We request from your eminence an explanation of the analogical reasoning (qiyas) that is valid in the Shari'ah? And when is it resorted to? (Discussion on the issue of speaking during prayer: does it invalidate it?)

The questioner : Thank you, your eminence.The Shaykh .

The Shaykh: Excuse me.

The questioner : Actually, we would have liked you to elaborate on the issue of qiyas when you mentioned it as a source of the Shari'ah, because I see many Muslims treating qiyas as mere logical reasoning without relying on Shari'ah evidence or a Shari'ah cause when applying qiyas. So I ask your eminence to elaborate on this issue so that Muslims may understand it, and thank you.

The Shaykh : Yes, and although this question is scholarly and precise and not suitable for the general public, I must say a word. Did we hint in our previous answer—I don't know if you were here before the prayer?

The questioner : I was, yes.

The Shaykh : We hinted that qiyas is not permissible to be introduced into acts of worship, because qiyas was legislated to resolve matters or to answer incidents for which we cannot find a text from the Book of Allah or from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In that case, we must resort to qiyas. But the truth is that the scholars of the Muslims, let alone others, have differed on this qiyas into many schools. Some denied qiyas entirely and in detail; these are the ones known to scholars as the People of the Apparent Meaning (Ahl al-Zahir), led by Dawud al-Isfahani, who has no known printed works today. Following him is Imam Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm, who is the bearer of the banner of fighting qiyas in principle and in application, especially in his famous book al-Muhalla. On the opposite side from the Zahiris are the Hanafis, who expanded the use of qiyas to an extent that is not approved by the Shari'ah at all, not only in expanding the scope of obligations but also in contradicting the texts. Among the issues we read during our study of the fiqh of our Albanian fathers and grandfathers, who knew Islam only as the Hanafi school, we read in the invalidators of prayer or the things that corrupt prayer: speaking intentionally or by mistake. We said intentional speaking is a matter agreed upon by the scholars of the Muslims: the one praying speaks to the one praying next to him or to someone who is not praying; this is speaking, as came in the authentic hadith: This has its relevance, but how does speaking in prayer by mistake invalidate it? When we returned to the commentaries and marginal notes, we found them saying that prayer is invalidated by speaking intentionally or by mistake, by analogy to intentional speaking, by analogy to intentional speaking. This is analogizing the opposite to the opposite. This should not happen among Muslims, but it did happen. As the old poet said: "What I feared has happened; indeed, to Allah we return." Some of the Imams took a middle path in this issue, and the best word I can mention on this occasion, which I make the foundation for the moderate analogizers, is the word of Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him), who said: "Qiyas is a necessity, so one does not resort to qiyas except in necessity."