What is the meaning of Imam Ahmad’s statement: “Analogical reasoning in religion is invalid, and opinion is even more invalid than it”?

The questioner : What is the meaning of Imam Ahmad’s statement: “Analogical reasoning in religion is invalid, and opinion is even more invalid than it”?

The Shaykh : I do not know that Imam Ahmad said, “Analogical reasoning in religion is invalid,” to the extent of my limited knowledge, , which did not encompass the phrase the questioner directed, but what I know about Imam al-Shafi'i, who was one of Imam Ahmad’s teachers, is that he said: “Analogical reasoning is a dire necessity to which one does not resort except in cases of dire necessity.” If we want to understand this phrase, we arrive at something similar to the statement attributed to Imam Ahmad; that is: analogical reasoning in acts of worship is invalid, because acts of worship are complete, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in the authentic hadith established through numerous chains: . Thus, “May Allah be truthful, the Mighty” is permissible to say here, because we are going against the custom that has arisen today, where after completing every ten chapters of the Qur'an, a verse has been added to the end of the ten chapters: “May Allah be truthful, the Mighty.” I say: “May Allah be truthful, the Mighty” in everything He said, including when He said: . So religion is complete, but religion includes beliefs, acts of worship, morals, and transactions. The three types do not accept addition unless they accept subtraction, and the one who adds is the brother of the one who subtracts. The first three categories—beliefs, acts of worship, and morals—do not accept what? Addition.
As for transactions, these develop with the development of time and place, as we mentioned earlier regarding the airplane and the swing, and the like. So if a person wants to draw near to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) through an act of worship, he should not use analogical reasoning; he has no need to use it, because acts of worship are complete, first by the text of the Noble Qur'an, and second—and this is a lesson I hope you pay attention to—acts of worship are so numerous that the most worshipful of people, the most worshipful of humans, cannot carry them all. Do you know who the most worshipful of humans is? He (peace and blessings be upon him) said, as in “Sahih al-Bukhari”: . Dawud (peace be upon him), if he were alive, would not be able to encompass in his work the acts of worship brought by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his companions); he would only be able to perform some of them, half of them, or three-quarters of them. As for encompassing them from all sides, that is an ocean with no shore. So why does the Muslim add through analogical reasoning, or as they call it, juristic preference, relying on a hadith they misunderstood? to the end of the hadith. There is no need for juristic preference and no need for analogical reasoning, so the scope of acts of worship is too vast for the most worshipful of people to encompass; this is impossible. So the Muslim should be content with what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has granted him of knowledge regarding some acts of worship, and he should strive with all his effort to adhere to them if he truly wants to be among the most worshipful of people. I do not say: and to be the most worshipful of people. If he wants to be among the most worshipful of people, it is sufficient for him to apply what is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and what is authentic from him. So there is no room for analogical reasoning in acts of worship at that point. But in transactions, which are endless, especially with the passage of time and the change of circumstances and conditions, here a person is compelled to use analogical reasoning. This statement that was the subject of the question, I do not know it, but it is the meaning of Imam al-Shafi'i’s statement that analogical reasoning is prescribed for dire necessity, and dire necessity has its rulings.
Other than that?