“类比”（al-Qiyaas）是建立在分支（al-Far‘）与根源（al-Asl）共有同一个“教法因由”（al-‘Illah）的基础之上的；但该“教法因由”在分支中可能比在根源中更强、更为明显。这就是“更优类比”（Qiyaas al-Awlaa）。

Al-Qiyaas is built or based upon the shared commonality of the Far’u (branch) with the ‘Asl (origin) in respect to one single ‘Illah however the ‘Illah could be stronger (or more evident) in the branch than it is in the origin. This is the Qiyaas Al-Awlaa.

它也可以在分支上与原始情况相等。这被称为“Al-Qiyaas Al-Musaawiy”（等同类比）。

It could also be equal in the branch as it is in the origin. This is called Al-Qiyaas Al-Musaawiy.

它在分支上可能比在本源上更弱。这被称为"Al-Qiyaas Al-Adnaa"（低级类比）。

And it could be weaker in the branch than it is in the origin. This is called Al-Qiyaas Al-Adnaa.

这是指分支（Far'u）中的“Illah”比其本源（Asl）中更为强烈，因此在分支中确立（或证明、肯定）该Hukm，比在本源中更为合适（或更为明显）。

This is when the ‘Illah of the branch (Far’u) is stronger than it is in origin (Asl) and so the establishment (or proof/affirmation) of the Hukm in the branch is Awlaa (more evident or applicable) than in respect to the origin.

示例:

Example:

安拉塔阿拉说:

Allah Ta’Aalaa says:

这段文字禁止 At-Ta’feef（表示不满或轻蔑）。

The text here prohibits At-Ta’feef (showing displeasure/disdain)

对父母的，其“illah”（效因）包含在字面表述之中，即“伤害”之义。同样的“伤害”之效因，在殴打父母这一行为中以更加强烈、更为严重的方式存在。因此，禁止殴打父母（此为分支）比禁止对父母表示不满（此为根本）更为合适、更具约束力。

towards the parents and the ‘Illah is that which is contained within the Lafzh (expression) in terms of (the meaning of) harm. This same ‘Illah of ‘harm’ is present in the act of hitting the parents in a more powerful and stronger manner. Consequently, the prohibition of hitting the parents (which is the branch) is Awlaa (more effective/fitting) than the prohibition of showing displeasure towards the parents (which is the origin).

一些主张usool（法理学）的学者认为，禁止打父母的规定是由经文本身确立的，而不是通过类比（Qiyaas）确立的。原因在于，经文的Mafhoom（即经文隐含所理解的意义）已经指示并引导至该禁令，无需类比。这是以较低或较轻的事物来提醒或引起人们对较高或较重事物的注意。因此，表示不满的Ta'feef（斥责、表示厌烦）由经文的Mantooq（即经文字面明示的意义）而被禁止，而殴打或辱骂则通过经文的Mafhoom（即隐含的理解）而被禁止，这一观点是正确的。

Some of the scholars of Usool held the opinion that the prohibition of hitting the parents is established by the very text itself and not by Qiyaas. That is because the Mafhoom of the text (i.e. what is understood from the text by implication) indicates and guides to that prohibition without (the need of) Qiyaas. It represents alerting or drawing attention to what is higher or greater through that which is lower or lesser than it. So the Ta’feef (displaying displeasure) is Muharram (prohibited) by the Mantooq of the text (i.e. what is expressly understood from the worded expressions) whilst hitting or insulting is prohibited through the Mafhoom of the text (i.e. the implied understanding) and this represents the correct view.

同样，另一个例子见于安拉塔阿拉的话语：

Similarly, another example of this is found in the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

可以从这节经文中不通过类比（Qiyaas）而直接理解：这类人在超过一个第纳尔的财物上是不可信的。

It is understood from the Aayah without Qiyaas that this category of people are not trustworthy in respect to that which is greater than a Deenaar.

这里所说的，是“原件”（Asl）中的“illah”与“分支”（Far'u）中的“illah”相等（Musaawiy），而大部分的类比推理（Qiyaas）都围绕这一类别展开。以我们前面提到的例子来说，禁止在星期五聚礼（Salaat ul-Jumu'ah）时间内经商，其“illah”是“分散注意力”（Ilhaa'），使人无法履行拜功（Salaah）。那么，因租赁（Ijaarah）或从事某项体育活动等而造成的分散注意力，即代表“分支”的情况，在导致分散注意力这一点上，与经商所造成的分散注意力是相等的。

This is where the ‘Illah in the Asl (origin) is equal (Musaawiy) to the ‘Illah in the Far’u (branch) and most of Qiyaas revolves around this category. In the example that we mentioned earlier which is the ‘Illah of the prohibition of conducting trade as the time of Salaat ulJumu’ah represented in the ‘Illah of Ilhaa’ (distraction) from the performance of the Salaah, then the distraction due to Ijaarah (leasing/renting) or engaging in a sporting activity for instance, which represents the branch, is equal in respect to the distraction found in the act of conducting trade.

示例：

Examples:

他的真主至高者之言:

His Qawl Ta’Aalaa:

这段经文出现在人们请求使者(saw)分配战利品(战利品)之后，分配给贫穷穆斯林的原因(起因，即“伊莱”)是，财富不应仅仅在富人之间流转。因此，命令下达，将“फै”(Al-Fai’，即“法依”)分配给穷人。 Note: the original has "the Messenger of Allah (saw)", so per the rules the honorific should be ﷺ, and "(saw)" should be replaced by ﷺ. Corrected translation: 这段经文出现在人们请求使者ﷺ分配战利品(战利品)之后，分配给贫穷穆斯林的原因(起因，即“伊莱”)是，财富不应仅仅在富人之间流转。因此，命令下达，将法依(Al-Fai’)分配给穷人。

This part of the Aayah came after the request to the Messenger of Allah (saw) to divide and distribute the spoils (booty) amongst the poor Muslims and the ‘Illah (reason) is so that the wealth does not remain circulating amongst the wealthy or rich alone. As such, the command came for the spoils (Al-Fai’) to be distributed upon the poor.

欧麦尔·本·赫塔布(愿真主喜悦他)以类比(戛雅斯)的方式,对那些被武力征服的伊拉克土地作出了判定。依照此类比,他将这些土地仍留在原有居民手中,条件是他们缴纳哈拉只税,并使这笔哈拉只税的收入分配给贫穷的穆斯林,用于照顾他们的事务,直至末日。

‘Umar ibn Al-Khattaab (ra) made Qiyaas (analogy) with the lands of Iraq that had been opened by force upon that wealth. As such he kept it in the hands of its original people upon the basis that they pay Kharaaj and so that the revenue of this Kharaaj would be distributed upon the poor Muslims and be used to foster their affairs until the Day of Judgement.

因此,防止财富在特定阶层之间流通,构成了该"Illah"(效因),而这一效因同样适用于战利品中所体现的财富,以及以"Kharaaj"(土地税)形式所体现的财富。

Consequently, preventing the circulation of wealth amongst a particular class represents the ‘Illah and this ‘Illah is equal or applies equally in respect to the wealth manifested in spoils or booty and the wealth which is represented in the Kharaaj.

当'illah（效果因）在分支（Far'u）中的体现比在本源（Asl）中更弱或程度更低时，便是如此。

This is when the ‘Illah is realised weaker or to a lesser degree in the Far’u (branch) than it is realised in the Asl (origin).

有人以此为依据,认为醉意(iskaar)是禁止饮酒(khamr)的'illah(效因)。他们是就这样一种情形而言的,即以致醉这一'illah为依据来判定khamr的禁止。

Some have utilised that in respect to the intoxication that they regarded to represent the ‘Illah for the Tahreem (prohibition) of Khamr in the case where this ‘Illah of Iskaar (causing intoxication)

可能在大麦酒类饮品中的酒精强度，比枣类饮品要弱，例如。

could be weaker in a barley alcoholic beverage than a date beverage for example.

"致醉"（Iskaar，即导致醉酒）是禁令的Sabab（原因、缘由），而不是'Illah（effective cause，即据以类比的effective cause）。至于人们用葡萄酒做类比而推及的其他饮品，如Nabeedh（用枣等制成的其他发酵饮品），其实质便是Khamr（酒），文本本身已经包含并涵盖了它，无需通过Qiyaas（类比推理）。这是因为真主的使者ﷺ说：

Iskaar (causing intoxication) is the Sabab (cause) of the prohibition and not the ‘Illah and what they have made analogy upon with the Khamr of grapes like the Nabeedh (other fermented beverages from dates for example) then it is in its reality Khamr (alcohol) and the text already includes and encapsulates it without Qiyaas. That is because the Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

因此,“Khamr”一词适用于一切使心智昏迷的东西,即它蒙蔽心智、使人头脑迟钝。由此可见,使人醉的“Iskaar”(致醉)并不是其“‘Illah”(效因)。假如它是“‘Illah”,那么饮用少量未致醉的Khamr就会是Mubaah(允许的),然而立法者(Shaari')的经文已经以圣使ﷺ的话明确禁止了它,其言曰:

