可能会出现这样的情形：从经文（Nass）中得出的律例（Hukm）与通过类比推理（Al-Qiyaas）推导出的分支律例（Far'u）之间，发生冲突或矛盾。

It is possible for there to be a conflict or contradiction between the Hukm that is taken from the Nass (text) and the Hukm of the Far’u (branch) that is deduced by Al-Qiyaas.

可以将学者们（Fuqahaa'）在这一问题（Mas'alah）上的观点归纳为三类。

It is possible to sum up the opinions of the Fuqahaa’ in relation to this Mas’alah (issue) into three categories:

1) 如果从经文中提取的律例与通过类比（Qiyaas）推导出的分支律例相冲突，则采用从经文中理解出的律例，因为存在经文时，绝对不存在类比。无论经文是Qat'iy（确定的）还是Zhanniy（或然的），也无论经文的Dalaalah（含义与所指）是Qat'iy还是Zhanniy，此原则均适用。 2) 通过类比得出的分支律例，可以与从具有Zhanniy Dalaalah（不确定含义/所指）的经文中提取的另一律例相抵触，但不能与Qat'iy（确定的）律例相违背。

1) If the Hukm extracted from the text is in conflict with the Hukm of the branch deduced by Qiyaas then the Hukm that is understood from the text is taken and that is because there is absolutely no Qiyaas in the case where a text exists. This applies whether the text is Qat’iy or Zhanniy and whether the Dalaalah (meaning and import) of the text is Qat’iy or Zhanniy. 2) The Hukm of the branch taken by Qiyaas could contradict another Hukm taken from the text by a Zhanniy Dalaalah (indefinite meaning/import) but it cannot be contrary to the Qat’iy.

因此,如果类比(Qiyaas)与确定性经文(Al-Qat'iy)相违,则该类比被视为无效(Faasid)的类比,而取用确定性经文,因为它比类比更有力。权衡取舍(Tarjeeh)

Consequently, if the Qiyaas is contrary to Al-Qat’iy then it is considered to be a Faasid (corrupt/invalid) Qiyaas and the Qat’iy is taken because it is stronger than the Qiyaas. Outweighing (Tarjeeh)

在两种证据相互冲突时，以确定性（Qat'iy）的证据优先于以或然性（Zhanniy）的证据，这一点是所有法学家（Fuqahaa'）的共识。

the Qat’iy over the Zhanniy when they are in conflict with each other represents a point of agreement amongst all of the Fuqahaa’.

3) 有效（正确、可靠、成立）的类比推理（即经由类比推理得出的分支律例）绝不可能与天启律法文本相违或相冲突，无论该文本是确定可靠来源（Qat'iy Ath-Thuboot）的，如《古兰经》和传闻广泛的圣训（As-Sunnah Al-Mutawaatirah），还是可能可靠来源（Zhanniy Ath-Thuboot）的，如单传圣训（Akhbaar Al-Aahaad）。这是伊本·泰米叶及其学生伊本·古叶姆的观点，其依据是：如果类比推理与任何文本相违，那么它就是无效（Faasid）的类比推理。

3) The Saheeh (correct/sound/valid) Qiyaas (i.e. the Hukm of the branch deduced through Qiyaas) cannot possibly be contrary to or in conflict with the Shar’iy text at all irrespective of whether the text is Qat’iy Ath-Thuboot like the Qur’aan and the Sunnah AlMutawaatirah or if it is Zhanniy Ath-Thuboot like the Akhbaar AlAahaad. This is the opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn ulQayyim and is based on the argument that if the Qiyaas was contrary to any text then it would be a Faasid (invalid) Qiyaas.

这两种观点之间的区别如下：

The difference between this last opinion and the first is as follows:

- 关于第一种观点：即使某个类比（Qiyaas）是有效的（Saheeh），也不应转而求助于它。

- In respect to the first opinion: The Qiyaas is not turned or resorted to even if it was Saheeh (valid).

关于第三种观点：它认为，如果类比（القياس）与经文（النص）相抵触，那么这种类比是无效的（فاسد）。

- In respect to the third opinion: It considers that the Qiyaas is Faasid (invalid) if it contradicts with the Nass (text).