Bring together the steps of a complete analogy:
Original and ruling: wine and its prohibition.
Effective cause: intoxication, established as legally relevant.
Subsidiary case: a newly encountered drink reliably shown to be intoxicating.
Checks: no opposing text, no change to a textual ruling, intelligible original rationale, a genuinely legal question, and no independent governing text for the new case.
Only then can the jurist assess whether the original ruling applies to the new case. Qiyas does not replace revelation; it is a disciplined method of reasoning from it. The next section distinguishes effective cause from sabab, shart, and mani‘.