قياس الشبه عند الأصوليين و أثره في الفروع الفقهية

الملخص EN

Measuring the similarity of the fundamentalists and its impact on the branches of jurisprudence
Suleiman Abdul-Wahhab Al-Shahat Badawi.

Department of Fundamentals of Jurisprudence, Faculty of Sharia and Law in Tafahna Al-Ashraf - Dakahlia, Al-Azhar University, Egypt.

E-mail University: soulmanabdalwhab.31@azhar.

edu.

eg

This research deals with a type of measurement called the analogy measurement, and he knew it Fundamentalists: attaching a branch to an original with a description that you think is appropriate without knowing it It is after a thorough search by those who are qualified to look at it, and it was written from the street to pay attention to it in some provisions.

By studying this subject, it became clear to us that there is a difference between measuring the similarity and measuring the cause.

And the measure of expulsion, and that the measure of likeness is a different type to measure the predominance of likeness.

The fundamentalists differed in its authenticity and the fact that it was valid for explanation on different schools of thought.

Some of them said that it is an argument and the justification for it is valid, and it is the doctrine of the majority of the fundamentalists.

And some of them said that it is not an argument and it is not valid to justify it, and it is the view of some of the Hanafis.

And some of the Malikis, and some of the Shafi'is, and Imam Al-Razi went to consider the similarities in what.

It is most likely that it is dependent on the ruling, by thinking that it necessitates the reason for the ruling, and Ibn.

The one who obstructs is saying that it is an argument, and it is valid to justify it, but without considering the resemblance from.

It is one of the paths of the cause, rather it must be proven by another path except the path of Allah.

The occasion, and Imam Al-Ghazali went to the point that the analogy of resemblance, if the mujtahid adheres to it, was an argument
In his right, if there is a preponderance of conjecture, otherwise not, and every school has inferred what it went to
With his evidence, and after studying and discussing these evidences, it became clear to us that the most correct of these schools of thought is
The view of the majority that the analogy of resemblance is an argument and valid for justification.

Then, in this research, we dealt with some branches of jurisprudence based on analogy.