Wanazuoni wa Kiislamu wamekubaliana kwamba kuelekea upande wa Nyumba (Al-Kaaba) ni moja ya masharti ya kusihi kwa Swala, kwa sababu ya kauli ya Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu: "Na popote utokapo [kwa ajili ya Swala, ewe Muhammad] elekeza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtukufu. Na hakika hiyo ndiyo haki kutoka kwa Mola wako." Ikiwa hata hivyo mwabudu anaiona Nyumba, basi wajibu ni kuelekea Nyumba yenyewe, na hakuna mjadala kuhusu hili. Wanazuoni wanatofautiana katika masuala mawili pale ambapo Al-Kaaba haionekani. La kwanza, je, wajibu ni kuelekea Al-Kaaba yenyewe au kuelekea upande wake? La pili, je, wajibu ni kuwa sahihi kabisa katika hilo au kukadiria upande, yaani, kuwa sahihi kuhusu Al-Kaaba yenyewe au kuhusu upande wa jumla?

The Muslim jurists agreed that turning toward the direction of the House is one of the conditions for the validity of prayer, because of the words of the Exalted, “And whencesoever thou comest forth [for prayer, O Muhammad] turn thy face toward the Inviolable Place of Worship. Lol it is the Truth from thy Lord”.99 If, however, the worshiper can see the House, then the obligation is to face the House itself, and there is no dispute about this. The jurists disagree about two issues, when the KaQ^a is not in sight. First, whether the obligation is to face the Ka^a itself or to face in its direction. Second, whether the obligation is to be exact about it or estimate the direction, that is, being exact about the KaTia itself or about the general direction?

Baadhi ya wanazuoni wa fiqhi walishikilia kwamba wajibu ni kuelekea Al-Ka'aba yenyewe, huku wengine wakishikilia kwamba ni kuelekea upande wake. Chanzo cha kutofautiana kwao ni kama katika kauli ya Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu, "Na popote utokapo [kwenda kuswali, Ee Muhammad] elekeza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtakatifu", kuna neno lililodokezwa linalopaswa kudhaniwa, ili isomeke, "Na popote utokapo [kwenda kuswali, Ee Muhammad] elekeza uso wako upande wa Msikiti Mtakatifu", au kama maneno yasomwe jinsi yalivyo. Wale waliodhania kuwepo neno lililodokezwa walishikilia kwamba wajibu ni kuelekea upande wake, ilhali wale ambao hawakudhania neno lililodokezwa hapa walisema kwamba wajibu ni kuelekea Al-Ka'aba yenyewe. Ni lazima kufasiri maneno kwa maana zake halisi, isipokuwa ushahidi uonyeshe kwamba yamejengwa kwa maana ya kiistiara. Hata hivyo, inasemekana kwamba ushahidi wa neno lililodokezwa hapa unapatikana katika kauli ya Mtume ﷺ, "Kilicho kati ya mashariki na magharibi ni qibla ikiwa utaelekea upande wa Nyumba." Walisema kwamba makubaliano ya wanazuoni wa fiqhi kuhusu safu ndefu ya waumini inayoenea zaidi ya mipaka ya Al-Ka'aba ni ushahidi kwamba wajibu si kuelekea Al-Ka'aba yenyewe, yaani pale Al-Ka'aba isipoonekana. Ninachosema ni kwamba, kama wajibu ungekuwa kulenga Al-Ka'aba yenyewe, ungekuwa ni uzito usiokuwa na kifani, na Mwenyezi Mungu Mtukufu amesema, "Amekuchagueni wala hakukuwekea katika dini uzito wowote." Kulenga jambo moja kwa moja hakuwezekani bila kulikaribia kwa kutumia jiometri na uchunguzi wa kinyota, na hata hivyo matokeo yake huwa ya kukadiria tu. Basi, itawezekanaje bila haya kuamua mwelekeo kwa njia ya ijtihadi? Hatuna wajibu wa kugundua kwa njia ya jiometri inayotegemea uchunguzi wa kiastronomia ambao kwao urefu na upana wote wa ardhi unaweza kupatikana.

