LessonsArgument Without New Proof: Absence of a Cause and Presumption of ContinuityQuiz

إنه كالسمك؛ فقال: فما بال السمك لا خمس فيه؟ قال: لأنه كالماء ولا خمس فيه
Ambergris was likened to fish. When asked why fish bear no khums, the reply likened them to water, on which no khums is due.

The exchange separates surface resemblance from a valid legal cause. Calling one thing like fish and fish like water cannot establish the ruling unless the attribute on which the law actually depends is identified.

A proper analogy requires separate examination of the original case, the new case, the ruling and a legally relevant cause common to them. Mere comparison of physical characteristics is inadequate.

Opening interactive controls...

Ambergris and fish: examining the analogy

Argument Without New Proof: Absence of a Cause and Presumption of Continuity

إنه كالسمك؛ فقال: فما بال السمك لا خمس فيه؟ قال: لأنه كالماء ولا خمس فيه
Ambergris was likened to fish. When asked why fish bear no khums, the reply likened them to water, on which no khums is due.

The exchange separates surface resemblance from a valid legal cause. Calling one thing like fish and fish like water cannot establish the ruling unless the attribute on which the law actually depends is identified.

A proper analogy requires separate examination of the original case, the new case, the ruling and a legally relevant cause common to them. Mere comparison of physical characteristics is inadequate.