Explaining the reason for their falling into this decline; which is giving precedence to analogical reasoning over the hadith.

The Shaykh : The source of the error in their giving it precedence over the Sunnah, in my view, is that they look at the Sunnah as being in a rank lower than the rank that Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) has placed it in, on the one hand, and that they doubt its authenticity, on the other hand. Otherwise, how could it be permissible for them to give analogical reasoning precedence over it, knowing that analogical reasoning is opinion upon opinion and independent legal reasoning, and that it is subject to error, as is well known? And for that reason, it is not resorted to in cases of dire necessity, as mentioned earlier in the words of al-Shafi'i: "It is not permissible to use analogical reasoning when a report exists." How could it be permissible for them to give precedence to the practice of the people of some lands over it, when they know that they are commanded to refer to it in cases of disagreement, as has been mentioned? How excellent is the saying of the Imam al-Subki regarding a person who follows a school of jurisprudence and finds a hadith that his school does not adopt, and he does not know of anyone from outside his school who affirms it. He said: "In my opinion, the better course is to follow the hadith. Let a person imagine himself in the presence of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and having heard this from him. Is it permissible for him to lag behind in acting upon it? No, by Allah. And every person is obligated to the extent of his understanding."
I said: This supports what we mentioned, namely that doubt regarding the authenticity of the Sunnah is what threw them into that error. Otherwise, if they had known it, and that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said it, they would not have uttered those principles, let alone applied them and contradicted hundreds of authentic hadiths from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). They have no basis for that except opinion and analogical reasoning, or following the practice of a group of people, as we mentioned. The correct practice is what agrees with the Sunnah. Adding to that is adding to the religion, and subtracting from it is subtracting from the religion. Ibn al-Qayyim said: "So the first is analogical reasoning, and the second is invalid specification. Neither of them is from the religion. And whoever does not stand with the texts, he sometimes adds to the text what is not part of it and says: 'This is analogical reasoning.' And sometimes he subtracts from it some of what it implies and removes it from its ruling and says: 'This is specification.' And sometimes he leaves the text entirely and says: 'The practice is not upon it,' or he says: 'This is contrary to analogical reasoning,' or 'This is contrary to the principles.'"
He said: "And we see that the more deeply a man delves into analogical reasoning, the more his contradiction of the Sunnahs increases. And we do not see contradiction of the Sunnahs and reports except among the people of opinion and analogical reasoning. By Allah, how many a correct and explicit Sunnah has been nullified by it? And how many a report has had its ruling erased because of it? So the Sunnahs and reports are, in the view of the people of opinion and analogical reasoning, empty of their substance, their rulings nullified, isolated from their authority and jurisdiction. They have the name, but the ruling belongs to something else. They have the coin and the sermon, but the command and prohibition belong to something else..."