Hisab & Ru'ya or Matla' al-Budur
Shaykh Muhammad
Afifi al-Akiti's Definitive Reply to the Moonsighting
Controversy
[ The fallowing learned explanations are within thw
madhhab of Imaam Schafi]
source:
http://www.masud.co.uk/Islam/misc/moonsighting.htm
(Sh'abaan 1431)
bismillahi r-rahmani r-rahim. al-hamdulillah alladhi
ja‘ala l-ahillata mawaqita li-n-nasi wa-ijtima‘a n-nayrayni
‘alamatan li-inqida’i sh-shahri wa-miqatan li l-‘ibadati
bi-ru’yati l-ahillati fi shari‘ati l-amri wa s-salatu wa
s-salamu ‘ala rasulihi alladhi ja‘alahu sirajan muniran
wa-min nurihi mustaniran wa ja‘ala alihi wa-ashabihi nujuman
wa li-shayatina l-insi wa l-jinni rujuman amma ba‘d.
Your letter raised a number of issues, so I have divided
this article into four questions: (a) the fiqh ruling of
rejecting a testimony [shahada] that contradicts
unquestioned computation [hisab qat‘i; i.e., astronomical
data]; (b) the maximum extent [tahdid] of the local
sighting-zone [matla‘ mahall al-ru’ya] according to both
fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence] and falak [astronomy]; (c) the
precedence of a sighting [ru’ya] in the East over the local
sighting-zone; (d) the meaning of having a ‘universal’ and
united ‘Id; and an introduction. I have called the article:
“Matla‘ al-budur wa majma‘ al-sudur fi l-tawafuq bayna
l-fiqh wa l-falak wa tazahur al-hisab wa l-ru’ya” [The
Risings of the Moon and the Meeting of Hearts concerning the
Harmony between Islamic Jurisprudence and Astronomy and the
Correlation of Computation and Sighting].
Allah
umma hidayatan li-s-sawab!
To begin with, the hukm [legal ruling] for every Muslim to
have knowledge of the local calendar (by knowing their
respective sighting-zone or matla‘* with respect to the
other matali‘ so that he or she whether a resident or a
traveller may know the calendar for the various Wajib and/or
communal ‘ibada that are to be performed throughout the year)
is the same as the hukm of knowing the Qibla, so that it is
Farḍt ‘Ayn for a traveller and Farḍt Kifaya for the resident [Shabramallisi,
3:156, cf. I‘anat. 2:220]; while when resident in a given
zone [mahall], it is Farḍt ‘Ayn when there are only a few who
have this knowledge, and Farḍt Kifaya, when there are many
who know [Fadani, Mukhtasar, 3].
*Notes for students of Fiqh and Falak: Technically, “Matla‘”
when found by itself in fiqh discussions concerning
moonsighting refers to “matla‘ mahall al-ru’ya”,
“sighting-zone of the area” (or equally acceptable,
“sighting-zone of the region”). Thus “ittihad al-matla‘”
means “the local sighting-zone” (or equally correct, “the
same sighting-zone”); and “ikhtilaf al-matali‘ means “a
different sighting-zone”. Although matla‘ literally means
“starting point” or “a point of ascent for a celestial body”
it is often used equivocally [mushtaraka] in falaki texts. A
common usage of it, for example, is as the equivalent of the
modern “right ascension” (RA). Other usages of matla‘ there
may include matali‘ falakiyya [celestial ascension] (=
matali‘ al-mamarr [lit. transit ascension] or even daraja
al-mamarr [lit. the degree of transit]), and matali‘
al-nazir, the equivalent to nadir, and matali‘ al-waqt [time
zones].
This is why in the Far East [sharq aqsa], for example, even
those who are not religious scholars are given the option of
learning falak shar‘i [Islamic astronomy] at schools or
universities—as part of their communal duty; whereas it is
expected for a religious student in a madrasa to be trained
competently in the ancillary sciences of Miqat [timekeeping],
Nayrayn [knowledge dealing with the movements of the two
luminaries: the sun and the moon; although it deals chiefly
with events caused by the latter], and ultimately, their
mother science, Falak [astronomy], from which the times of
the obligatory prayers, the Shuruq, Duha and the Zawal [ta‘rif
al-awqat], the exact direction of the Qibla [simt al-qibla],
the visibility predictions for the beginning of every lunar
month [hukm imkan al-ru’ya] (and not only the three months
of Ramadan, Shawwal and Dhu l-Hijja), and the occurrence of
eclipses [‘amal al-khusufan] (even if MakRuuhh in our school)
can be known positively, with yaqin [certainty], and not
simply based on judgement and/or estimation [zann] through
ijtihad (the latter maqam is analogous to the conclusions
reached without knowledge of Falak and Miqat such as the
case oft-cited by our jurists of a prisoner in solitary
confinement [al-mahbus fi mahall mazlam] estimating the
relevant datum). As the great contemporary jurist and
astronomer, Imam al-Fadani (may Allah
be pleased with him!),
reminds his students, knowledge of these data are fruits [thamra]
of the science of falak, and they become in fact instruments
[alat] of the Law (whether through the use of something
physical, like the astrolabe [asturlab], or an extension
from the physical world, such as pure computation based on
almanacs and observation). This is why, as he says,
astronomical instruments have a basis in the Shari‘a and
furthermore, they make precise and certain what the Shari‘ [Lawgiver]
has made obligatory and become a means [tariq] of the law
without being an addition to it.
Because of the original ruling [asl] above concerning
knowledge of the calendar, we find from the earliest times
until now in every community or area or zone or region or
country where Muslims have established themselves properly,
an authority [literally, “Imam”, analogous to an Imam who
leads the congregational [jama‘a] prayer, who is responsible
for the mistakes made and who acts as the guarantor for the
followers; which in this case could be a committee or
council claiming to be one] to which those living there
could refer concerning the local calendar. (To achieve this,
they will have to organize and liaise with moonspotters
[nazir al-hilal]: in Morocco, for example, the traditional
Muwaqqit [timekeeper] in almost every town (and most
madrasat) still perform this solemn duty and report to the
Chief Qadi; and in many Muslim countries, there has always
been the fixed or tried and tested sites suitable for
moonspotting, which sometimes include, observatories
[marsad] and where traditionally, families or young students
would gather together to witness the beautiful creation of
Hilaal.) So strong is this authority that if someone in a
country like Malaysia decided to celebrate ‘Id al-Adha on a
day different from the calendar that was announced on the
eve of Dhu l-Hijja by the local moonsighting committee
(i.e., the authority in this case), even if it be a day that
coincides with the ‘Id in Mecca, that person could be fined
or even jailed (according to Section 9, of the Johor Shari‘a
Criminal Act, 1997, for example). This action is indeed
sanctioned by our Sacred Law and is the right of the
temporal ruler [Imam or Amir], since the purpose of it is to
ensure Muslims living in the same area or the local matla‘
follow the same calendar, celebrate ‘Id and fast uniformly.
