Three methodologies may be applied in analytical studies and scientific research:

1. Inference from one particular to another - when two subjects are similar and a judgement about one is known, that judgement may be inferred to the other subject on the basis of it being similar. The technical term for this in Islamic law is analogy - qiyas.

2. Inference from the particular to the universal is called induction - istiqra'. In order to arrive at a rule that is truly 'universal' scientists have to examine an extremely wide number of incidents and repeat experiments before being able to claim that 'universality' really does exist.

3. Inference from the universal to the particular is referred to as deduction, or a syllogism - burhan. This is a formal deductive argument made up of a major premise or kubra, a minor premise or sughra, and a conclusion or natijah. An example of such inference within Aristotelian logic is, 'All birds have feathers, penguins are birds, therefore penguins have feathers.'

In comparisons between the above three methodologies, we observe: for analogy or qiyas to be a reliable tool in the derivation of Islamic legal rulings, the Imamiyah emphasize the need for it to be definitive and not speculative. However, other schools of Islamic law, the Hanafiyah in particular, make no differentiation between that which is definitive and that which is speculative.

As for induction - istiqra' - it goes without saying that exploration of as many particulars as possible is required before one is able to provide a definitive universal judgement. With regard to deduction/ syllogism or burhan, it is agreed by all scholars that in the absence of the article 'all' in the major premise, such reasoning is false. For example, if it were to be said that 'Birds sing beautifully, penguins are birds, therefore penguins sing beautifully', the reasoning used for such judgement can clearly be seen to be false because it has not been asserted that 'all' birds sing beautifully.

Speculative Reasoning Does Not Provide Valid Methodology

In referring to the Holy Qur'an we find that,

“Most of them [those who disbelieve] follow nothing other than conjecture; truly conjecture is not able to provide the truth.” (Surah Yunus, 10:36).

In another ayah, Allah condemns those who suggest measures for both the lawful and the unlawful based only upon their own understandings, saying,

“Has Allah permitted you, or do you forge a lie against Allah?” (Surah Yunus, 10:59).

It is clear from the above that speculative conclusions that are not based upon definitive statements do not provide a valid methodology for the derivation of Islamic rulings.

Judgements passed in courts have to be based upon definitive investigations. In referring to judges who make mistakes, for which they are to be held accountable on the Day of Judgement, the Prophet (S) included those whose verdicts, despite being precise, were not based upon thorough investigations.1

In another hadith, the Prophet (S) is recorded to have said, 'Those who act without proper knowledge ruin more than they may cure'.2

Based upon the Holy Qur'an and the above ahadith, the Imamiyah reject speculative analogical deduction - qiyas - and do not regard it to be a valid methodology in the absence of textual sources.

Essential Requirements For Qiyas

Technically, qiyas is the extension of a shari’ah value from an original case - asl - to a new case on grounds that the latter has the same effective cause as the former. The original case is regulated by a given text and qiyas seeks to extend the same textual ruling to the new case.3

The essential requirements for qiyas are:

1. The original case – asl – on which a ruling has been given in the text and which analogy seeks to extend to a new case.

2. The new case – far’ – on which a ruling is needed.

3. The effective cause – ‘illah – that is a characteristic of the asl to be shared with the subject of the new case.

4. The ruling – hukm – that has been clearly given for the original case and, by way of qiyas, extended to the new case.

A good example for this is that it is clearly prohibited for Muslims to drink wine (this is asl) and its prohibition is called hukm. There is no text to tell us about the ruling regarding the taking of narcotics, so by establishing similarities in the effective cause (‘illah) between wine and drugs, those who support qiyas extend the ruling for wine to cover narcotics. The only observation of the Imamiyah regarding this type of derivation is that similarity in the effective cause must be definitive rather than speculative.

But how can one differentiate between the definitive and speculative bases?

1. When the lesser degree of any action is prohibited in a text, it is logically right to say that the greater degree is also prohibited. For example, in Qur'an we read that none is permitted to say to their parents “I am fed up with you” (Surah Isra’, 17:23).

It is only rational and logical that insults via the use of stronger words or actions are prohibited too. This is technically referred to as mafhum al-Muwafaqah.

2. When the wording in the original ruling is used only as an example, e.g. when we read in a hadith that, 'You have to wash hands that have been in contact with impurities such as urine,' it follows that this applies to any other parts of the body too - the hands being only the example. This is technically referred to as definitive effective cause - tanqih al manat al qat’i.

3. When the effective cause ‘illah is mentioned in the text itself. For example, when we read in a hadith that 'Drinking wine is prohibited because it leads to intoxication', the reason for such prohibition is explicitly mentioned in the text and can thus be applied to any other item that is likely to cause intoxication. This is technically referred to as mansus al ‘illah.

To go back to the example of narcotics, by extending the ruling for wine to encompass them we employ syllogism rather than analogy, explained as follows:

The major premise: All intoxicants are prohibited

The minor premise: Narcotics are intoxicants

The result: Narcotics are prohibited

If we use the above methodology of syllogism or refer to the case as mansus al ‘illah we arrive at the same conclusion.

All jurists concur that the Qur'an and the Sunnah constitute the sources - asl - of qiyas. However, according to the Hanafiyah, qiyas may also be founded upon rules that have been established by consensus. For instance, Allah tells us in Qur'an 4:6 to monitor minors, and when it is clear that they have attained maturity, to permit them to deal with their own property themselves.4

This rule indicates that minors need the consent of their guardian to validate the decisions they make concerning their wealth. This is the asl of some of those who defend the concept of qiyas and extend need for the consent of the guardian to female minors' dealings with marriage - on the grounds that they perceive similarities between marriage and transactions.5

• 1. Wasa'il al-Shi’ah, Vol. 27, p. 22.
• 2. Wasa'il al-Shi’ah, Vol. 27, p. 25.
• 3. Al-Shawkani, lrshad al-Fuhul, p. 198.
• 4. The full verse reads:
  "And do test the orphans until they reach the age of marriage. Then, if you find in them maturity, make over to them their property and do not consume it wastefully and hastily lest they should grow up; and whoever (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain (from taking something of the property of the orphans) and whoever is poor, let him devour reasonably. Then, when you make over to them their properly, take witnesses over them; and Allah is enough as a Reckoner." (Surah An-Nisa’, 4:6).
• 5. Abu Zahra, Usul, p. 181.