Is one obliged to attain accuracy or is ijtihād itself sufficient—that is, must one hit the exact edifice or merely the correct direction, according to those who require the former? One group held that the duty is to face the very structure (al-ʿayn); another maintained that it is sufficient to face the general direction (al-jihah).

The cause of their disagreement is whether, in the Almighty’s words,
“So wherever you come forth, turn your face toward the Sacred Mosque” (Qur’an 2:144),
there is an implied word—so that the verse would mean, “turn your face toward the direction of the Sacred Mosque”—or whether nothing is omitted and the wording is to be taken at face value. Whoever understood an implied word said the obligation is the direction; whoever denied any ellipsis said the obligation is the very structure, for speech must be retained in its literal sense unless clear evidence forces a figurative reading.

It might be contended that the evidence for an implied word is the Prophet’s statement, peace and blessings be upon him, “The space between east and west is a qiblah for anyone who faces the House.”

They also argue that the unanimous practice of Muslims lining up in a broad row outside the Kaʿbah shows that the obligation cannot be the very structure—provided the Kaʿbah is not in sight.

What I myself hold is that, had aiming at the precise structure been obligatory, the matter would be burdensome, whereas Allah the Exalted has said, “He has not laid upon you in religion any hardship” (Qur’an 22:78). Striking the exact spot can only be approximated—if at all—through geometric calculations and astronomical observations; how, then, could it be achieved by other, less precise forms of ijtihād? Moreover, we have not been charged with that level of investigation based on the observational astronomy that determines the latitude and longitude of lands.

The second question is whether the duty of the one who exercises ijtihād concerning the qiblah is to achieve accuracy or merely to exert diligent effort. If we say accuracy is required, then whenever it becomes clear that he erred he must repeat the prayer; but if we say the obligation is ijtihād alone, he need not repeat once error becomes apparent, for he had already prayed on the basis of his considered judgment.

Al-Shāfiʿī claimed that accuracy is required and that, should error later come to light, he must always repeat. Others said he does not repeat and that his prayer stands, provided he did not act deliberately or neglect ijtihād; this is the view of Mālik and Abū Ḥanīfah, though Mālik recommends repeating within the prayer time.

The root of the disagreement lies in a perceived clash between transmitted reports and analogical reasoning, coupled with differences over the soundness of the relevant ḥadīth.

The analogy compares direction (al-jihah) to prayer time. They all agree that accuracy with respect to time is obligatory, and that if a person later discovers he prayed before the time had begun, he must always repeat—save for an isolated dissent from Ibn ʿAbbās and al-Shaʿbī, and what is related from Mālik: that if a traveller, unaware of the rule, performed ʿIshāʾ before the disappearance of the twilight and then learned that fact, his prayer nonetheless stands. The similarity, they say, is that one is a temporal miqāt, the other a spatial miqāt.