Without this uniform calendar for a given area, the society
concerned would be adversely affected (it becomes worst in
the sight of Allah
if the distance between two mosques that
have different calendars is no more than the minimum
distance of Qasr [travelling, i.e., approx. 96 km], as
Muslims in the Far West [bilad al-afranj] should be able to
empathize with fully). All of this is clearly encapsulated
in the following general legal principle [qa‘ida]:
taSarrufu l-imAmi ‘ala
r-ra‘iyyati manUTun bi l-maSlaHati
[the decisions of the authority on behalf of the subjects
are dependent upon the public interest].
This episode (of Muslims in the UK having to choose between
two ‘Ids) shows that at the very least, as our fiqh
references make clear, individual Muslims living in the Far
West should be aware of their communal responsibilities
(namely, regulating their own calendar is as vital and Wajib
as determining their Qibla). And for the UK specifically,
there must be a national authority to establish the calendar
and whose decision the community there must follow for their
own public interest (even if the community believes it to be
the wrong decision); the decision cannot in the end be an
impossible choice of giving the option to their community of
choosing between two ‘Ids. If there were to be such an
impossible choice, then their raison d’etre [sabab al-wujud]
would no longer exist.
It is religious- as well as common-sense, and in fact it
becomes a religious necessity [darura] that there should not
be thousands of mosque committees throughout the country
deciding the calendar by themselves (and consequently
carrying the heavy burden of responsibility in the sight of
Allah
and who in the Next world will have to answer for
their decisions). It is only wise and safe for them instead
to devolve this weighty decision to a nationwide authority,
as is the case with all of the other well established Muslim
societies and countries.
As for the First Question:
"It does admittedly bother me that we are accepting
the testimony of sighting when all experience, and all
experts too, tell us that such a sighting is impossible (I
have looked at moonsighting.com and hilal-sighting.com for
verification, and they are unequivocal about the rejection
of the report). Can you inform me about the Shariatic
position of such testimony--is it indeed regarded as void?"
Yes, the shahada could be invalidated by the authority. In
this case, the trained Hakim or Qadi who in the process of
declaring or establishing the crescent [thubut al-hilal] on
the night of sighting has the right to reject the testimony
after cross-examining the witness (in our fiqh texts (for
example, in the Fath al-Mu‘in: I‘anat, 2:216) this appears
simply as “bayna yadayhi al-qADI” or “‘inda l-qADI”)—and the
Qadi must strive to judge by the standards of what is yaqin
(i.e., from facts) and not at the level of zann, as the
faqih-and-falaki, Qadi al-Batawi (may Allah
be pleased with
him!), concludes that the authority must examine two things
(1) the witness [i.e., unzur ila man qal] and (2) the
testimony [i.e., unzur ila maqal]: “the judge must be
cautious when he wants to declare the fast or the ‘Id, and
he may declare that [fast or ‘Id] once the crescent passes
[the local position] without there being any doubt or fraud,
owing to its remoteness and the small size of its body. He
must examine the witness and make sure of their credibility,
being vigilant regarding them and clearing them of suspicion
and allegation [by making sure that their testimony is of a
high standard; see the following]. He must then examine the
testimony which must be in agreement with the conditions
already described [i.e., that the testimony does not
contradict certain physical facts, see below on hisab qat‘i]
and with the judgements of [definite and unquestioned]
computation [i.e., astronomical data] as to the possibility
or impossibility of sighting it.” [Sullam, 1:10]. Thus the
authority has the right to reject a moosighting testimony if
it is discovered that the crescent was not ‘positively’
sighted, whether owing to a criminal case of perjury [khabar
al-kadhib] or to a simple error of sighting something else
[khabar al-ghalat; for example: the evidence or report
submitted by the witness [ra’i] that the object sighted was
in an impossible position—on the eastern horizon [ufuq
sharqi], for instance—or sighted at the wrong time (for
instance, after the moonset [i.e., makth al-hilal fi l-ufuq
ba‘da l-ghurub or qaws al-makth; the lag time for the moon
above the local horizon after sunset] plus ghurub [sunset]
is equal to moonset; or simply, in modern terminology:
ghurub al-hilal)]*.
$$Arjuzah fi qabul shahadat al-ru’ya ‘inda l-Qadi$$
iHfaZhA!
An unworthy soul has composed the following verses for the
one lost in blindly following someone else:
lA budda li-l-imAmi qaT‘a r-ru’yati # an yatahAfaZa
li-raf‘i t-tuhmati
aD-DAbiTu l-awwalu naZru man naTaq # lA tansa ba‘dahu
‘tibAra mA wafaq
[The authority must, when declaring sighting,
take care so there is no finger-pointing.
The first rule is to look at the one speaking;
thereafter don’t forget to check that it is fitting!]
Among our jurists was Imam al-Subki (may Allah
be pleased
with him!), who was unequivocal when addressing a case where
fiqh and falak appeared to be in conflict: “if one or two
witnessed sighting the crescent, whereas the judgement of
computation is that it is impossible to sight the crescent”;
he says: “this testimony is not accepted, since astronomical
computation [hisab] is definite [qat‘i]** while testimony
and report are probable [zann] and [there is the fiqh rule
of] ‘the probable cannot contradict the definite’ [al-zannu
lA yu‘AriDu l-qaT‘a]” [Subki, 1:226; cf. Mughni, 2:143 and
I‘anat, 2:216]. The most well known Muhaqqiq of our school,
Imam Ibn Hajar (may Allah
be pleased with him!) qualified
and explained further the meaning of hisab under discussion:
“if its specialists agreed that [for a given computation]
its premises [i.e., its equations, axioms and mathematical
procedure (i.e., the purely rational premises) and also, its
long-term empirical data and observations [arsad wa tajarib
tawila] relied upon to reach the result of a given
computation] are definite, and the reporters of that
[computation] from them number in the tawatur [such that the
sheer number of transmission is too many for the computation
of the scientists/astronomers/mathematicians to be
fabricated], then the testimony is rejected. If not, no.”
[Tuhfat, 4:508; cf. I‘anat, 2:216]. This is the position
made strong by Imam Ibn Hajar that is accepted and practiced
today by most of our jurists and communities, especially
from the Far East to the Hadramawt to East Africa. Our
teachers have confirmed that this is the Qawl Mu‘tamad
[reliable position] of the school, even when an occasion
arises such that the authority might not reject a physically
mistaken testimony but accept it instead (whether owing to
an ill-trained Qadi or not), and after the authority’s
decision is made public, that decision remains valid (even
when those who know know it to be wrong), and the public
must follow suit. (See the Fa’ida below.)
*Notes for students of Fiqh & Usul al-Din: There is the
principle of an-nAdiru ka l-ma‘dUmi [something that rarely
happens is like a thing that has not happened or literally,
“a rarity is like a non-existent”]. So, unless the number of
witnesses of the extraordinary moonsighting report amount to
tawatur (such as two million instead of only two persons)—in
which case this would be a clear sign of the End of Days and
would be a case of a disruption in natural laws [inkhiram
al-‘ada]; sighting the crescent on the western horizon [ufuq
gharbi] or sighting it before it physically sets from the
local horizon [ufuq ardi] are cases of what jurists term
‘inevitable cause’ [‘illa al-mulazama], such as the case of
a well quoted physical truth: “nightfall in the East is
before [the West]” [al-laylu yadkhulu fI l-bilAdi
sh-sharqiyyati qablu].
