Hoja dhidi ya Qiyas zimetolewa hasa na madhehebu ya Dhahiri (wanaofuata maana ya wazi ya matini), na baadhi ya Mu'tazilah, akiwemo Ibrahim al-Nazzam. Pia, kimsingi, Shi'a Imamiyyah hawakubali uhalali wa Qiyas, kwani wanashikilia kuwa Qiyas ni dhana tupu ambayo inapaswa kuepukwa. Zaidi ya hayo, Qur'ani, Sunnah na hukumu za Maimamu, kwa mujibu wa Ulamaa wa Shi'a, zinatoa mwongozo wa kutosha wa mwenendo, na kutaja Qiyas ni jambo lisilo la lazima wala lisilo na msingi.14

The arguments against Qiyas have been articulated mainly by the Zahiri (literalist) school, and some amongst the Mu'tazilah, including, Ibrahim al-Nazzam. Also in principle, the Shi‟a Imamiyyah do not recognise the validity of Qiyas, as they maintain that Qiyas is pure conjecture which must be avoided. In addition, the Quran, the Sunnah and the rulings of the Imams, according to the Shi'i Ulema, provide sufficient guidance for conduct, and any reference to Qiyas is unnecessary and unwarranted.14

Hii ndiyo msimamo wa tawi la Akhbari la Shi'a Ithnā 'Ashariyya, ambao kukataa kwao Qiyas kunafanana sana na kile cha Zahiri. Lakini tawi la Usuli la Shi'a huhalalisha vitendo kwa kutumia aina fulani za Qiyas, yaani Qiyas ambayo 'Illah yake imetajwa waziwazi katika maandiko (Qiyas mansus al-'Illah), Qiyas ya ulinganifu wa bora (Qiyas al-awla), na Qiyas dhahiri (Qiyas jali). Aina hizi za Qiyas, kwa mtazamo wao, si dhana tupu; ama zinaingia katika maana ya maandiko, au zinaunda uwezekano mkubwa (Al-zann al-qawi) ambao unaweza kuchukuliwa kama mwongozo wa mwenendo. Lakini wao wanathibitisha hili kupitia Ijtihad na 'Aql badala ya Qiyas yenyewe.15

This is definitely the view of the Akhbari branch of the Twelve Shi‟a, whose refutation of Qiyas closely resembles that of the Zahiris. But the Usuli branch of the Shi‟a validate action upon certain varieties of Qiyas, namely Qiyas whose „Illah is explicitly stated in the text (Qiyas mansus al-`‟Illah), analogy of the superior (Qiyas al-awla) and obvious analogy (Qiyas jali). These varieties of Qiyas, in their view, are not mere speculations; they either fall within the meaning of the text or else constitute a strong probability (Al-zann al-qawi) which may be adopted as a guide for conduct. But they validate this through recourse to Ijtihad and „Aql rather than Qiyas per se.15

Lakini wale waliokataa Qiyas kama vile Dhahiriyya hawakukataa kwa kweli kanuni ya Qiyas, kwa sababu walikubali pale ilipotokana na mantuq (maana iliyotamkwa). Kwa kuwa wao walikuwa Dhahiriyya, yaani wafuasi wa maana ya moja kwa moja ya maandiko, hawakuchukua 'Illah (sababu) zilizotokana na mafhum (maana iliyodokezwa), kwa kuwa hiyo ingekuwa kufuata dhana na si yakini. Na kuhusu 'Illah iliyochukuliwa kutoka kwenye Mantuq, hawakuiita Qiyas, kwa sababu waliiona kuwa ni kufuata tu maana ya dhahiri (Zaahir) ya maandiko, wakati Qiyas kwao ilikuwa neno lililotumika kumaanisha mchakato wa dhana (Dhanni) katika kutunga sheria, jambo ambalo waliliona kuwa haliwezekani kukubalika. Ndiyo sababu walikataa neno Qiyas na baadhi ya aina zake, ingawa kwa uhalisia walikubali kanuni yake.

However, those who rejected Qiyas like the Zahiris did not actually reject the principle of Qiyas because they accepted it when it came from the mantuq (uttered meaning). Being Zahiris i.e. literalists they did not take the „Illal (reasons) that were derived from the mafhum (implied meaning) for this would be following speculation and not certainty. And as for the „Illah taken from the Mantuq they did not call this Qiyas because they considered it as simply following the literal (Zaahir) meaning of the text whilst Qiyas for them was a term used to mean a speculative (Dhanni) process in legislation which they found unacceptable. That is why they rejected the term Qiyas and some of its forms though in reality they accepted it in principle.

