—there are two opinions:

1. All of his arrows are counted, because every one of them is closer than any of his opponent’s. This is the more persuasive view.

2. The farther of his arrows is cancelled out by the nearer; the farther one is treated as null and judgment is based on the nearer.

The reasoning here is that, since this view scores the arrows according to the rule of “nearer cancels farther” (1), the more distant arrow is set aside and credit is given to what is nearer, just as would be done if the farther arrow belonged to the other contestant and the nearer one to him. In other words, what is done when comparing the two contestants’ arrows is applied within his own.

All of this is a subsidiary discussion under the first scenario (2). If, however, they had specified an exact distance for what counts as “near,” the issue would not arise.

Whatever strikes any side of the target within the stipulated range is credited. The Shāfiʿī school has a very weak view that an arrow striking the upper part of the target is not counted. This has no basis; the top, bottom, and sides are all the same.

Sub-issue

If they fixed nearness at, say, one cubit (3) and stipulated that each shooter’s nearer arrow cancels whatever of the other’s is farther away—even though that arrow is still within the nearness limit—then it becomes obligatory