**Notes for students of Fiqh: What Imam Ibn Hajar (and Imam
al-Subki, Imam Ibn al-Qasim al-‘Abbadi, Imam al-Qalyubi, the
Muhaqqiq al-Kurdi and other jurists, for example) mean by
unquestioned astronomical computation [hisab qat‘i], that
which is strong enough to reject the testimony of a
non-tawatur sighting (i.e., an example of a primacy in hisab
over ru’ya), is astronomical data such as the times for
moonset or the conjunction of the sun and moon [ijtima‘
al-nayrayn; for non-astronomers: this is the time when the
new moon is ‘born’], which are a question of fact and not
prediction. Conversely, in the case of the latter, there can
be rare instances when the computation may not be definite,
and indeed, even modern astronomers have not produced an
infallible theory to predict the crescent’s first actual
visibility. (When Muslims were unsurpassed in the various
sciences—secular and religious—medieval Muwaqqits from among
our jurists as well as astronomers [hasib or ahl al-falak],
who almost without exception had training in fiqh too,
devoted considerable attention to this scientifically and
physically complicated problem; and the average scholar
could have easily predicted the visibility with reasonable
precision using one or two traditional criteria of
visibility [shurut al-ru’ya], depending, for example, on its
elevation or altitude [irtifa‘uhu], its age [al-sa‘at ba‘da
l-ijtima‘], its lag time on the local horizon [makthuhu fi
l-ufuq] and the atmospheric condition [safa’ al-jaww wa
kuduRuuhhu].) That is why in our school, ru’ya is even now a
religious duty [ta‘abbud]: predictions alone are not
sufficient to establish the beginning of the new month, and
none of our jurists is known to have set such a precedent
and sanctioned the use of a prediction against actual
sighting. The ‘illa [legal basis] for this is as Qadi
al-Batawi explains: “this is because sighting is an obvious
matter [amr zahir] which scholars as well as the public are
capable of mastering [the ability to sight the crescent], as
compared to computation [i.e., meaning here, knowledge of
falak or astronomy], which only the few will be capable of
mastering. Whereas the Lawgiver only commanded the people
with what their masses can know”; [Sullam, 1:11].
%%Additional Nukat for Fiqh readers%% If in our fiqh
literature we find passages to the effect of “lA ‘ibrata
bi-qawli l-HisAbi” [There is no value in the report of
computation] (i.e., an example of a primacy in ru’ya over
hisab), then it refers to the latter hisab, that is to say,
the predictions of sighting visibility, and not hisab qat‘i.
Those who insist upon reading the primacy-of-ru’ya passages
in our fiqh manuals literally, believing in the absolute
primacy of ru’ya over hisab and maintaining that falak has
no value whatsoever to facilitate fiqh, have unfortunately
misunderstood his text and the context of those passages;
that is a sign of immaturity and of not being able to live
up to even the standards of the lexical [lughawi] meaning of
fiqh: to have a profound and deep understanding [al-fahmu mA
daqqa]. Insight is required here for students of fiqh; and
statements of this kind need to be qualified and understood,
as wise jurists, such as Ibn Hajar above, have done,
following the general qa‘ida in fiqh of lA ‘ibrata bi
Z-Zanni l-bayyini khaTa’uhu [there is no value in the
judgement that is clearly mistaken].
From a fiqh perspective, therefore, it is vital to
distinguish between the two kinds of hisabs: (1) hisab qat‘i
and (2) hisab zanni. The former hisab,
hisab-of-the-factual-kind (such as the astronomical data of
moonset and conjunction), has been used—and continues to be
used today by our religious scholars—as a useful tool to
facilitate the process of establishing a ‘positive’ ru’ya,
with yaqin (analogous to the legal ruling of using
instruments in medieval times such as the computation using
the trigonometrical (specifically, Sine) quadrant [rub‘
mujayyab] to fix the prayer times or to determine the exact
direction of the Qibla); whereas the latter—for example,
computational predictions of visibility—can only be used to
estimate, but not by itself, to establish the new lunar
month, even when nine out of ten times they have been proved
to be correct.
?!?!Mas’ala?!?! If it is said: “Are we allowed to use
certain astronomical data as published by non-Muslims such
as the Royal Greenwich Observatory or from an almanac
published in the daily local newspaper as a guide to sight
the moon?”
We say: Allah
the Exalted says: wa-bi-n-najmi hum yahtadUna
[and by the stars they are guided] (al-Nahl, 16:16). If our
medieval scholars used the most accurate computational tools
available to them such as ephemerides [taqwim] and
observation tables [jadwal] and knowledge of Nayrayn to
compute the times of the new moon or the moonset for a given
day and considered them a blessing, even if from non-Muslims
[wa-law min kuffArin], what about today’s more exact tools?
++Fa’ida++ Once a testimony is made (and the testimony
accepted by the relevant authority), which must be made at
latest by midnight of the first eve of the night in question
[muntasaf al-layl fi laylat al-ru’ya], or once the authority
declares the calendar [ba‘da shuru‘ihim] (whether by
deciding to complete the previous lunar month or establish
the new one through local witnesses or otherwise), even if
the public have not yet begun to act upon the decision of
the authority (such as in the case of the Ramadan fast: they
have not begun the fast), then, even if the original witness
were to withdraw his testimony (because he thought, for
example, that he was mistaken), everyone concerned (the
public as well as the authority) must [Wajib] continue to
act upon the original decision (so that in the case of
Ramadan, it is obligatory to perform the fast), even if the
mistake becomes obvious to all [Nihayat al-Zayn, 185]. The
point of this fiqh rule is that once the authority has
decided the date for the next day (rightly or wrongly),
there can be no turning back according to the Shari‘a, and
this is in order to uphold the public and communal interest
[maslahat al-‘amma] as exemplified by the following two
legal principles of dar’u l-mafAsidi muqaddamun ‘alA jalbi
l-maSAliHi [preventing harm takes precedence over any
benefits] and al-khayru l-muta‘addi afDalu mina l-lAzimi
[the good of the many outweighs the good of the one]. The
authority must therefore do its best to ensure that its one
and only decision that evening is correct, since legally,
albeit as Imams, they have no right [haqq] to change the
decision after the first evening of any lunar month. This is
based on the general qa‘ida: al-ijtihAdu lA yunqaDu bi
l-ijtihAdi [an ijtihad may not be overruled by another
ijtihad] and specifically, its derivative principle: lA
yajUzu naqDa Hukma l-HAkimi ba‘da l-Hukmi [to nullify the
decision of the authority, after a decision, is not
allowed].
