Its meaning, which is harm). In this saying, there is an exclusion of every analogical meaning based on the exercise of opinion to attach a branch to an origin. And a restriction of the issue to the meaning of the text, with an understanding of what is implied but not explicitly stated, based on the context of the speech and its intention.

Al-Ghazali included this analogy (as Ibn Tumart called it) in the chapter on what is inferred from words based on their meaning. He considered that the ruling is obtained by understanding what is implied but not explicitly stated from what is stated. Or, in other words, by attaching the unmentioned to the mentioned. He referred to the first type mentioned by Al-Mahdi as where the unmentioned is attached to the mentioned, considering that the unmentioned is more deserving of the ruling than the mentioned. He gave the example of "uff" (displeasure) for the same. He referred to the second type as where the unmentioned is attached to the mentioned, considering that the unmentioned is like the mentioned, and is neither more deserving nor less deserving than it. So it is said to be in the meaning of the origin. He gave several examples, including the saying: "And whoever kills them from among the free women" (Al-Nisa/25), so the free adulteresses are punished. (The unmentioned) is attached to the ruling of the enslaved adulteresses (which is mentioned). The criterion for this attachment is that the difference between the unmentioned and the mentioned has no bearing on the type of ruling. This is known by inductively examining the rulings of Sharia and its sources and origins in that category, so that it is known, for example, that the ruling of slavery and freedom does not differ based on gender, nor does it differ based on whiteness or blackness. This last meaning is what Al-Mahdi referred to in his commentary on the examples of the second type, saying: "And if this is followed, it applies to all Sharia rulings, just as it applies to rational matters."

Al-Ghazali discussed whether this type of inference falls under analogy, and he favored that, especially the first type, is far from being called analogy, because it is not included in it. [Al-Bazdawi, Usul, p. 69] [See: Al-Ghazali, Al-Mustasfa, p. 70 and subsequent pages, 190-191, 281] [Ibn Tumart, Risala fi anna al-Sharia la tathbut bil-'aql, p. 173] 306