As regards differentiating between similar things, the Shar’a has differentiated between times that seem similar to the Muslim in terms of their honour. Thus it has given a preference to the laylatul qadr (night of Power) over other nights. It has also discriminated between places in terms of their honour, such as the preference for Makkah over Madinah, and Madinah over other cities. It has distinguished between the prayers when they are shortened, so the prayer consisting of four raka’at is shortened, whilst the three and two raka’at are not shortened. It has distinguished between the maniy (semen) and the maziy (pre-seminal fluid).

It made the maniy pure and the maziy impure, even though they both emit from the same place. It obliged the one to have ghusl (bath) from the maniy and invalidated his fast, when it is deliberately emitted, but not if it is maziy, even though they emit from the same place. It obliged the clothes to be washed because of the urine of a baby girl, but only to be sprinkled by water if it is the urine of a baby boy. It obliged the menstruating woman to make up the fast but not the salah. It cut the hand of the one who stole three dirham but did not cut the hand of the one who illegally possessed huge sums of wealth. It made the ‘iddah (waiting period) of the divorced woman three menstrual cycles, whilst the waiting period of the widow is four months and ten days, even though the condition of the rahm (womb) is the same. In this manner we find many matters that are similar and one can combine them. If it were left to the mind to give the rules in these issues, then it would have made mistakes. It would have brought a rule in conflict with what the Shar’a has given. The Shar’a has given for each one a different rule, which indicates the falsehood of this innovated method of analogy.