is a form of analogical reasoning, as when one says: “The case of someone who kills with a fuller’s implement is like that of someone who kills with a sword,” or “The case of a cat falling into oil is like that of a mouse falling into clarified butter,” and so forth. It rests on identifying the common features and differences between the two cases with respect to the attributes relevant to the judgment one seeks to affirm or deny.

His saying, “Its likeness is like that of such-and-such,” compares one mental representation with another, since it is through these that the analogy is drawn. Someone drawing a comparison considers one case, and it becomes represented in his mind; he then considers the other, and it too becomes represented in his mind. He then compares the two representations and finds them alike. Thus he knows that the two cases are alike in themselves because they are alike in his knowledge. He cannot compare the two cases themselves until each is represented in his mind, for judging a thing depends upon first conceiving it. This is why—and Allah knows best—it is said: “The likeness of this is like that of …” (1)

In some passages, He, glorified be He, mentions the original case used for comparison so that the judgment concerning the derivative case may be inferred from it, without explicitly mentioning the derivative case. An example is His saying:

“Would any of you wish to have a garden of palm trees and grapevines, beneath which rivers flow, containing every kind of fruit, and then be overtaken by old age,”

through to His words:

“Thus Allah makes His signs clear to you, so that you may reflect.”

This requires reflection. For this reason, ʿUmar asked the Companions present with him about this verse, and Ibn ʿAbbās gave him an answer that satisfied him. The recounting of narratives is similar: they are all likenesses that serve as original cases for analogy