Ibn Hazm, mmoja wa wanazuoni wa Kizahiri aliyepinga kwa nguvu zaidi Qiyas, alisema: "Kwamba Mwenyezi Mungu amepanga sababu fulani kwa baadhi ya sheria zake, lakini sisemi hivyo isipokuwa pale tu panapokuwepo Nass (maandiko) ya kuthibitisha jambo hilo." Kisha akaendelea kunukuu Hadithi ya Mtume ﷺ isemayo: "Muovu mkubwa zaidi katika Uislamu ni yule anayeuliza kuhusu jambo ambalo si haramu, kisha likawa haramu kutokana na swali lake."16

Ibn Hazm one of the most outspoken against Qiyas from the Zahiri scholars said: “That God has assigned certain causes to some of His laws, but we say this only when there is a Nass (text) to confirm it.” He then goes on to quote a Hadith of the Prophet to the effect that, “The greatest wrongdoer in Islam is one who asks about something, which is not forbidden, and it is then forbidden because of his questioning”.16

Ibn Hazm anaendelea: “Sisi tunakataa kabisa kwamba hukumu zote za Shari‟ah zinaweza kufafanuliwa na kuelezwa kwa sababu. Mwenyezi Mungu huweka sheria kama apendavyo. Swali la „vipi na kwa nini‟ halihusiani wala halipaswi kuelekezwa kwa mapenzi Yake. Kwa hiyo si sahihi kwa mtu yeyote kuuliza, pale ambapo hakuna maandishi wazi, kuhusu sababu za sheria za Mungu. Yeyote anayeuliza maswali na kutafuta sababu za amri za Mungu 'anamwasi Mwenyezi Mungu na anafanya uvunjaji wa mipaka”.17

Ibn Hazm continues: “We firmly deny that all the Ahkam of Shari‟ah can be explained and rationalised in terms of causes. Almighty God enacts a law as He wills. The question of „how and why‟ does not and must not be applied to His will. Hence it is improper for anyone to enquire, in the absence of a clear text, into the causes of divine laws. Anyone who poses questions and searches for the causes of God's injunctions 'defies Almighty God and commits a transgression”.17

Wafuasi wa qiyasi, kwa mujibu wa Ibn Hazm, wanadhania kwamba Shari‘ah haitoi maandiko kwa kila jambo, dhana ambayo, kwa mtazamo wake, inapingana na Aya za Qur’ani. Anataja Aya ifuatayo kuthibitisha hili: “Hatukuacha chochote katika Kitabu” (TMQ Al-An‘am: 38)

The supporters of analogy, according to Ibn Hazm, proceed on the assumption that the Shari‟ah fails to provide a text for every matter, an assumption which is contrary to the Ayat of the Quran in his view. He quotes the following Ayat to this effect: “We have neglected nothing in the Book” (TMQ Al-An‟am: 38)

"Tumeiteremsha Kitabu kuwa ni ufafanuzi wa kila kitu." (TMQ An-Nahl: 89)

“We revealed the Book as an explanation for everything.” (TMQ An-Nahl: 89)

{Leo nimekukamilishia dini yenu, na nimetimiza neema yangu juu yenu.} (TMQ Al-Maida: 4)

“This day, I perfected year religion for you, and completed My favour upon you.” (TMQ Al-Maida: 4)

Kwa kuwa hukumu (Ahkam) za Ash-Shaari' ni kamili na zinatoa mwongozo kamili kwa kila tukio, wajibu wetu pekee ni kuzitafuta na kuzitekeleza. Kwa mtazamo wake, kuchukulia Qiyas kuwa dalili ya ziada kungekuwa sawa na kukiri kwamba Qur'ani imeshindwa kutoa mwongozo kamili.18

Since the Ahkam of the Lawgiver are all-inclusive and provide complete guidance for all events, our only duty is to discover and implement them. In his view to consider Qiyas as an additional proof would be tantamount to an acknowledgement that the Quran fails to provide complete guidance.18

Zaidi, anasema kwamba Qiyas hupata uhalali wake kutoka kwenye 'Illah ambayo ni ya kawaida kwa jambo la asili na jambo jipya. Hiyo 'Illah ama imeonyeshwa katika maandiko, na katika hali hiyo hukumu inatokana na maandiko yenyewe na Qiyas haina umuhimu; au la, pale ambapo 'Illah haijaonyeshwa hivyo, hakuna njia ya kuijua kwa uhakika. Qiyas kwa hiyo inategemea dhana, ambayo haipaswi kuruhusiwa kuwa msingi wa hukumu ya kisheria. Kwa mujibu wa Ibn Hazm, hili limetajwa katika Aya ya Qur'ani: "Dhana haifai chochote mbele ya haki" (TMQ An-Najm: 28)

Furthermore he argues that Qiyas derives its justification from an „Illah which is common to both the original and the new case. The „Illah is either indicated in the text, in which case the ruling is derived from the text itself and Qiyas is redundant; or alternatively, where the „Illah is not so indicated, there is no way of knowing it for certain. Qiyas therefore rests on conjecture, which must not be allowed to form the basis of a legal ruling. This according to Ibn Hazm, has been mentioned in the Qur‟anic Ayah: “Conjecture avails nothing against the truth” (TMQ An-Najm: 28)

Kutambua 'Illah katika Qiyas ni zoezi la kubahatisha, ilhali Qur'ani inatuamuru:

Identifying the „Illah in Qiyas is an exercise in speculation, whereas the Quran enjoins us to:

"Usifuate yale usiyo na elimu nayo." (TMQ 17:36)

“Pursue not that of which you have no knowledge.” (TMQ 17:36)

Mwishowe, Ibn Hazm anashikilia kwamba Qiyas ni haramu katika Qur'an.19 Hivyo ndivyo ilivyo aya:

Lastly, Ibn Hazm holds that Qiyas is forbidden in the Quran.19 Thus the verse:

"Enyi mlioamini! Msitangulie mbele ya Mwenyezi Mungu na Mtume Wake, na mcheni Mwenyezi Mungu."

