1. As one may note from the small introduction to the Islamic Seminary home page, in the scholastic section among the text books named for reference is Kifayatul ‘Usul of Aakhun-de Khurasani (may God reward him in abundance). This textbook does not treat the "Analogical inference" directly. There is a short discussion about it, as is the case in general with the normal style of this work even when dealing with the issues that are of vital status to the author and the subject of his concern.

One reason perhaps is what one may find in the following statement of Aakhun-de Khurasani: "Even if reason would consider Qiyas (analogy) as Hujjat (authoritative judgment) it is only when there no other form of Hujjat in the form of ‘amarah or ‘asl with valid authority would be available". This may indicate that he is preoccupied with other issues in the sources of the Shari’a.

2. There is a small verbal confusion in this matter and should be cleared first and before any detailed discussion.

The term, Qiyas, in the works on the Islamic jurisprudence is indicative of the term that in logic is called Tamthil, Analogy, which is one of the forms and modes of inference; the other two being Qiyas, and Istiqra..

The two latter forms of inference are also known as:

1. Deductive,
2. Inductive reasoning.

Huge works are available on both forms of reasoning by the western scholars as well as the Muslim scholars. On the other hand Tamthil, Analogical form of inference is only mentioned along with either one of the aforementioned forms of logic.

Keeping the above into consideration a very small, yet very much to the point, account of the role of Analogical reasoning and inference is available in the works of Al- Shaykh Muhammad Raza Al-Muzaffar of Najaf, Iraq. ’Usul Al-fiqh vol. 2. 4^th Edition 1983.