Therefore, the word Khamr is applied to everything that intoxicates the mind, where it clouds it and makes it dull-witted. Consequently, Iskaar (causing intoxication) is not an ‘Illah. Had it been the ‘Illah then drinking a portion of Khamr without that causing intoxication would be Mubaah (permissible) whilst the text of the Shaari’ (legislator) has mentioned its prohibition by the statement of the Messenger of Allah (saw):

因此，不存在以低级（Adnaa）类比高级（A'alaa）的任何指示（Dalaalah）。关于安拉塔阿拉的言辞：

There is therefore no Dalaalah (indication) in respect to the Adnaa (lower) being analogised with the A’alaa (higher). So in respect to the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa:

"明文"（المنطوق）所表达的是：如果你把大量的钱交给某些人，他们会保管好并归还。"隐含义"（المفهوم）所表达的是：如果把少于"一坎塔尔"（即大量财物）的钱交给这类人，他们同样会保管好并归还（或偿还）。这一点并非通过类比推理（القياس）得出，而是来自隐含义的指示（الدلالة）所理解的内容。

The Mantooq (expressed meaning) of the Lafzh (wording) indicates that there are people whom if you were to give them a great amount of money they would safeguard it and return it. The Mafhoom (implied meaning) of the Lafzh indicates that if the like of these people were to be given less than a Cantar (great amount) they would safeguard it and return or repay it (readily). This is not understood or derived by Qiyaas but rather from the Dalaalah (indication) of the Mafhoom (the understanding that is implied).

类比推理（القياس）根据其层次与强度，可分为两类：显而易见的（جلي）与隐晦的（خفي）。

Al-Qiyaas is divided in terms of its level and strength into two categories: Jaliy and Khafiy.

这种类型是指：在原级（Asl）与分级（Far'u）之中实现“伊拉”（'Illah）时，二者之间不存在区分。这在前面提到的“平等类比”（Qiyaas Al-Musaawiy）中可以看出，也有学者认为，它既在“更优类比”（Qiyaas Al-Awlaa）中实现，也在“平等类比”中实现。

This is the type in which there is no differentiator between the Asl (origin) and the Far’u (branch) in respect to realising the ‘Illah within each of them. This is evident in respect to the Qiyaas Al-Musaawiy mentioned previously and some have said that it is realised in both the Qiyaas Al-Awlaa and the Qiyaas Al-Musaawiy.

这是指在分支(Far')与本源(Asl)之间,对于'Illah(效因)的实现存在一个区别因素的情况。例如,用石头等沉重或钝的物体杀人,与用剑、子弹等锋利(或尖锐)的物体杀人相比较所进行的类比推理(Qiyaas),在这种情况下,该区别因素是否具有影响力或作用(Mu'aththir),存在不同看法。因此,艾卜·哈尼法(愿真主慈悯他)认为,用沉重物体致人死亡的情况下,不存在义务的同等报复刑(Al-Qisaas);而其他法学家则认为,在这种情况下同等报复刑是义务的。

This is when there is a differentiator in respect to the realisation of the ‘Illah between the branch and the origin. An example of this is like the Qiyaas of killing with a heavy or blunt object like a rock upon the killing carried out with the sharp (or piercing) object like a sword and a bullet, in the case where it is permitted for the differentiator to be influential or impacting (Mu’aththir) or not. For this reason, Abu Haneefah (rh) held that Al-Qisaas (punishment of retribution) is not obligatory in relation to the killing undertaken by a heavy object whilst other Fuqahaa viewed that Al-Qisaas is obligatory in its case.

据他们的看法，这并不包括或涵盖除"最低限度的类比"（Al-Qiyaas Al-Adnaa）之外的情形。然而，正确的观点是：钝器与利器之间，在满足或实现"Illah"（效因）方面并无区别，而该效因即杀人（或谋杀）的发生，因此将钝器类比于利器。

And this, according to their opinion, does not include or cover other than Al-Qiyaas Al-Adnaa. However, the correct opinion is that the heavy or blunt object is analogised with the sharp object due to the absence of a differentiator between them in respect to fulfilling or realising the ‘Illah which is the occurrence of killing (or murder).

沙斐仪（Ash-Shaafi'iy）将"qiyaas al-jaliy"（明显的类比）称为"qiyaas al-ma'naa"（意义的类比），将"qiyaas al-khafiy"（隐晦的类比）称为"qiyaas ash-shabah"（相似的类比）。

Ash-Shaafi’iy called the Qiyaas Al-Jaliy: ‘Qiyaas Al-Ma’naa’ (of meaning) and he called the Qiyaas Al-Khafiy: ‘Qiyaas Ash-Shabah’ (resemblence)