+++Another Fa’ida+++ If the testimony of a witness is
rejected by the authority (for whatever reason, even if the
witness was in actual fact correct—whether because the
witness had a criminal record [fasiq or ghayr ‘adl wa-law
‘adluhu masturan], or his testimony was invalidated by the
authority because his sighting was thought to be mistaken),
then only in the case of the Ramadan fast (but not for the
two ‘Ids), if the original witness still believes that the
next day is Ramadan, he alone—and no on else in his
community except those who are convinced by him—may [ja’iz]
fast [Nihaya, 184]. This is because of the principle:
adh-dhimmatu idhA ‘ummirat bi-yaqInin tabra’u illA biyaqInin
[once the obligation is based on certainty it can only be
discharged by certainty]. This rule applies to anyone whose
knowledge that the next day is Ramadan, including those who
have sharp eyes [hadid al-basar] or use optical aids
[ru’yatihi fi l-mir’at] or someone blessed with an
inspiration [ilham] or astronomers who use predictions of
visibility [hisab zanni], although the authority’s decision
is otherwise. All of this is an analogy to the case of a
person who with a true dream of the Messenger himself (may
Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him!) says that
“tomorrow is Ramadan”. Even this knowledge is not sufficient
to establish the new month, because, as Imam Ibn Hajar
explains, “of its being far off from the standard of
witnessing [the actual crescent], not because of there being
any doubt in the dream [or computation and so forth];
[Tuhfat, 4:493]. This is the legal background as to why we
find in our books of fiqh (such as in the Fath al-Mu‘in, the
Iqna‘ or Safinat al-Naja) that testimonies in the vein of “I
testify that tomorrow is Ramadan” [ashhadu anna ghadan min
ramaDAna] is inadequate by itself to establish the new month
when compared to: “I testify that I have witnessed the
crescent” [ashhadu annI ra’aytu l-hilAla ].
~~~Khatima~~~ In the end, as our medieval scholars viewed
the universe, both scientific facts [‘aql] and scriptural
demands [naql] support each other, since all true knowledge
comes from Allah
, and all true knowledge leads to Him (so
for instance, Imam al-Raghib al-Isfahani and the Hujjat
al-Islam, al-Ghazali (may Allah
be pleased with both of
them!) was able to say: “Reason resembles the base while the
Sacred Law is the building” [al-‘aqlu ka l-ussi wa sh-shar‘u
ka l-binA’i]). And just because a Qadi can reject a
testimony that is found to be in contradiction with physical
truths, it does not mean in this case that
‘aql-as-represented-by-hisab has won over
naql-characterized-by-ru’ya, nor is it at all a question of
that kind. Indeed, as Imam al-Subki himself, the champion of
the complementarity between falak and fiqh, describes the
condition [shart] for a valid testimony of moonsighting, it
must be: “physically [hissan], rationally [‘aqlan] and
religiously [shar‘an] possible.” [Subki, 1:226]. Therefore
we can sum up a point of law tersely in the following dabit
or restricted principle for this mas’ala:
lA yuqbalu l-HisAbu l-qaT‘iyyu illA fI raddi sh-shahAdati
Z-Zanniyyati lA fI tathbIti l-hilAli
[Unquestioned astronomical data can only be admitted to
reject a probable testimony but not to establish the
crescent].
As for the Second Question:
"I have read recently that while one (Shafi'i) opinion
is for a horizon to be confined to a north-south stretch of
maximum 81km [i.e., the distance of Qasr or travelling]"
This is definitely not the Qawl Mu‘tamad in our school
concerning the maximum extent [tahdid] of the matla‘ or
sighting-zone. Instead, as Imam Nawawi al-Jawi makes clear:
“the reference of it is to the position’s longitude [tul]
and its latitude [‘ard], whether the distance is near or
far; pay no attention to whether it is the distance of
travelling or not” [Nihayat al-Zayn, 185]. The reliable
position and the Qawl Sahih [Sound Position] is farther than
the distance of Qasr, in that another area will be
considered local when it has ‘the same’ rise and set times
of celestial bodies (the stars and constellations including,
minimally, our sun) when compared to the rising and setting
times in the reference town (i.e., the dabit is: ghurUbu
sh-shamsi wa TulU‘uhA fI l-maHallayni fI waqtin wAHidin [the
two positions have ‘the same’ rising and setting times of
the sun] [Nihayat al-Zayn, 184]; “the same” means to a fixed
degree of deviation, and in this, there is room for minor
variances amongst our jurists).*
*Notes for students of Fiqh & Falak: Throughout our long
history, Shafi‘i jurists who possess knowledge of astronomy
have come up with various figures for the extent of the
matla‘ (all of them were in fact qualifying or specifying
the legal meaning of “fi waqt wahid” above). These fuqaha’
have used their specialist knowledge in astronomy and
planetary models [hay’a] and trigonometry [muthallathat]
along with the zijs, ephemerides and observation tables
available to them in their day to arrive at the various
extents of the matla‘, because, as most of our early jurists
had already realized, that which Imam al-Nawawi famously
restated: “the consideration concerning the different
[sighting-]zones comes practically to astronomical
computation and the judgement of astronomers” [Tuhfa,
4:506]. The efforts and results of some of them are listed
below in reverse chronological order (all of the authors are
distinguished Shafi‘i jurists). (As for the figures in
degrees, it is understood that the deviation calculated
through them refers to a non-Easterly position from the
local one as Imam al-Fadani makes clear; and this is evident
because of the physical fact, “nightfall is earlier in the
East”: this ‘inevitable cause’ is the same basis for the
famous rule of Imam al-Subki invoked in the Third Question
below on the precedence of a sighting in the East over the
local position:)
(1) The polymath of our time, Imam al-Fadani: if the
crescent has been sighted at a position West (but not East)
of the local one, it is inevitable that it would have been
sighted in the local position, as long as the deviation
between the two positions does not exceed 8 degrees [Sharh
al-Thamra, 63]. This, and the rest of the section mean, a
sighting to the east is immediately admitted, but to the
west only at 8 (to 6) degrees of deviation is accepted.
(2) Qadi al-Batawi: if the deviation is 6 degrees or more,
then the two zones are considered different: “The meaning of
‘difference in sighting-zones’ [ikhtilaf al-matali‘]
mentioned in the chapter of fasting [in the books of fiqh],
is the difference with regard to the positions of sighting
[the moon] so that [at the moment] when it is sighted in one
of them, it cannot be sighted [yet] in the other. That
[difference in sighting-zones] takes place only when the
deviation [tafawut] between the [two] positions is six or
more degrees in the arcs of day and night**”; [Sullam,
1:10]. (Note: this conservative calculation of 6 degrees by
Qadi al-Batawi, the teacher to Imam al-Fadani above, is the
Ihtiyat [precautionary position] and not the minimum fiqh
ruling.)
**Notes for students of Falak: The classical explanation
from falak of why there is the deviation in the arcs of day
and night [al-tafawut min qus al-layl wa l-nahar] is: it is
a result of the unequal length of night and day in the
various areas by reason of the declination of the sun [mayl
al-shams] from the equinoctial line [da’ira mu‘addal] and
the elevation [irtifa‘] of the north pole above the horizon.
(3) The historian and usuli, an expert in both of the
scriptural and rational sciences [al-Jami‘ bayna l-manqul wa
l-ma‘qul], and author of works from mathematics to fiqh,
Habib al-Shilli: 8 degrees or less [Sharh al-Thamra, 63].
