical reasoning in its entirety? When he saw some of those who use analogical reasoning =
-- And peace be upon you --
= When he saw some of those who use analogical reasoning analogize the opposite to its opposite, analogizing 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 killer who made a mistake; are they equal, for example, in the sight of Allah? They are not equal; this one is punished and that one is not punished, and the difference is that this one did it intentionally and that one did not do it intentionally. So when Ibn Hazm saw the actions of some of those who use analogical reasoning in their analogizing, 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 analogizing the one who speaks by mistake or forgetfulness to the one who does it intentionally, Ibn Hazm says to you: If there were any valid analogical reasoning in it, this would be the very essence of falsehood.
And I truly agree with the second part. I say: Analogical reasoning has a basis, and we explained this in some gatherings. But this kind of analogical reasoning, analogizing 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 from his teaching. As for his saying (peace and blessings be upon him), it is: , and the story of Mu'awiyah ibn al-Hakam al-Sulami who spoke during the prayer and raised his voice loudly, and said while he was praying, on the occasion of saying the response to the sneezer in the prayer; he said to him: May Allah have mercy on you, while he was praying. So they looked at him with the corners of their eyes, silencing him. He was distressed by that, and raised his voice saying: Woe to my mother! Why are you looking at me?! All of this was during the prayer. So what did the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) do with him? He describes it; he said: When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) finished the prayer, he turned to me; and by Allah, he did not overpower me, nor did he humiliate me, nor did he hit me, nor did he insult me, but he only said to me: . He did not say to him: Repeat your prayer. Why? Because he was not doing it intentionally. As for that school of jurisprudence, it says: The prayer of the one who speaks is invalid, whether he was intentional or in a state of forgetfulness. If he was intentional, that is its evidence. And if he was in a state of forgetfulness, what is its evidence? He said: Analogizing the one who forgets to the one who does it intentionally. This is the worst analogical reasoning regarding this matter. So we affirm analogical reasoning, but we say as Imam al-Shafi'i said: "Analogical reasoning is a dire necessity, and we do not add to it."
Yes.