“O you believers! Do not press forward before God and His Messenger, and fear God.” (TMQ Hujarat: 1)

Kulingana na tafsiri yake, hii ina maana kwamba waumini wanapaswa kujiepusha kutunga sheria juu ya mambo ambayo Mwenye Kutunga Sheria amechagua kunyamaza kuyahusu. Jambo hilo hilo limetajwa katika Hadithi ambapo Mtume ﷺ aliwaamuru waumini kama ifuatavyo:

According to his interpretation this means that the believers must avoid legislating on matters on which the Lawgiver has chosen to remain silent upon. The same point is conveyed in the Hadith where the Prophet (saw) ordered the believers as follows:

"Msiniulize kuhusu mambo ambayo sijayataja. Mataifa yaliyokuwa kabla yenu yaliangamizwa kwa sababu ya maswali mengi na mabishano yao na manabii wao. Ninapowaamuru jambo, lifanyeni kwa kadiri ya uwezo wenu, na jiepusheni na yale niliyoyakataza."20

“Ask me not about matters which I have not raised, nations before you were faced with destruction because of excessive questioning and disputation with their Prophets. When I command you to do something, do it to the extent that you can, and avoid what I have forbidden.”20

Kwa hiyo, kuhusu mambo ambayo maandiko ya Shari‟ah yamenyamaza, kwa mujibu wa Dhahiriyya si sahihi kwa Muislamu kuchukua hatua ya kutoa Hukm, kwani ameamrishwa asifanye hivyo. Kwa hiyo Qiyas, katika mtazamo wao, inakiuka maneno wazi ya Qur'ani na Sunnah.

Thus in regard to matters on which the Shari‟ah texts are silent, according to the Zahiri‟s it is incorrect for a Muslim to take the initiative in issuing a Hukm, for he is ordered not to do so. Qiyas therefore violates the express terms of the Quran and the Sunnah in their view.

Hoja zao zina kasoro kwa sababu zifuatazo:

Their arguments are flawed for the following reasons:

a) Aya zinazosema kwamba dini imekamilika na kwamba Qur'ani ina maelezo ya kila kitu zinamaanisha kwamba vyanzo vya Kiislamu, yaani Qur'ani na Sunnah, vina uwezo wa kushughulikia masuala yote. Wanazuoni wengi wanasema kwamba hukumu zimekuja ama moja kwa moja ndani ya maandiko haya, au kupitia dalili ambazo kwazo Qiyas au Ijtihad ni lazima. Kufanya Ijtihad au Qiyas hakubatilishi maana ya aya hizi; kwa kweli, hiyo ndiyo njia iliyoteremshwa ili kutoa hukumu kutoka kwenye Qur'ani na Sunnah.

a) The Ayat that mention that the Deen is complete and that the Quran has an explanation of everything mean that the Islamic sources i.e. the Quran and the Sunnah have the capacity to deal with all issues. The majority of Ulema argue that either rules have come directly within these texts or through indications upon which Qiyas or Ijtihad is necessary. Making Ijtihad or Qiyas does not invalidate the meaning of these Ayat in fact they are the revealed method in order to extract the rulings from the Quran and Sunnah.

b) Kuhusu baadhi ya Aya ambazo wanaopinga Qiyas wamezinukuu, hasa zile zinazohusu matumizi ya ushahidi wa dhana (Zann) katika sheria, Aya hizo zinakataza dhana katika mambo ya imani (Aqeeda) pekee. Ama kanuni za vitendo za Fiqh, nyingi zake zinatokana na maandiko yenye maana ya dhana (Dhanni dalalah). Hii haimaanishi kwamba lazima kuacha kuyatendea kazi, jambo ambalo lingemaanisha kwamba hakuna tofauti ya maoni inayoruhusiwa kabisa katika Fiqh, jambo ambalo lingepingana na ushahidi uliothibitishwa unaoruhusu tofauti ya maoni katika maeneo fulani.

b) With reference to some of the Ayat that the opponents of Qiyas have quoted, especially on the use of speculative evidence in law, the Ayat in question forbid speculation (Zann) in matters of belief (Aqeeda) only. As for the practical rules of Fiqh, most of them are from texts which are speculative in meaning (Dhanni dalalah). This does not necessarily mean that action upon them must be suspended, the conclusion of which would mean that there would be no difference of opinion allowed at all in Fiqh, which would be contrary to established evidences permitting difference of opinion in certain areas.

c) Aya za Qur'an zenye neno "Illah", pamoja na dalili zilizotajwa kutoka Sunnah, na Ijma' ya Maswahaba, zimethibitisha Qiyas kuwa chanzo cha Shari'ah.

c) The Ayat from the Quran that contain „Illah, the aforementioned evidences from the Sunnah and „Ijma of the Sahabah have established Qiyas as a source of Shari‟ah.