(4) The Mufti of Yemen of his time (i.e., in the 16th
century), Habib Bamakhramah: if the deviation between the
two positions is 8 degrees or less, then the two are in the
same sighting-zone; if it is more than this, even if for
only some seasons of the year, then it is in a different
sighting-zone or in an ambiguous one [Bughyat, 109].
(5) The mufassir and muhaddith, usuli and mathematician,
Imam Taj al-Din al-Tibrizi (a son of Azerbaijan, who lived
thereafter in Baghdad and finally died in Cairo): the
maximum distance [musafat al-ba‘id] between two positions
for it to be considered to be of the same sighting-zone
should be more or less one and a half times the distance of
travelling (i.e., 24 farsakh [i.e., 3 marhala] (24 x 6 km =
144 km) [I‘anat, 2:219]. (Note: according to Imam
al-Qalyubi, this is a weak position that cannot be adopted
just like the other older rejected position that the maximum
extent of the matla‘ is the distance of Qasr [Hashiyatan,
2:64]).
Nukat for students of Fiqh The technical meaning in fiqh
of ‘the same/local sighting-zone’ [ittihad al-matla‘ or
balad muttahid matla‘ihi or in older texts: balad wahid or
balad qarib / nearby region], is:
(A) with respect to latitudinal positions, are areas sharing
the same longitude, such as Greenland and Brazil. There is
basically no fixed extent in this case, so that a sighting
of the crescent in the south, for instance, will establish
the new moon for the north; and
(B) with respect to longitudinal positions, are areas having
the same latitude, such as Mexico and the Middle East. In
this, there is a fixed but minor Easterly to Westerly extent
so that if a Western region further than the fixed extent
sighted the crescent, the new moon is not considered sighted
in the Eastern region, because they are in different
sighting-zones (i.e., ikhtilaf al-matali‘ or balad ba‘id /
distant region).
Among the legal bases [adilla] used by our school for
defining the different sighting-zones (i.e., type B above),
where each matla‘ has a fixed East-to-West extent, are: (1)
scriptural texts associating the start and end of the
obligatory ‘ibada by cycles of the moon that sanction the
different times (such as al-Baqara, 2:189 and the Hadith of
Kurayb below); (2) the general consensus [Ijma‘] (as
reported by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr and others) that a sighting in
a given area does not necessarily establish the sighting for
all areas; (3) analogy [Qiyas] to the Salat of which the
‘illa [basis] is the prayer times [mawaqit] which is based
also, like the different moon-zones, different sun-zones
[ikhtilaf matali‘ al-shams] because of the physical
differences in the solar cycles; and (4) rational arguments
[dalil ‘aqli] such that the waning and waxing of the
crescent is physically different in the regions moving from
East to West.
++Fa’ida++ The mawaqit connected to the crescents [ahilla]
(as opposed to the mawaqit of the sun) are (these involve
the Five sacred rulings, so know their times throughout all
the months of the year and not only the three of them, so
you may be rightly guided): Salat al-‘Id; the fast of
Ramadan; Zakat al-Fitr; the fast on ‘bright’ days; the fast
of ‘Ashura and various other recommended fasts connected to
a date; the offensiveness of fasting after the middle of
Sha‘ban; the Six Fasts of Shawwal; the various du‘as
connected to a specific date throughout the year; the Zakat;
knowledge of the ages of the Shat, cattle and camels; the
vowed I‘tikaf; the fast of the ten days of Dhu l-Hijja; the
Hajj; the Wuquf of ‘Arafa; the fast of ‘Arafa; the ‘Id
al-Adha sacrifices; the ‘Aqiqa; the Hady [sacrificial act
during Hajj as expiation]; the Ajal [deferred time for a
loan]; the Salam [forward-buying contract]; the Bulugh
[onset of puberty upon reaching 15 years old]; the Musaqa
[crop-sharing contract]; the Ijara [hiring things]; the
Luqta [lost and found articles]; the Ajal al-‘Unna
[probationary term for impotence]; the ‘Ila’ [forswearing
sexual intercourse]; the fast-expiations [kaffara bi l-sawm]
for Wiqa‘ [sexual intercourse during Ramadan], Zihar
[injurious comparisons] and Qatl [killing]; the ‘Idda
[post-marital waiting period] for a Mutawaffa [deceased
husband]; Ayisa [menopausal] and Istibra’ [absolution after
the menstrual intervals]; the Rida‘ [suckling]; the Kiswa
al-Zawja [clothing support for the wife]; and the Diyat
[various indemnities]; and others like it.
As for the Third Question:
"The problem, it seems to me, is confounded by the
fact that if one goes strictly by local/national horizon,
countries like Germany would rarely experience the crescent
sighting until the third maghrib after conjunction. In other
words, if Germany (and northern Britain) is to rely on their
own horizon and deviate only to the maximum extent of the
distance between al-Madina and Damascus (in fulfillment of
the famous narration), then Eid there will be on Saturday."
No, following the ‘traditional matrix’ would not result in
having ‘Id on Saturday in this case. This is because there
is a restricted principle expressed famously by Imam
al-Subki (and others, such as Imams al-Isnawi and
al-Ramli—may Allah
be pleased with them!) which overrides
the ‘ardi [latitudinal] considerations (i.e., type A above),
namely (when it is possible to know that): “whenever the
crescent is sighted [during the night in question] in the
East, its sighting in the West follows, but not the other
way round” [matA HaSalat al-ru’yatu fI l-baladi sh-sharqI
lazima ru’yatuhu fI l-baladi l-gharbI dUna ‘aksahu] [Nihayat
al-Zayn, 185]. In astronomical/falak’s term, this is the
rule of “taqdim tulihi ‘ala ‘ardihi fi ru’yati l-hilal” [the
longitudinal sighting takes precedence over the latitudinal
one when spotting the crescent]. It is immediately
understood from this dabit, of course, that it applies even
when the sighting is made in a different zone or when the
local day is too cloudy [wa-in ikhtalafat al-matali‘ aw fi
l-yawmi l-ghaymi]. Indeed, our fuqaha’ derived this rule
precisely from the very Hadith of Kurayb concerning Medina
and Damascus which you appropriately brought out.
!!!Tanbih!!! The presentation of some primary texts [dalil]
below is not with the intention of satisfying the addictions
of ‘ahl al-dalils’ but merely done to complete our
discussion (may Allah
make our everyday concern to be His
simple ‘abidin and make us closer to Him!).
The Hadith of Kurayb (may Allah
be well pleased with him!):
ra’aytu l-hilAla bi-sh-shAmi laylata l-jum‘ati thumma
qadimtu l-madInata fI Akhiri sh-shahri fa-sa’alanI bnu
‘abbAsin raDiya LlAhu ‘anhumA matA ra’aytumu l-hilAla
fa-qultu ra’aynAhu laylata l-jum‘ati fa-qAla anta ra’aytahu
fa-qultu na‘am wa-ra’Ahu n-nAsu wa-SAmU wa-SAma mu‘Awiyatu
fa-qAla lAkinnA ra’aynAhu laylata s-sabti fa-lA nazAlu
naSUmu HattA nukmila thalAthIna aw narAhu fa-qultu a-wa lA
naktafI bi-ru’yati mu‘Awiyata wa-SiyAmihi fa-qAla lA hAkadhA
amaranA raSUlu LlAhi Salla rasUlullahi SallAllahu ‘alayhi wa-sallama
[I saw the crescent [of Ramadan] on Friday night while in
Damascus. I arrived at Medina at the end of the month and
Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah
be well pleased with both of them!)
asked me: “When did you see the crescent?” I said: “We saw
it on Friday night.” He said: “Did you see it yourself?” I
said: “Yes, and the people saw it, and they and Mu‘awiya
fasted.” He said: “But we saw the crescent on Saturday
night. So we will not stop fasting until either we complete
thirty [days] or we sight the crescent [of Shawwal].” I
said: “Is Mu‘awiya’s sighting and fasting not sufficient for
us?” He said: “No, this is how the Messenger of Allah
(may
Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him!) ordered us.”]
(Related by Ahmad, the Famous Five except al-Bukhari, and by
al-Daraqutni and al-Bayhaqi, with variants).
That famous Hadith establishes beyond doubt, not only the
precedence of a sighting in the East over the West, and not
vice-versa, but also the unrealistic notion of a “universal
‘Id” (see below, Question Four). While in the following
Hadith of Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah
be pleased with them both!),
our late scholars (like Imam al-Subki) used its general
meaning [‘amm] to include the absolute consideration of an
Eastern sighting [mu‘allaq bi-mutlaq al-ru’ya al-sharqiyya]
even if from a different region (but not in the West, of
course, due to the specification of the meaning [Takhsis] of
the above Hadith); and some early scholars (like the
celebrated Ibn Surayj) understood the meaning of “fa-qdurU
la-hu” [lit. ‘to count it’ or ‘determine’ or ‘estimate’]
from this Hadith as the admissibility of hisab as a useful
tool for ru’ya:
lA taSUmU HattA taraw l-hilAla wa-lA tufTirU HattA
tarawhu fa-in ughmiya ‘alaykum fa-qdurU la-hu
[Do not begin your fast until you see the crescent [of
Ramadan], and do not end your fast until you see it [the
Shawwal]; if it is cloudy, then determine when it should
appear]
(Related by Malik, al-Shafi‘i, al-Tayalisi, Ibn Abi Shayba,
Ahmad, al-Darimi, the Famous Five except Ibn Majah, and by
Abu Ya‘la, Ibn Khuzayma, Ibn Hibban, al-Daraqutni, al-Hakim,
al-Bayhaqi, al-Daylami, and al-Baghawi).
Thus, acting on this restricted principle: even if on
Tuesday in Germany it were the laylat al-thalathin (“the eve
of the 30th”, i.e., the 29th of Dhu l-Qa‘da: meaning the
night when it is Wajib to do ru’ya; and if the hilal is
sighted in Germany after Maghrib, the next day, i.e.,
Wednesday, will be the 1st of Dhu l-Hijja; and if it is not
sighted because it was cloudy, for example, then we would
expect the month of Dhu l-Qa‘da to be completed [istikmal],
so that the next day should be the 30th of Dhu l-Qa‘da), and
it turned out that the moon was not sighted, nonetheless,
the moon for the next month could still be established
[thubut al-hilal] with the knowledge that the crescent was
positively spotted to the East of Germany (even if ikhtilaf
al-matali‘, such as in Java). If this turns out to be the
case (that the crescent was not sighted locally, even if
cloudy, on the 29th day of the preceding lunar month but was
sighted somewhere in the East), according to both Fiqh and
Falak, the next day could NEVER be the 30th of that lunar
month.
?!?!Mas’ala?!?! If it is said: “In the UK, one can never see
the moon on the 29th of any month so if we were to follow
our own calendar then each and every month would have 30
days. That means that at the end of the year we would be 5-6
days ahead of the rest of the world.”
We say: knowledge of this simple rule in fiqh will dispel
that simplistic notion. Understand this so that you may be
rightly guided.
As for the Fourth Question:
"While this deviation from the traditional matrix does
bother me (for in effect we are relying on conjunction
rather than visibility in great parts of the
Saudi-influenced world), I am also mindful of the hadith
which says, "Inna ummati la tajtami'u 'ala al-dalala, fa
idha ra'aytum al-ikhtilaf fa 'alaykum as-sawadan al-adham"
(I apologize if my memory is incorrect, and for the bad
transliteration). As far as I recall, this hadith is
supposedly sound in no less than six chains. The question is
whether insisting on visibility [I understand what you mean
by “visibility” here as following the calendar of the local
sighting-zone as opposed to following the calendar of Saudi
Arabia, whether for ‘Id al-Adha or al-Fitr or for the rest
of the lunar months] breaks with the 'greater group' and
whether silence therefore is best. Please do advise me on
all this."
The answer is dependent on the status of your local
authority (so that if you’re in the UK, then UK) whose
function is to regulate the calendar (in the following
cases, computation strictly refers to hisab qat‘i, and not
visibility predictions, and they are for a town with only
one mosque, such as in your case):
Hal A: If the authority makes a decision X not Y, and your
mosque adopts Y, and if X is physically possible, then,
whether you know this or not, you should not be silent but
rather remind the people who run the mosque that they are
neglecting their sacred communal responsibilities and are in
fact undermining the authority that all Muslims in the
country necessarily depend on, even though if you were to be
in that town you would follow the mosque. (In this case, the
executive committee of the mosque will solely be responsible
for breaking with the “greater group”, for not devolving the
weighty decision to the authority.)
Hal B: If the authority makes a decision X not Y, and your
mosque adopts Y, and if X is physically impossible, then,
whether you know this or not, you should remind the mosque
committee of their undermining the authority that all
Muslims in the country necessarily depend on, even if you
know that the mosque is correct and you will in the end
follow the mosque; and if you know and you are able to, you
can politely raise your concerns with the authority about
their conduct. (In this case, the authority and the mosque
will both be responsible for their decisions, the latter for
defying the authority and the former for making the mistake
in calling the wrong day.)
Hal C: If the authority makes a decision X not Y, and your
mosque adopts X, and if X is physically possible, then,
whether you know this or not, you should be silent. (In this
case, you will be responsible for breaking with the “greater
group” if you adopt Y on your own.)
Hal D: If the authority makes a decision X not Y, and your
mosque adopts X, and if X is physically impossible, then, if
you do not know this, you should be silent; if you know, you
should be silent with respect to the mosque (and follow the
mosque) and if you are able to, you may politely raise your
concerns with the authority about their conduct. (In this
case, only the authority will be responsible for their
physically wrong decision.)
Hal E: If the authority makes a decision X and Y, and your
mosque adopts Y, and if Y is physically possible, which you
know from unquestionable reports, then you should be silent
with respect to the mosque (and follow the mosque) but you
should remind the authority that they are undermining their
own authority that all Muslims in the country necessarily
depend on. (In this case, the authority has defeated its own
purpose and failed to function as the Imam because they have
effectively handed over the burden of responsibility to the
thousands of mosques in the country and will be ultimately
responsible for fracturing the “greater group”.)
Hal F: If the authority makes a decision X and Y, and your
mosque adopts Y, and if Y is physically impossible, which
you know from unquestionable reports, then if you are able
to, you should politely raise your concerns with the mosque
committee about their conduct (even though if you were to be
in that town on the day of ‘Id you would follow the mosque),
and you should remind the authority that they are
undermining the necessary authority that is needed by
Muslims all over the country. (In this case, the mosque will
be responsible for their wrong decision, and the authority
for fracturing the “greater group”.)
In Ahwal A to D, you will be following the local calendar
(your knowing of which is only Farḍt Kifaya), and in E to F,
you may or may not in the end, depending on the decision of
the mosque, be following the local calendar; but in all of
the above cases, you will certainly not be defying the
“greater group” unless in any of them you decided not to
follow the only mosque when you are in that town. The hukm
of knowing the local calendar becomes Farḍt ‘Ayn in Hals E
and F, even when you end up not adopting your own findings
but following instead the decision of the local mosque for
the ‘Id prayer.
This is the meaning [haqiqa] of having a united ‘Id: to have
all the mosques in a given area or sighting-zone or at least
town celebrate on the same day (whether the day is
physically correct or not), as is the practice in all of the
long established Muslim lands from East to West. (Instead,
to believe in a ‘universal ‘Id’ in the sense that all
Muslims everywhere regardless of their local sighting- and
time-zones celebrate on the same day, is a mistake; a
“universal ‘Id” is a misnomer [mughalata lafziyya],
physically absurd [muhal], and religiously heterodox
[bid‘a]. Hence a responsible [mukallaf] Muslim who breaks
with the “greater group” by doing this act will be
answerable in the Next world for causing a fitna in the
Muslim community where he or she was resident.)
The way [kayfiyya] to achieve this united ‘Id is for the
thousands of local mosques/Islamic centres/Muslim
halls/musallas or whoever wherever hosting the ‘Id prayer to
follow the national authority of the respective
sighting-zone, even if the particular mosque believed it to
be the wrong decision.
yA ayyhuhA l-ladhIna AmanU aTI‘u l-LAha wa-aTI‘u r-rasUla
wa-uli l-amri minkum [O believers, obey Allah, and obey the
messenger, and those with authority among you!] (al-Nisa’,
4:58).
If, sadly, Shaytan (Allah’s curse upon him!) has got the
better of us and there is in its place a choice of two ‘Ids
between two mosques in your town, then, if there is a
decision by the national authority, you should follow the
mosque that follows the higher authority, even if you happen
to know that the national decision is physically on the
wrong day; but if there is no decision made by the
authority, then you should observe the one you know to be
the correct or the more obvious [Azhar] day.
Someone who follows the only local option or the national
authority, even when, falak-wise, the day is physically
wrong, is not wrong, fiqh-wise. This is known as the fiqh
rule of ‘conforming with the local community’ [muwafaqa ahl
al-bilad] above other considerations, and in this, there is
wisdom: “If someone travelled from one [calendar] zone to
another and find its people fasting or doing otherwise
[because they follow a different calendar than his original
one], he must conform with them [i.e., with their calendar],
whether it is at the beginning of the month or at the end of
it” [Nihayat al-Zayn, 184-5].
^^^Furu‘^^^ The following are two golden cases for Ramadan
rehearsed by our jurists as an illustration of the rules on
conforming with the locals [I‘anat, 2:220]:
A. The bonus case of fasting 31 days: If Kurayb travels from
Damascus to Medina, wherein the people in Damascus started
fasting a day earlier than Medina, and to his dismay finds
that they are still fasting, then he must [Wajib] join them
in their fast, even when he has already completed 30 days of
fasting and could not wait to celebrate ‘Id as the people in
Damascus are doing. In this case, he will be in the unique
position of receiving the heavenly reward for a 31 days of
the obligatory fast.
B. The exculpated case of fasting 28 days: If Kurayb travels
from Medina to Damascus, wherein the people in Medina
started fasting a day later than Damascus, and to his
surprise finds that they are celebrating ‘Id, then he cannot
[Haram] fast but must join them in breaking the fast, even
if it means that he has only fasted for 28 days—short of the
minimum lunar month. In this case, although he will have
been forgiven since he has the legal excuse [‘udhr] for not
completing the month’s fast, he will nevertheless be
required to replace [Qada’] one day of fast after the ‘Id is
over and before the start of the next Ramadan.
$$Manzuma$$ The poet and historian, Qadi Ibn al-Wardi (may
Allah
be pleased with him!) composed the following verses
(in Rajaz) about the legal cases above for the benefit of
all of us today:
wa-ba‘da an yamDiya thalAthUna akal # wa-man ilayhi yawmu
‘Idihim waSal
wa-in yaSum ‘ishrIna ma‘a thamAniyah # kAna qaDA’uhu
li-yawmin kAfiyah
wa-in yusAfar li-makAnin lam yurA # fIhi fa-lA tujiz
la-hu an yufTirA
[After thirty days have passed, then eat!
And also to those who arrive at their day of ‘Id!
Even if he has fasted twenty eight days:
He will only replace a complete day.
If he had travelled to a place that has not sighted,
There, he could not have feasted!]
?!?!Mas’ala?!?! If someone said: “Shouldn’t the fast of
‘Arafa be on the day of the ‘Arafa itself? So whether we
like it or not we will have to follow the Saudi calendar?”
We say: The fast of the ‘Day of ‘Arafa’ is on the 9th of Dhu
l-Hijja (and in our school it is also better [Awla; but not
Sunna Mu’akkada] to fast on the 8th as the fast of ‘Arafa
too, as it is more precautionary [Ahwat], in the event that
the physical day falls earlier than the local position [Fath
al-Mu‘in: I‘anat, 2:265]), despite its name,* wherever you
are, even if in reality the physical day of ‘Arafa is on a
different day, albeit a day after [i.e., muqarana hukmiyya
wa-law ba‘dahu]. It is easy for those who have no knowledge
of fiqh to believe otherwise and conclude mistakenly that
only with regards to ‘Id al-Adha, the Saudi calendar must be
followed, at the exclusion of other calendars and different
sighting- and time-zones. Not only is the fast not Wajib, it
is also a legal fact that it does not have to coincide
physically [muqarana haqiqiyya] with the wuquf [standing] at
‘Arafa, since the legal cause [sabab] for the fast is not
the physical event itself, but the fast is for those who
have not performed the Hajj that year, wherever they may be
(and in our school for example, it could even be Khilaf Awla
or MakRuuhh for pilgrims at ‘Arafa that day to fast [Mahalli,
Hashiyatan, 2:93]). A quick glance at one of our basic fiqh
manuals is enough to dispel this flawed reasoning: “It is
strongly recommended [Sunna Mu’akkada] for those not in the
Pilgrimage [even if he or she is in Mecca, for example, or
for those not travelling or sick] to fast the Day of
‘Arafa...and it is on the 9th of Dhu l-Hijja.” [Fath
al-Mu‘in: I‘anat, 2:265]. If he still believes that the ‘Id
in the month of Dhu l-Hijja must be physically connected to
the Hajj, then he might as well call it the ‘Id al-Hajj, and
not use the mutawatir-transmitted name of this ‘Id, namely,
the “Festival of Sacrifice” or ‘Id al-Adha, which follow the
great Hajj.
