—or even enumerates its underlying causes. What appears from his method, may Allah have mercy on him, is that he appended to his treatise on the legal rulings of archery every jurisprudential question connected with the subject over which people have differed. We shall make this clear once he has completed his discussion of these issues (1), issues he began by treating from the angle of practical implementation.
In short, he overlooked what was immediately required and occupied himself with what was more remote. For the branch of horsemanship calls only for an explanation of what it itself undertakes to do; this naturally tilts the inquiry toward how it is to be employed in warfare. Yet what the Shaykh has presented is the procedure a jurist follows when someone versed in the craft transmits from another a particular act performed in a manner sanctioned by the Law: what is the ruling in such a case?
This can be settled only after the description has been thoroughly perfected; then, once the person undertakes the act and carries it out in conformity with the explicit dictates of the Law after proper mastery, the matter goes beyond mere theoretical knowledge of the craft. In the end we find that horsemanship is nothing but the pursuit of victory by lawful means. Allah, exalted is He, grants success.
- He says on p. 176:
‘I say: The Shaykh’s opening the door to argument based on “taste” is unsound (2), and the consequences that stem from it are obvious.’
- He also says on p. 176: