And which is more emphatic: prayer or pilgrimage? We would say to him: prayer. He says: “Then I forgot that today was the ninth, so I will stand at Arafah on the tenth.” We say: “That is not permissible.” He says: “This is a valid analogy. You have now acknowledged that prayer is more emphatic; so, if it is valid to make up a prayer, then it should likewise be valid to make up standing at Arafah.”

It is said in response: This is an invalid analogy, because the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Whoever arrives on the night of Jamʿ before dawn has caught it” (1). Its implied meaning is that whoever arrives after dawn has not caught it. This is an explicit text, and analogy cannot be applied in the presence of an explicit text.

Thus, whoever omits a pillar without which his rite is not complete must perform it. But if the pillar is one whose time may be missed—and this can only be illustrated by standing at Arafah—then in that case he has missed the pilgrimage.

His statement, “or its intention, without which his rite is not complete”: Had the author said, “or one of its conditions,” that would have been more comprehensive. For example, if he circumambulated the House without purification, based on the view that purification is a condition for circumambulation, his circumambulation would not be valid.

His statement, “his rite is not complete without it,” means that he must perform it. The apparent meaning of the author’s words is that this applies even in a case of necessity. If he is unable to do so, its ruling will come later in the chapter on missing the pilgrimage and being prevented from completing it.

His statement, “or its intention”: The pillar for which intention is stipulated is circumambulation and saʿy; as for standing at Arafah, the jurists do not stipulate intention for it.

The correct view is that intention is not stipulated for circumambulation or saʿy, because circumambulation and saʿy are parts of an act of worship composed of several parts, so the intention at the