Some Jurists maintained that the obligation is for facing the Ka<ba itself, while others maintained that it is for facing its direction. The reason for their disagreement is whether in the words of the Exalted, “And whencesoever thou comest forth [for prayer, O Muhammad] turn thy face toward the Inviolable Place of Worship”, an implied word is to be assumed, so as to read, “And whencesoever thou comest forth [for prayer, O Muhammad] turn thy face in the direction of the Inviolable Place of Worship”, or whether the words are to be read as they are. Those who assumed an implied word maintained that the obligation is for facing in its direction, while those who did not assume an implied word here said that the obligation is to face the Ka<ba itself. It js necessary to interpret the words in their actual meanings, unless an evidence indicates their construction in the metaphorical meaning. It is, however, maintained that the evidence for an implied word here is to be found in the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “.Whatever is between the east and the west is a qiblay if you take the direction of the House”. They said that the agreement of the Muslim jurists about a long row of worshipers extending beyond the boundary of the Ka<ba is an evidence that the obligation is not to face the Ka^a itself, that is when the Ka<ba is not in sight. What I would say is that if the obligation had been to aim at the Ka<ba itself it would have amounted to hardship, and the Exalted has said, “He hath chosen you and hath not laid upon you in religion any hardship”.100 Aiming directly at a thing is not possible without approaching it by the use of geometry and (astronomical) observation, and yet the result is approximate; then, how is it possible without these to determine the direction by way of ijtihad? We are not under the obligation of discovery by means of geometry based upon astronomical observation from which the whole length and breadth of the land may be derived.

Je, wajibu wa mtu anayejitahidi kubainisha Qibla ni kupata usahihi (wa kuielekea Qibla ya kweli), au ni kutekeleza juhudi tu za kuitafuta? Kwa hiyo, tukisema kwamba wajibu ni kuibainisha kwa usahihi, basi anapaswa kuswali tena iwapo atagundua kwamba alikosea (katika kubainisha mwelekeo wa kweli). Tukishikilia kwamba wajibu ni juhudi tu, basi hatalazimika kuswali tena iwapo atakosea, na vilevile kama alishaswali kabla ya kufanya juhudi za kutafuta mwelekeo. Al-Shafi'i alifikiri kwamba wajibu ni kupata usahihi wa kubainisha, na iwapo itadhihirika kwa mtu kwamba alikosea, alipaswa kuswali tena, daima. Kundi la wanazuoni wa fiqhi lilisema kwamba haswali tena ikiwa amekwisha kumaliza swala, isipokuwa ikiwa alifanya hivyo kwa makusudi (yaani, aliswali upande usio sahihi) au aliswali bila kufanya juhudi za kutafuta mwelekeo. Hii ndiyo ilikuwa maoni ya Malik na Abu Hanifa, isipokuwa kwamba Malik alipendekeza kuswali tena iwapo muda bado upo.

Is the obligation of a person striving to determine the qibla (the attainment of) accuracy or is it just the exercise of effort to discover it? Thus, if we say that the obligation is to accurately determine it, he is to pray again if he discovers that he made a mistake (in determining the true direction). If we maintain that the obligation is only for exerting effort, he does not have to pray again if he makes an error, and also if he had prayed before an effort to discover the direction. Al-ShafiT thought that the obligation was for accurate determina­ tion, and if it becomes obvious to the person that he had made a mistake, he was to pray again, always. A group of jurists said that he does not pray again if he has finished praying, unless he did so intentionally (that is, prayed in the wrong direction) or prayed without making an effort to discover the direction. This was the opinion of Malik and Abu Harnfa, except that Malik i recommended praying again if there was still time.

Sababu ya kutofautiana katika hili ni mgongano kati ya hadithi na qiyas, pamoja na mzozo kuhusu usahihi wa hadithi yenyewe. Qiyas inategemea mfanano wa wajibu wa kuelekea kibla (qibla) na wakati, yaani muda wa sala. Wamekubaliana kuhusu wakati kwamba wajibu wa mwabudu ni kuuwahi wakati kwa usahihi. Ikiwa mtu atagundua kwamba alisali kabla ya wakati, sala yake inakuwa batili, na lazima aisali tena, bila shaka yoyote. Hata hivyo, kuna upotofu kidogo uliopokewa kutoka kwa Ibn 'Abbas na al-Shafi'i, pamoja na riwaya kutoka kwa Malik, kwamba msafiri asiyejua muda wa sala akasali 'Isha kabla ya kutoweka kwa shafaka, kisha akagundua baadaye kwamba alikuwa amesali kabla ya wakati huo, sala yake inabaki kuwa sahihi. Msingi wa mfanano kati ya mambo haya mawili ni kwamba haya ndiyo mipaka ya wakati, kama vile zile ndizo mipaka ya mwelekeo.

The reason for disagreement in this is the conflict between a tradition and analogy, along with a dispute over the authenticity of the tradition. The analogy is based on the similarity of (the obligation to face the) direction to time, that is, the timing for prayer. They agreed (about time) that the obligation was for the worshipper to hit the time accurately. If the subject realizes that he prayed before time his prayer becomes invalid, and he must pray again, invariably. There is, however, a slight deviation reported from Ibn <Abbas and al-Sha^T, as well as the report from Malik that if a traveller is unaware of the timing and prays <ish& before the disappearance of twilight discovering later that he had prayed before this time, his prayer remains valid. The basis for the resemblance between them is that these are the bounds of timing just as those are the bounds of direction.