*Just as with the recommended fast of the first nine days of
Dhu l-Hijja, despite the traditional name of the fast being
“ashr dhi l-Hijja” [literally, the ten (days) of Dhu
l-Hijja]. We should heed the guidance of Imam al-Ghazali
here: “once the meaning is understood, there is no need to
quibble about names” [idhA urifa l-ma‘nA fa-lA mushAHHata fi
’l-asAmi]. The meaning of the ‘ashr dhi l-Hijja fast is
explained by Imam al-Tarmasi: “its meaning is [the first]
nine days of it [and not ten], because to fast on the day of
‘Id is prohibited as we have already mentioned. It is likely
that it is expressed by ‘ten’ because the Hadiths being
transmitted concerning that [fast] come with the word ‘ten’”
[Mawhiba, 4:299].
~~~Tatimma~~~ “My community shall never agree on an error”,
is a well known Hadith, and indeed, a given in our religion.
But if you thought that the “great parts of the
Saudi-influenced world” (with the greatest respect to them,
of course) equals the ‘greater group’ numerically, then, you
must surely be mistaken! For the more than 200,000,000
Muslims of the Far East alone outnumber those in the Middle
East.
It hardly needs mentioning in this article that there is
already Ijma‘ in the Umma of the Seal of the Prophets (may
Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him!) that the day of
‘Id al-Adha falls on the 10th of Dhu l-Hijja, and ‘Id
al-Fitr is on the 1st of Shawwal, and that they fall in
their respective lands, countries and regions of the world
following the decision of their Imams. As numerous
contemporary jurists including eminent scholars from Saudi
Arabia itself have written on the subject, to believe that
the rest of the world should follow the Saudi’s local
calendar for the months of Ramadan, Shawwal and Dhu l-Hijja,
is a baseless innovation [bid‘a la asla laha], one for which
no jurists properly schooled, today or in days gone by, have
set a precedent.
Despite the modern age, the considerable confusion over the
regulation of the calendar witnessed in parts of the Muslim
world is a sad and appalling testament of our affairs; it is
especially distressing to see some from the Umma defying
both Fiqh and Falak as well as long established traditions
from our chequered history. There have even been cases when
the beginning of a lunar month was announced in some
countries on an evening when the moon had actually set
before the sun—a situation inconceivable in medieval times
and hardly in keeping with the spirit of Islam. As a nation,
we have forgotten the courage that made us a beacon for the
dark ages: al-muHAfaZatu ‘alA qadImi S-SAliHi wa l-‘akhdhu
bi-jadIdi l-aSlaHi [to preserve the best of the ancients and
to adopt the very best of the moderns].
O Lord, have mercy on us when we are called to judgement;
forgive the Muslims for their shortcomings, and for their
petty politics, and for their not being in synchrony with
the heavens, Amin, ya Allah, Amin!
This, I hope will be sufficient; wa Allahu ta‘ala a‘lam wa
ahkam!
May this be beneficial; and my best wishes of ‘Id and the
blessings that come with it to you and to your family and
for your community in Cambridge al-Mahzuza tomorrow.
Allahumma j‘alnA wa-iyyAkum mina l-fA’izIna li-riDA’i
rabbi l-‘AlamIn, wa-a‘Adahu LlAhu ‘alaynA wa-‘alaykum
sinInan ba‘da sinIn, wa-a‘wAman ba‘da a‘wAm, maSHUbIna bi
l-luTfi wa l-‘Afiyah; wa-takarram ‘alaynA wa-‘alaykum
bi-Hajji bayti LlAhi l-HarAm, wa-ziyArati qabri n-nabiyyi
‘alayhi S-SalAtu wa-s-salAm; wa-rzuqnA kamAla l-mutAba‘ati
lahu ZAhiran wa-bATinan, wa-fahman thAqiban wa-‘ilman
nAfi‘an wa-yaqInan SAdiqan wa-‘amalan SAliHan; Amin Amin
Amin!
al-faqir dhu l-taqsir in Oxford al-Maghbuta,
Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti
on Wednesday, the 8th of Dhu l-Hijja 1425, or 19 I 2005.
Select Bibliography:
§
Ba‘alawi,
Abd al-Rahman. Bughyat
al-Mustarshidin fi Talkhis Fatawa ba‘d al-Muta’akhkhirin.
Bulaq, 1309 H.
§
al-Bakri. Hashiyat I‘anat al-Talibin. 4 vols. Bulaq, 1300 H.
§
al-Batawi. Sullam al-Nayrayn.
3 vols. Mecca, 1925.
§
al-Fadani. al-Mukhtasar al-Muhadhdhab fi Ma‘rifat
al-Tawarikh al-Thalatha wa l-Awqat wa l-Qibla bi l-Rub‘
al-Mujayyab. Mecca: Muhammad Salih Ahmad Mansur al-Baz, n.d.
§
al-Fadani. Sharh Thamrat al-Wasila al-Musamma bi-l-Mawahib
al-Jazila fi Azhar al-Khamila. Cairo: Dar al-Tiba‘a
al-Misriyya, 1949.
§
Ibn
Hajar al-Haytami. Tuhfa al-Muhtaj bi-Sharh al-Minhaj
al-Nawawi in Hawashi al-Shirwani wa-Ibn Qasim ‘ala Tuhfa
al-Muhtaj. Edited by Muhammad ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Khalidi. 13
vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1996.
§
Nawawi al-Jawi. Nihayat al-Zayn fi Irshad al-Mubtadi’in
Sharh ‘ala Qurrat al-‘Ayn bi-Muhimmat al-Din [of Imam
al-Mallibari]. Cairo: Mustafa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1938.
§
al-Qalyubi and ‘Umayra. Hashiyatan ‘ala Sharh al-Mahalli
‘ala Minhaj al-Talibin. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1981.
§
al-Shabramallisi. Hashiya. In al-Ramli. Nihayat al-Muhtaj
ila Sharh al-Minhaj [al-Nawawi].
8 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub
al-‘Ilmiyya, 1998.
§
al-Shirbini. Mughni al-Muhtaj ila Ma‘rifa Ma‘ani Alfaz
al-Minhaj [al-Nawawi]. Edited by ‘Ali Muhammad Mu‘awwad and
‘Adil Ahmad ‘Abd al-Mawjud. 6 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub
al-‘Ilmiyya, 1994.
§
al-Subki. Fatawa al-Subki fi Furu‘ al-Fiqh al-Shafi‘i.
Edited by Muhammad ‘Abd al-Sallam Shahin. 2 vols. Beirut:
Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2004.
§
al-Tarmasi. Mawhibat Dhi al-Fadl Hashiya ‘ala Sharh Ibn
Hajar Muqaddimat Bafadl. 4 vols. Cairo: al-Matba‘a
al-‘Amirah al-Sharifiyya, 1327.
