Is it wrong for a person to burden himself with applying the branches of fiqh to all the principles of usul?

Al-'Uwayshah: These issues, I mean, do you not see it as wrong for a person to overburden himself in some fiqh issues by applying them or trying to force their application, without being held accountable for some of the principles of usul? There may be some forced application of certain fiqh rules to certain usul principles, where they perhaps do not fit together, so he tries to force them.

The Shaykh : Of course, how does he understand them without principles? That is what is supposed to happen. So you need to reconcile what you denied with what you affirmed. If the branches of fiqh cannot be understood correctly except by presenting them to the principles of usul, but you say that exaggeration in this application is such and such, what is your solution?
Al-'Uwayshah: What I intended, Shaykh, is that some principles of usul come to mind, and he tries to pass these fiqh rules through them. As for classification, there is necessarily benefit from the principles of usul, but some of the principles of usul may be in the person's mind, and some may not apply to some fiqh rules, so he tries to force them.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, you are repeating "principles of usul" and "fiqh rules." I thought at first it was a slip of the tongue. Yes, but now that you have repeated it, it seems you mean there are fiqh rules and usul principles. Is that another slip of the tongue? Glory be to Allah, once is enough.
Al-'Uwayshah: It is a verbal emphasis.

The Shaykh : If you mean the branches of fiqh, we are confused. You need to repeat the phrase to us with the corrected term. So what do you say?
Al-'Uwayshah: I mean, in seeking help to understand a specific fiqh issue, it comes to his mind that this is connected to that, and he finds that its status is such and such through the principles.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is so. So what is the difficulty for you? We have not yet reached understanding your intent from this speech. We agree that we cannot understand a fiqh branch except through the science of usul, is that not so? What is the disagreement? No, after he has thrown down his weapon.
Al-'Uwayshah: I did not intend that.

The Shaykh : I did not tell you "I intended" so that you would say "I did not intend." Since we agree on this principle, what is the disagreement? Surely we know there is a disagreement between you and others. I am not saying Zayd, Bakr, and 'Amr. The agreement is established, so what is the disagreement? We do not understand.
Al-'Uwayshah: The disagreement is that, for example, I have a principle of usul in a specific issue, so I am in a state of...

The Shaykh : No, no, do not say "a specific principle of usul." A principle does not exist in a specific issue. A principle encompasses many, many branches. It is as if you want to have a principle that you want to apply to a fiqh branch. Well, continue so we can see what the disagreement is.
Al-'Uwayshah: I mean, the classification may not be correct in classifying the branches under the principle.

The Shaykh : You say "classification." How? Application or classification?
Al-'Uwayshah: Application.

The Shaykh : Glory be to Allah. It is possible that we do not apply the branch to the principle, meaning there is a branch that does not fall under the principle you want to say.

The questioner : Usul principles that are forced, with no evidence from the Book and Sunnah. Perhaps he means he wants to...

The Shaykh : If he wanted to say that, he would not have agreed with us at the beginning. Did you see how you are? You are doing a double take for him. You want to say, "O Abu 'Abd al-Rahman..."

The questioner : Perhaps some of the principles of usul have no evidence from the Book and the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : Is that what you want to say?
Al-'Uwayshah: No, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Do you have something?
Mashhur: In my opinion, the disagreement in deriving the principles is acceptable within the scope of acceptable disagreement among jurists. It still comes to my mind that it is necessary for students of knowledge to have general guidelines regarding what is acceptable and what is not. What comes to my mind regarding the guidelines and acceptable disagreement is the pulling of usul principles toward some branches, and the difference of opinion among mujtahids in deriving them and attaching them to this principle or that, in the absence of explicit Sharia texts. Perhaps now, Brother Husayn is forcing some branches or some fiqh rulings by attaching them to a primary principle where there may be forced application, and they are more appropriate for another principle, not this one.

The Shaykh : Let him clarify it for us.
Al-'Uwayshah: This, this.

The Shaykh : No, the matter is not clear. He says the branch does not fall under the principle, but it falls under another principle.
Al-'Uwayshah: That is what I intended, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Well, clarify it for us.
Al-'Uwayshah: A general principle, but...
Mashhur: Among the guidelines in acceptable disagreement, is the mentioned guideline considered one of the Sharia guidelines?

The Shaykh : "The mentioned" means what?
Mashhur: Fiqh rulings that are pulled by principles where there is no explicit Sharia ruling, meaning not textually specified, and opinions differ regarding attaching them to this principle.

The Shaykh : It is possible, but his research is on an issue that is textually specified in Sharia. Is it addressed by fiqh principles or not? His first statement was that there is exaggeration in applying these principles to the branches.
Al-'Uwayshah: My Shaykh, this is what I intended.

The Shaykh : But, my brother, he is going around something else. He is going around applying usul or usul principles to branches that have no Sharia text. That is not your topic.
Al-'Uwayshah: O my Shaykh, this...

The Shaykh : Well, what is appropriate? You said this, but was the research not on textually specified branches? What do you want?
Mashhur: The Shaykh al-Islam mentioned in the Fatawa that ta'wil (figurative interpretation) of the names and attributes did not occur, despite his review of tafsir books specifically, except in what is reported from Ibn 'Abbas.