that is, one whose effect in a comparable ruling is explicitly stated. For example, it is known that the Lawgiver has made being a minor the basis for guardianship over property. If guardianship in marriage is likewise based on it, the effective cause of this ruling is established through its recognized effect in the comparable ruling.

When the attribute has no such established effect, however, it is what they call an uncorroborated suitable attribute. There are two well-known positions concerning it, for this involves inferring that Islamic law has attached the ruling to the attribute solely on the basis of the benefit we perceive.

Whoever carefully considers the evidence of Islamic law, both explicit and inferred, will recognize that sound analogy consists in treating like cases alike. It is part of the justice commanded by Allah and His Messenger, and it is true and cannot be false. The Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was sent with justice. He therefore never assigned the same ruling to two things unless they were alike in the respect warranting that equality, nor did he distinguish between two things in a ruling unless they differed in the respect warranting that distinction. Sound analogy cannot contradict an authentic text, just as clear reason cannot contradict authentic transmission. Rather, if someone supposes that a text and an analogy conflict, one of two things must be the case: either the analogy is unsound, or the text does not support the conclusion drawn from it.

Nevertheless, the Quran and Sunnah have explained all rulings through general terms. Bringing particular cases within their scope, however, requires precise understanding and penetrating insight, so that each particular case is included within a category, and that category within another category explained by the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.