Mention of Shaykh Al-Albani's journey and his debate with Mufti Hasan al-Kiyali.

The Shaykh : From manuscripts that are not found in the Zahiriyyah Library in Damascus, so I traveled to Aleppo for several years. Then I was informed that there was a virtuous man in a town known as Idlib, located about sixty kilometers from Aleppo. I went there for the first time, and the gathering assembled in a very large room, which contained the elders of the people, as it is said, including the mufti of the town, whose name was Hasan al-Kiyali, who passed away to the mercy of Allah. He was of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence and a follower of a scholar without knowing his evidence. He welcomed us with a pleasant reception, as if it were a preparation for an attack on the news that had reached him, some of which was true and some of which was not. In any case, they said, "We have been informed that you are a scholar qualified to derive rulings, or that you claim to be a scholar qualified to derive rulings," or words to that effect. I said, "None of that is the case. I am a follower, and I am neither a follower of a scholar without knowing his evidence nor a scholar qualified to derive rulings." The discussion proceeded in this area, as is customary. Naturally, like other followers of a school of jurisprudence, they deny what they perceive as a Muslim being on the right path, on the one hand, and as an encroachment on the status of the imams, on the other hand. The discussion reached the point where they said to him, "O Shaykh, if a Muslim does not understand Islamic jurisprudence in the Book of Allah and in the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he will not be able to derive rulings for new issues that may arise and occur." For example, we asked him, "What is your opinion? Is the ritual prayer valid on an airplane?" He said, "How can the ritual prayer be valid on an airplane?" I asked him, "What is the evidence?" My question was embarrassing for him, because the followers of a school of jurisprudence hold as a principle of their school that a follower of a scholar without knowing his evidence is not permitted to engage in independent legal reasoning and cite evidence from the Book and the Sunnah; rather, he cites the statements of the imams, even if they are followers of a scholar without knowing his evidence. So it was expected that if he answered that the ritual prayer on an airplane is valid, he would provide a report from the muftis or authors of his school of jurisprudence who came before him. But he did not do any of that, and this is self-evident. For this reason, the choice of the question was about the airplane. I said to him, "What is your argument for your statement that the ritual prayer on an airplane is valid?" He said, "And here is the point: by analogical reasoning, it is like the ritual prayer on a ship." I said to him, "What is the common factor in the analogical reasoning?" He said, "The ship is connected to the earth by water, and the airplane is connected to the earth by air, so the ritual prayer in this is like the ritual prayer in that." I said, "This is a beautiful thing, but you have contradicted the school of jurisprudence." He said, "How?" I cited to him that phrase, which is mentioned by Shaykh al-Rafi'i in his book, a commentary on al-Wajiz by Shaykh al-Ghazali, the old one, of course. He said, "I have not seen this text." I said, "In any case, the text exists in this book, printed in the margin of al-Majmu' by Imam al-Nawawi." The conversation continued, may Allah will it, and... of course, for the one who is on the guidance of his Lord, and praise be to Allah. The point now is that we do not find a text that we can bring to prove the validity of the ritual prayer on an airplane, as our brothers always ask me. When they ask a question and I answer it, they say, "What is the evidence?" They want a detailed evidence according to their way, according to their whim, according to their knowledge, and according to their ignorance. Say whatever you want; it is not possible for us to find a detailed hadith for every issue, whether small or large, in such detail that everyone would agree in understanding it, even if they were people of knowledge of the Arabic language. For this reason, it was among the characteristics that 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) mentioned, namely understanding and comprehension, when Abu Juhayfah al-Sawai asked him: "Did the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) give you, O people of the House, something from knowledge that he did not give to the people?" He said, "No, except that in the sheath of this sword of mine is a sheet of paper containing some of the well-known hadiths in the two authentic collections regarding the rulings of wounds and retaliation, and the virtue of Medina. Then he said, 'O Allah, except for understanding that Allah grants to a person in His Book.'" This understanding has a great connection to what we are currently discussing, which is analogical reasoning. Analogical reasoning means likening a thing to its similar and equivalent counterpart. So there is no doubt that such a thing is not accessible to everyone except for the one who, as 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said, was granted understanding in the Book. And this is part of the independent legal reasoning for which the text explicitly came in his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying, which is well known in Sahih al-Bukhari: So this analogical reasoning is, in fact, often a place of error and mistake due to its subtlety. And for this reason, that man from Idlib, the mufti, said to me, "So you have likened the ritual prayer on an airplane to the ritual prayer on a ship?" I said, "Yes." I said, "Then you have fallen into what you denied." He said, "How?" I said to him, "You have engaged in independent legal reasoning, because independent legal reasoning is citing evidence from one of the four proofs: the Book, the Sunnah, scholarly consensus, and analogical reasoning. And analogical reasoning is the most subtle of the four proofs. So if you were able to, or if you allowed yourself at least to perform analogical reasoning, you have engaged in independent legal reasoning, and thus you have fallen into what you denied in others. So this was among the arguments presented against him in his hostile stance toward the Salafi call, to which we called and still call, praise be to Allah. This is what can be mentioned on this occasion.