the target and passes clean through it by virtue of its force, the hit is credited.

Abū al-Maʿālī and other colleagues said, “This is the sounder position, for it agrees with both the wording and the intent.” (1)

I say: this is the preferred view.

The second opinion holds that the hit is not credited, and that is the view toward which practicing archers lean.

Subsidiary Issue (2)

If the competitors stipulate piercing shots, and the arrow does pierce but remains lodged in the target because a board or some other object behind it prevents exit—so that, were it not for that obstacle, it would have passed through—one may argue that the hit should be counted, in deference to the intended result; for without the impediment the stipulated condition would have been met. This is comparable to a case in which the wind blows the target away and the arrow lands in the very spot it had occupied.

It may also be argued that the hit should not be counted, for we cannot be certain that piercing would have occurred had the obstacle been removed; the arrow might still have lodged even without the hindrance.

Section on proximity and the nearest hit

Archery contests fall into two categories: