النص المفهرس

Establishing the sighting of the crescent through a radio report
Question
The decision of the Jam'īyyatul 'Ulama' is generally broadcast over the
radio. Will the sighting of the crescent be established in this way?
Answer
A radio broadcast is like an announcement. If the announcement
regarding the sighting of the crescent is made by a formal committee
which passes a verdict according to a Shar'i testimony and rules of the
Shari'ah, and the one who is making the announcement is a Muslim
representing that committee, it will be correct and valid to rely on
that announcement.
Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah:
If the court makes a Shari ah-valid investigation as regards the
sighting of the crescent while acting under the order of the country,
and then announces it via telegram or radio, then the people of that
city and the areas which fall under it can rely on the announcement. It
will be correct for them to act on it according to the Shari'ah.1
Īdāh al-Masā'il:
A mere radio announcement does not establish the sighting of the
crescent. Rather, in order for it to be reliable, the following conditions
will have to be fulfilled:
1. A Muslim ruler or a responsible member of a Hilal Committee who is
observant of the Shari' ah personally makes the announcement or asks
someone to announce it after he ascertained the sighting as prescribed
by the Sharī ah.
2. He must announce that he obtained a testimony, and that the
sighting has been established through a Shar'ī testimony.
3. The person making the announcement must identify himself by
saying that he is so and so, who is acting on behalf of such and such
ruler or such and such Hilal committee.
4. Details with regard to the radio broadcast must first be presented to
responsible 'ulama'. They will make their investigations and inquiries.
Once they are satisfied, the person must follow their guidelines and
instructions.
1 Fatāwā Mahmūdīyyah, vol. 10, p. 55.
261

5. The radio announcement can be relied upon to such a distance that
in the case where it is accepted, it will not result in the month being 28
days or 31 days.
6. On the occasion of this sighting, your horizon is not clear. If not, this
announcement will not be considered.
If the above conditions are fulfilled, the radio announcement is
considered. If not, it will not be considered.1
Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah:
A Shar'ī judge, body of reliable 'ulama', or that crescent-sighting
committee which is accepted by Muslims - these people must obtain a
formal testimony and decide on the sighting. The decision will then be
broadcast via radio by the Shar'ī judge, representative of the body of
'ulama' or representative of the crescent-sighting committee. If
'ulama' of other places accept this decision, it will be correct to act on
it.2
Fatāwā Farīdīyyah3:
The announcement or broadcast of a Hilal Committee via a radio will
be compulsorily reliable provided the information is detailed, the basis
and reason for the decision is mentioned so that people can be
satisfactorily convinced.
Also refer to: Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 2, p. 22; Imdād al-Muftīyyīn, vol. 2,
pp. 477-480.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Establishing a sighting of the crescent via telephone
Question
Can the sighting of the crescent be established via telephone?
Answer
If the person speaking on the phone is known to you, there is no doubt
about his identity, you are confident as regards his honesty, and he is
giving information about the sighting of the crescent in his region;
then after considering him to be a reliable person, it will be
1 Īdāh al-Masā'il, p. 80.
2 Fatāwā Rahīmīyyah, vol. 5, p. 185.
3 Fatāwā Farīdīyyah, vol. 4, p. 57.
262

permissible to act on his information on a personal level; but it is not
wajib to act on it. If people receive telephone messages from all over
and large numbers of people convey this message to the extent that it
is not likely that they are speaking a lie, then it reaches the level of a
Shar'ī testimony, and it becomes necessary to act on it.
Kitab al-Fatāwā:
If the horizon is clear - whether it is for the crescent of Ramadan or 'īd
- then for the establishment of the sighting of the crescent, there has
to be khabar mustafid. This means that such a large number of people
must provide the information regarding whom we can say that it is
generally not possible for them to have concurred on speaking a lie. If
the horizon is cloudy and the issue is with regard to sighting the
crescent of Ramadan, then the information of one reliable person is
sufficient to establish the sighting of the crescent. In both cases, the
basis for the sighting of the crescent is "information". Therefore, if
information is conveyed via telephone and you are satisfied that the
informer who is identifying himself is the right person, and he is a
reliable person, then such telephonic information can be relied upon.1
For further details refer to: Ahsan al-Fatawā, vol. 4, p. 407-412; Fatāwā
Rahīmīyyah, vol. 5, p. 187; Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 2, p. 21; Kifāyatul Muftī,
vol. 4, p. 216; Nizām al-Fatāwā, vol. 2, p. 163.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
When a judge passes a decision on the testimony of a flagrant sinner
Question
Can a judge accept the testimony of a flagrant sinner as regards the
sighting of the crescent? If he did accept it, will the decision which he
passes on the basis of that testimony be correct?
Answer
The judge who accepts a testimony of a fasiq (flagrant sinner) has
sinned. However, if the judge accepted his testimony because of the
man's popularity and trustworthiness, the decision will be
promulgated. In fact, Imam Abu Yusuf rahimahullah is of the view that
if a fasiq is well-known for his nobility and dignity, it will be essential
to accept his testimony. It is not even a sin to appoint such a person as
a judge. However, the more correct view is that it is a sin to accept his
testimony, but the decision will be passed and executed.
1 Kitab al-Fatāwā, vol. 3, p. 376.
263

Ad-Durr al-Mukhtār:
(والفاسق أبلها فيكون أبله لكنه لا يقلد) وجوباً ويأثم مقلده كقابل شهادته ہ
یفتى وقيده فى القاعدية بما إذا غلب على ظنه صدق فلیحفظ، درر، واستثنى
الثاني الفاسق ذا الجابة والمروءة فإنه يجب قبول شهادته بزازية، قال في النهر:
وعليه فلا يأثم أيضاً بتوليته القضاء حيث كان كذلك إلا أن يفرق بينهما .
انتہی.
وفي الشامية: (قوله لكنه لا يقلد وجوباً) قال في البحر وفي غير موضوع ذكره
الأولوية يعني الأولى أن لا تقبل شهادته وإن قبل جاز وفى الفتح ومقتضى
الدليل أن لا يحل أن يقضى بها فإن قضى جاز ونفذ ومقتضاه الإثم ... وصرح
ابن الكمال بأن من قلد فاسقا يأثم وإذا قبل القاضي شهادته يأثم. (قوله
واستثنى الثاني) أي أبو يوسف من الفاسق الذي يأثم القاضي بقبول شهادته،
والظابر أن بذا مما يغلب على ظن القاضي صدق، فيكون داخلاً تحت كلام
القاعدية فلا حاجة إلى استثنائ على ما استظهرنا آنفاً تأمل. (الدر المختار مع
الشامى ٥٣٥٦، كتاب القضاء، مطلب فى حكم القاضى الدرزى والنصرانى
سعيد).
Hadrat Muftī Muhammad Shafi Sāhib rahimahullāh writes:
The jurists concur that it is not wajib on a judge to accept the
testimony of a fasiq and to pass a judgement based on it. However, if
the judge - through circumstantial evidence - gauges that he is not
speaking a lie and he therefore passes a judgement on the basis of the
testimony of a fasiq, the decision will be correct and executed. This is
gauged from al-Hidāyah, Sharh al-Wiqāyah, ad-Durr al-Mukhtar, Shāmī,
'Ālamgīrī.1
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
1 Ru'yat-e-Hilal Aur Foto Ke Ahkām, p. 53.
264

When a fasiq judge passes a decision
Question
If a judge is a fasiq on the basis of his beliefs, will his judgement and
decision be acceptable?
Answer
No fasiq person - whether as regards beliefs or his actions - should be
appointed as a judge. However, if the Amir al-Mu'minin and the
supreme ruler appoints him as a judge, his judgement will be valid.
Muslims must therefore accept his judgement.
Shāmī:
(قوله والفاسق أبلها) وأفصح بهذه الجملة دفعاً لتويم من قال إن الفاسق ليس
بأيل للقضاء فلا يصح قضاءه، لأنه لا يؤمن عليه لفسقه، وبو قول الثلاثة
واختاره الطحاوي، قال العيني: وينبغي أن يفتى به خصوصاً في بذا الزمان.
أقول: لو اعتبر بذا لانسد باب القضاء خصوصاً في زماننا فلذا كان ما جرى
عليه المصنف بو الأصح كما في الخلاصة، وبو أصح الأقاويل كما في
العمادية، نهر، وفي الفتح: والوجه تنفيذ قضاء كل من ولاء سلطان ذو شوكة
وإن کان جابلاً فاسقاً وہو ظاپر المذہب عندنا وحينئذٍ فيحكم بفتوى غيره.
( فتاوى الشامى: ٥٣٥٥، كتاب القضاء، سعيد).
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
The need for a large group when the horizon is clear
Question
If the horizon is clear, is it permissible for a judge to declare the
sighting of the crescent based on the testimony of 2-3 witnesses?
Answer
The texts and commentaries of the Hanafi jurists concur that as per
the Zahir ar-Riwayah, if the horizon is clear, then there has to be a
large group. The sighting of the crescent based on the testimony of a
handful of people will not be established. There is no basis for
furnishing the argument that people nowadays are lazy and
disinterested in this regard. On the contrary, committees have been
265

established by governments, the public and 'ulama' bodies for this
purpose. Furthermore, lies and misunderstandings are quite common
today. It is therefore essential to practise on the Zahir ar-Riwayah.
Al-Mabsūt:
فأما إذا لم يكن بالسماء علة فلا تقبل شهادة الواحد والمثنى حتى يكون
أمراً مشهوداً ظابراً في بلال رمضان وبكذا في بلال الفطر في رواية بذا
الكتاب، وفي رواية الحسن عن أبي حنيفة قال: تقبل فيه شهادة رجلين أو رجل
وامرأتين بمنزلة حقوق العباد، والأصح ما ذكرنا بنا فإن في حقوق العباد إنما
تقبل شهادة رجلين إذا لم يكن بناك ظابر يكذبهما وبنا الظابر يكذبهما
في بلال رمضان وفي بلال شوال جميعاً لأنها أسوة سائر الناس في الموقف
والمنظر وحدة البصر وموضع القمر فلا تقبل فيه شهادة إلا أن يكون أمراً
مشهوداً ظابراً. (المبسوط للإمام السرخسى: ٤٠(٣، دار الفكر)
Imdād al-Fattāh:
وإذا لم يكن بالسماء علة فلا بد للثبوت من شهادة جمع عظيم لرمضان
والفطر وغيربما لأن المطلع متحد في ذلك المحل، والموانع منتفية، والأبصار
سليمة، والهمم في طلب روية الهلال مسقيمة، فالتفرد في مثل بذه الحالة لوبم
الغلط فوجب التوقف في رؤية البعض القليل حتى يراه الجمع الكثير. (امداد
الفتاح: ص ٦٧٠، بيروت)
Kanz ad-Daqā'iq:
وقبل بعلة خبر عدل ولو قناً أو أنثى لرمضان وحرين أو حر وحرتين للفطر
وإلا فجمع عظيم لهما. (كنز الدقائق: ص ٦٧، كتاب الصوم، مكتبة امدايه
ملتان)
266

Al-Mukhtār:
وإن لم يكن بالسماء علة لم تقبل إلا شهادة جمع يقع العلم بخبريم. (المختار:
١٢٩، كتاب الصوم. وكذا فى الهداية: ١٢١٥)
Furthermore, lies and misunderstandings are quite common today. It
is therefore essential to practise on the Zahir ar-Riwayah. 'Allamah
Khayr ad-Dīn Ramlī says in this regard:
قال العلامة الشامي: ظابر الرواية اشتراط العدد لا الجمع العظيم والعدد
يصدق باثنين ... ونازعم محشيه الرملي بأن ظابر المذبب اشتراط الجمع العظيم،
فيتعين العمل به لغلبة الفسق والافتراء على الشهر. (فتاوى الشامى: ٢٣٨٨،
سعيد)
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
When the crescent is seen the next day
Question
Testimony to the sighting of the crescent was given today. The next
day the moon was not seen in the western horizon although the
horizon was clear. Will the testimony of the previous day be rejected
on the basis that it is against what is obvious? Or is it that a general
sighting was not established the next day despite the horizon being
clear?
Answer
I haven't come across this matter in the Arabic books of jurisprudence
and fatawa. Nonetheless, it is stated in Fatawa Wahidī that if the moon
is not seen the next day, the previous day's decision will still be
correct. However, Fatawa Wahidī does not give any reference from the
books of the past. This fatwa is therefore against the obvious.
Nowadays, the testimony of people which is against the obvious will
have to be looked at, and this fatwa ought to be issued that the
previous 'id or fast was not correct, and the witnesses ought to be
punished.
The text of Fatāwa Wahidī reads as follows:
267

سوال: ما قولهم: اندر آھ پلال فطر را گواپاں در دیہی دیدند قاضی قسم
داده حكم بدان نمود وشب دویم دردی ودیگر بعضے مردم بسيار نظر
بستند ندیدند دراں صورت حکم ماضی نافذاست یا نه وکذب شهود رؤیت
ظاپر شد ونه و گواہی ندیدن مقبول است یا نه؟
جواب: الظابر أن حكم القاضي نافذ وإن لم يروا الهلال في الليلة الثانية،
کما يستفاد من جوابرالفتاوی حیث قال: قاضٍ شهد عنده شابدان برؤية
بلال رمضان وقضى به ثم أتموا ثلاثين يوماً ولم يروا بلال العيد والسماء
مصحية فإنهم يفطرون لأنهم عقدوا ثلاثين يوماً كما أمروا به ولا يظهر
بذلك كذب الشهود لأن قولهما وإن كان متحملاً فقد صار حجة لاتصال
القضاء به، انتهى، وكما لا يظهر كذب الشهود في الصورة المذكورة لاتصال
القضاء بالشهادة فكذلك فيما نحن فيه كما لا يخفى على أن الأصل قبول
شهادة الإثبات دون النفي. (فتاوى واحدى: للعلامة عبد الواحد سيوستانى
سندهی رحم الله، جلد اول ص ٣٣١)
Normally if the horizon is clear and 2-3 persons testify, then it is not
accepted because it is against the obvious. Thus, if after the first day
the moon is not sighted on the second day despite the horizon being
clear, then this will be even more against the obvious. Therefore, if
there is no sighting on the second day, the previous testimony ought
to be classified as invalid. This ruling is mentioned in the books of
jurisprudence that if testimony is given with regard to something and
its opposite is proved with certainty, then that testimony will be
considered to be non-existent.
Al-Hidāyah:
وإذا تنازعا في دابة وأقام كل واحد منهما بينة أنها نتجت عنده وذكراً تاريخاً
وسن الدابة يوافق أحد التاريخين فهو أولى، لأن الحال تشهد له فيترجح ... وإن
خالفت سن الدابة الوقتين بطلت البينتان، كذا ذكره الحافظ الشهيد، لأنه
ظهر كذب الفريقين فتترك في يد من كانت فى يده. (الهداية: ٣/٢٤)
268

The gist of the above is that if the opposite of the testimony is
outwardly proven, the testimony is invalid. In other words, the
person's testimony is rejected.
Fath al-Qadir:
بطلت البينتان، كذا ذكره الحاكم لأن ظهر كذب الفريقين وذلك مانع عن
قبول الشهادة حالة الانفراد فيمنع حالة الاجتماع أيضاً. (فتح القدير: ٨٢٧٩،
دار الفكر)
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
It is not possible for the crescent to be sighted in the morning in the east
and in the evening in the west
Question
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh states that it is possible in a certain
region for the crescent to be sighted in the morning in the east before
sunrise, and in the evening in the west. Nowadays, some regions do
make claims that they saw the crescent in the morning and also after
sunset in the evening. Is this possible? The text of 'Allamah Shāmī
rahimahullah reads as follows:
وأما إذا رؤي يوم التاسع والعشرين قبل الشمس ثم رؤي ليلة الثلاثين بعد
الغروب، وشهدت بينة شرعية بذلك، فإن الحاكم يحكم برؤيته ليلاً كما
بونص الحديث، ولا يلتفت إلى قول المنجمين إنه لا تمكن رؤيته صباحاً ثم
مساء في يوم واحد كما قدمناه عن فتاوى الشمس الرملي الشافعي. (فتاوى
الشامى: ٢٣٩٢، مطلب فى رؤية الهلال نهاراً، سعيد)
Answer
In the light of past and present statements of astronomers, exegetes
and their experiences, it is not possible for the crescent to be sighted
in the morning in the east and in the evening in the west. This is
because the moon most certainly gets concealed for at least two days.
Together with being an expert in the fields of Hadith and
jurisprudence, the muftī of Baghdad, 'Allāmah Ālūsī rahimahullah, was
an expert in the field of astronomy. He writes:
269

فبقي ثمانية وعشرون وہو زمان ما بين أول ظهوره بالعشيات مستهلا أول
الشهر، وآخر رؤيته بالغدوات مستتراً آخره. (روح المعانى: ٦×٢٣، سورة يُسّ)
In other words, apart from 28 days, there are two days for the
disappearance of the moon and its reappearance.
The marginal notes of Jalalayn quotes from Kamalayn that the moon
goes into concealment for two days and sometimes for three days.
Jalālayn:
بو الذي جعل الشمس ضياء وقدره منازل منازل ثمانية وعشرين منزلاً في
ثمان وعشرين ليلة من كل شهر، ويستتر ليلتين إن كان الشهر ثلاثين يوماً
ولیلة إن کان تسعة وعشرين يوما.
The following is stated in the marginal note to the above text:
تبع في ذلك الشيخ البغوي لكن ذلك خلاف المشابدة
In emulating the view of Imam Baghawī rahimahullah, 'Allāmah Suyūtī
rahimahullah states: In reality, the moon is concealed for two days
when the month is of 29 days, and for three days when it is of 30 days.
He writes at the end:
وأقل ما يخفى ولا يرى صباحاً ولا مساء ليلتان، وأكثره ثلاث ليال. (جلالين
مع الحاشية: ٧٠(٢، رقم الحاشية: ٢٣)
A Hadīth states:
عن عمران بن حصين رضي الله عنه أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لرجل:
بل صمت من سرر بذا الشهر (أي شعبان) شيئاً فقال: لا، قال: فقال له: إذا
أفطرت رمضان فصم يوماً أو يومين. (رواه مسلم: ١٣٦٨)
Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam asked a person: "Did you fast at
the end of Sha'ban on the day when the moon is concealed?" He
replied: "No." Rasūlullāh sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam said: “When
Ramadan comes to an end, you must keep one or two fasts."
270

Imam Nawawī rahimahullah, quoting on the authority of Auzā'ī
rahimahullāh, Abū 'Ubayd rahimahullah and several other scholars
states in Sharh Muslim that this refers to the last part of the month.
قال النووي: سرر ويقال أيضاً سَرار وسِرار بفتح السين وكسربا، وكله من
الاستسرار. قال الأوزاعي وأبو عبيد وجمهور العلماء من أبل اللغة والحديث:
المراد بالسرر آخر الشهر، سميت بذلك لاستسرار القمر فيها، قال البيهقي في
السنن الكبرى بعد أن روى الروايتين عن الأوزاعي: الصحيح آخره، ... قال
القاضي: والأشهر أن المراد آخر الشهر كما قال أبو عبد الله والأكثرون.
(شرح مسلم شريف: ١٣٦٨)
In the light of these texts and references, we cannot understand the
point made by 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh. It is possible that like
some of our countrymen or like Saudi Arabia, this is popularly believed
in Syria as well. It is also possible that he said this in emulation of
Shams Ramlī. But the reality is what was said above.
Some details on this issue are mentioned by Muhtaram 'Abd al-Mun'im
Sāhib in his book A'dal al-Aqwal.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
If the moon is sighted on a certain day in the east in the morning, it is
impossible to sight the crescent on that day or the day after it. This is
because during such days, the moon sets before the setting of the sun.
Sometimes, the Saudi government makes an announcement of
sighting the crescent on that very day.1
To sum up, as per the statement of the author of Jalalayn, it is
inevitable that the moon will be concealed for at least one day. And
according to the statements of the author of Kamalayn and 'Allamah
Ālūsī rahimahullāh, it will certainly be concealed for two days. Thus, it
is not possible to sight the moon in the morning in the east and in the
evening in the west.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 417.
271

When the crescent is not sighted after 30 days
Question
Thirty days of Ramadan were completed and the crescent was not
sighted despite the horizon being clear. Will there be 'id the next day?
Answer
If the sighting of the crescent was established by the testimony of one
person, and after the passage of 30 days of Ramadan the crescent was
not sighted, then as per the correct view, the next day will not be 'īd.
Instead, it will be necessary to fast because the testimony proved to be
against the obvious, and is therefore rejected.
If the sighting was established by the testimony of two persons, then
the correct view as per al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah, the next day will be 'īd.
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh also makes mention of this. However, in
the light of the statements of al-Bahr ar-Ra'iq and Tanqīh al-Fatawa al-
Hāmidīyyah (which was written after Shāmī), the view contained in al-
Fatāwā al-Hindīyyah is not preferred. This is because 'Allāmah Ibn
Nujaym rahimahullāh and 'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah said: More than
one person gave testimony, then after the passage of 30 days the
crescent was not sighted despite the horizon being clear, then this
testimony will be classified as shahādat-e-zūr (a false testimony) and it
will be necessary to fast the next day. Furthermore, the view of al-
Fatāwa al-Hindīyyah goes against the Hadith which states that a month
is either 29 or 30 days. When 30 days passed and the horizon is clear,
and the crescent is not sighted, it means that the month has now
become 31 days, and this cannot happen. Therefore the preferred view
is that the previous testimony was not correct.
The above ruling applies when 30 days of fasting are completed, the
horizon is clear and the crescent is still not sighted. However, if the
horizon is cloudy and unclear, and the crescent is not sighted, then all
scholars concur that it is permissible to observe 'id the next day.
Al-Fatāwā al-Hindīyyah:
وإذا صاموا بشهادة الواحد وأكملوا ثلاثين يوماً ولم يروا بلال شوال لا
يفطرون فيما روى الحسن عن أبي حنيفة للاحتياط، وعن محمد أنهم يفطرون
كما فى التبيين، وفي غاية البيان قول محمد أصح، قال شمس الأئمة: بذا
الاختلاف فيما إذا لم يروا بلال شوال والسماء مصحية ، فأما إذا كانت
272

متغيمة فإنهم يفطرون بلا خلاف كذا في الذخيرة وبو الأشبه، بكذا في
التبيين، وإذا شهد على بلال رمضان شابدان والسماء متغيمة وقبل القاضي
شهادتهما صاموا ثلاثين يوماً فلم يروا بلال شوال إن كانت السماء متغيمة
يفطرون من الغد بالاتفاق وإن كانت مصحية يفطرون أيضاً على الصحيح.
(الفتاوى الهندية: ١٩٨)
Ad-Durr al-Mukhtār:
وبعد صوم ثلاثين بقول عدلين حل الفطر لوجود نصاب الشهادة، ولو صاموا
بقول عدل حيث يجوز وغم بلال الفطر لا يحل على المذب خلافاً لمحمد كذا
ذكره المصنف لكن نقل ابن الكمال عن الذخيرة أنه إن غم بلال الفطر حل
اتفاقاً وفي الزيلعي الأشبه إن غم حل وإلا لا. وفي الشامي: قوله وفي الزيلعي
نقلم لبيان فائدة لم تعلم من كلام الذخيرة وبي ترجيح عدم الفطر إن لم يغم
شوال بظهور غلط الشابد لأن الأشبه من ألفاظ الترجيح، لكنه مخالف مما
علمته من تصحيح غاية البيان لقول محمد بالحل نعم حمل في الإمداد ما في
غاية البيان على قول محمد بالحل إذا غم شوال بناء على تحقيق خلاف الذي
نقله المصنف، وقد علمت عدمه وحينئذٍ فما في غاية البيان في غير محله لأنه
ترجيح لما بو متفق عليه. (الدر المختار مع الشامى: ٢٢٩١، سعيد)
However, in Tanqīh al-Fatāwā al-Hāmidīyyah, 'Allāmah Shāmī
rahimahullah writes differently:
شهادة الزور لا تعلم إلا بالإقرار ولا تعلم بالبيئة (أقول) قد تعلم بدون الإقرار
كما إذا شهد بموت زيد أو بأن فلاناً قتله ثم ظهر زيد حياً، وكذا إذا شهد
برؤية الهلال ومضى ثلاثون يوماً وليس في السماء علة ولم ير الهلال ومثله
بذا كثير. (تنقيح الفتاوى: ١٣٤١)
From the above we learn that if after 30 days pass, the crescent is not
sighted despite the horizon being clear, then the previous testimony
273

will be classified as a false testimony, and it will be necessary to keep
the 31st fast.
A point to bear in mind is that Tanqih al-Fatawa was written after Radd
al-Muhtar. The following is stated in the introduction:
وزدت ما لا بد منه من نحو استدراكه أو تقييده أو فيه تقوية وتاييد ضاماً إلى
ذلك أيضاً بعض تحريرات نقحتها في حاشيتي على البحر المسمات "منحة
الخالق على البحر الرائق" وحاشيتي التي علقتها على شرح التنوير المسماة "رد
المحتار على الدر المختار". (مقدمة تنقيح الفتاوى: ١)
Thus, the view that fasting should not be stopped will be preferred.
'Allāmah Ibn Nujaym Misrī rahimahullah writes the same thing in al-
Bahr ar-Rā'iq:
قوله ومن أقر أنه شهد زوراً يشهد ولا يعزر وقيد باقراره لأنه لا يحكم به
(أي بالزور) إلا بإقراره وزاد شيخ الإسلام أن يشهد بموت واحد فيجيء حياً
كذا في فتح القدير وجعل في إيضاح الإصلاح نظير مسئلة ظهوره حياً بعد
الشهادة بموت أو قتل ما إذا شهدوا برؤية الهلال فمضى ثلاثون يوماً وليس
في السماء علة ولم يروا الهلال. (البحر الرائق: ٧/٢٦، كوئته)
In the above text the word shahidu is in the plural form. This shows
that the word shahida (singular form) in Tanqih is unknown. In other
words, if Ramadan is established through the testimony of one person
or many persons, it will still be classified as a false testimony and it
will be necessary to keep the 31st fast.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Different horizons
Question
Does the Shari'ah consider different horizons? If it does, what is the
limit?
Answer
Different horizons ought to be considered on the basis of the Shari'ah
because senior Hanafī jurists like 'Allāmah Zayla'ī and 'Allāmah Kāsānī
have given preference to this. Some seniors of Deoband also consider
274

this to be preferable. As far as the limit is concerned, it becomes clear
from the statement of Hadrat Mufti Muhammad Shafi Sahib
rahimahullah that countries where the distance from one place to
another is so vast that if the sighting of one place is considered, the
month will either become 28 days or 31 days, then in such a case
different horizons will have to be taken into consideration. Where this
does not happen, different horizons will not be considered. One defect
in not taking different horizons into consideration is that if the
crescent is sighted in South Africa, then in Australia it will be close to
fajr time. Or in some other countries, the fajr time will have already
expired. Will they wait until the fajr time to sight the crescent or will
they keep fast and then break it?
Yes, a unified sighting is possible and easy for India, Pakistan and the
Arab countries. In fact, South Africa could be made the criterion where
there is a greater possibility of sighting on account of it being situated
in the south west; and the system for the sighting of the crescent is
also strong. In this way, the issue of the crescent for Africa, Europe,
India and Pakistan going to the west will be solved.
Badā'i' as-Sanā'i':
بذا إذا كانت المسافة بين البلدين قريبة لا تختلف فيها المطالع، فأما إذا كانت
بعيدة فلا يلزم أحد البلدين حكم الآخر لأن مطالع البلاد عند المسافة
الفاحشة تختلف فيعتبر في أبل كل بلد مطالع بلدبم دون البلد الآخر. (بدائع
الصنائع : ٢٨٣، سعيد)
Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi Wa Adillatuhu:
إذا كان بين القطرين قريب بحيث تتحد المطالع فلا يعتبر، وإن كانت بعيدة
بحيث تختلف المطالع فيعتبر فلو صام أبل قطر ثلاثين يوماً برؤية، وأبل قطر
آخر تسعة وعشرين يوماً برؤية، فعليهم قضاء يوم إن كان بين القطرين قرب
بحيث تتحد المطالع، وإن كانت بعيدة بحيث تختلف، لا يلزم أحد القطرين
حكم الآخر، فالقرب مثل سورية، والعراق، والبعد مثل الكويت والمغرب،
وجاء عن ابن عباس وعائشة رضي الله عنهما صوم کل جماعة یوم یصومون،
275

وفطربم يوم يفطرون. (الفقه الحنفي وأدلته: ١٣٨٩، قبول خبر الواحد فى روية
بلال رمضان، دمشق)
'Allāmah Zayla'ī rahimahullāh writes:
والأشبه أن يعتبر لأن كل قوم مخاطبون بما عنديم وانفصال الهلال عن شعاع
الشمس تختلف باختلاف الأقطار، كما أن دخول الوقت وخروجه تختلف
باختلاف الأقطار حتى إذا زالت الشمس في المشرق لا يلزم من أن تزول في
المغرب، وكذا طلوع الفجر وغروب الشمس بل كلما تحركت الشمس درجة
فتلك طلوع فجر لقوم وطلوع شمس للآخرين وغروب لبعض ونصف ليل
لغيربم. ( تبيين الحقائق: ١٣٢١، امدايم، ملتان)
Fatāwā Bayyināt:
The issue of different horizons has been a contentious one among the
past and latter day jurists. There are three views of the jurists in this
regard:
First view:
It is from Hadrat Imam Abu Hanīfah rahimahullah and is known as
Zahir ar-Riwayah - that there is no consideration whatsoever for
differences in horizons. (However, there are many difficulties in
applying this to the entire world).
Second view:
Different horizons are considered for every place in every situation
and condition.
Third view:
Different horizons are not considered in countries which are near to
other, but considered with respect to those which are far from each
other. (The basis of this ought to be 'urf. There are different horizons
in most of the northern and southern countries. The crescent is
sighted in the south, but not in the north). 'Allamah Zayla'ī
rahimahullāh and 'Allāmah Kāsānī rahimahullah give preference to this
view.1
1 Fatāwā Bayyināt, vol. 3, p. 58.
276

Hadrat Muftī Muhammad Shafi Sahib rahimahullah writes in Ru'yat-e-
Hilal:
Our honourable teacher, Hadrat Sayyid Muhammad Anwar Shah
Kashmīrī rahimahullah, was of this view. Furthermore, our honourable
teacher, Hadrat Maulānā Shabbīr Ahmad 'Uthmānī rahimahullāh, has
made reference to a point in his Fath al-Mulhim Sharh Muslim giving
preference to this view which, after reading it, the preference of this
view becomes clear. This is especially so in our times when distances
between the east and west are covered in a few hours. He says that it is
explicitly stated in the Qur'an and Sunnah that a month cannot be less
than 29 days and more than 30 days. If different horizons are
disregarded for countries which are far from each other and for
countries of the east and west, then in opposition to this explicit text,
it will necessitate that if the crescent is sighted in one city, while
another distant city which is still in its 28th day receives this
information. If the latter city is made subservient to the sighting, its
month will total only 28 days which becomes less than the limit laid
down by the Shari'ah. And this is not correct. From this investigation
of Hadrat 'Allamah 'Uthmanī rahimahullah we also learn what the
criterion ought to be when deciding whether a country is far or near.
That is, if a country is so far away that if the sighting of one place will
result in the other place having a month of 28 or 31 days, then
different horizons will have to be taken into consideration. Where the
distance is not so much, different horizons will not be considered.1
Muftī 'Abd al-Mun'im Sahib states:
From the seniors of Deoband, the following scholars accept different
horizons: Maulānā Anwar Shah Kashmīrī rahimahullah, Maulānā
Shabbir Ahmad 'Uthmanī rahimahullah, Maulānā Muftī Muhammad
Shafi rahimahullāh, Maulānā Yusuf Bannūrī rahimahullah and others.
Muftī Muhammad Farīd Sahib also gives preference to this view.2
For more details refer to: Jadīd Fiqhī Masā'il, vol. 2, pp. 27-34; Minhaj as-
Sunan, vol. 4, pp. 13-15; Ru'yat-e-Hilāl, pp. 58-59; Fatāwā Bayyināt, vol. 3,
pp. 58-63.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
1 Condensed from Ru'yat-e-Hilal, pp. 58-59.
2 A'dal al-Aqwal Fī Mas'alah al-Hilal, p. 72.
277

Different groups having different views on the sighting of the crescent
Question
As regards the sighting of the crescent of Shawwal, the Muslims of
Albania have become divided into various groups. They are:
1. One group followed Saudi Arabia. It neither kept fast nor
performed tarawīh. Instead, it observed 'id the next day.
2. One group followed the people of Britain and observed 'id one
day after the previous group. However, no one in Britain
sighted the crescent nor anyone in Albania. And there is just
one hour time difference between these two countries.
3.
The third group kept 30 fasts because the crescent was not
sighted in Albania. These people observed 'īd two days after
the first group and one day after the second group.
Now whose 'id is correct as per the rules of the Shari'ah?
Answer
The 'id of the first group is incorrect whether on the basis of the
Sharī ah, common practice ('urf) or based on calculations.
The second group did not sight the crescent - not in its country nor in
Europe. If it received correct and authentic information of sightings in
nearby cities of Asia, and it therefore observed 'id, it will be correct. If
it followed Britain without receiving correct information of sighting,
its 'id is not correct.
The 'id of the third group is correct because it did not receive correct
information. Or if it did, it did not rely on it either because it did not
receive the information via the correct channels or it did not accept
the testimony of far off countries, or for some other reason. No matter
what, its action is correct.
A Hadīth states:
وقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: صوموا لرؤيته وأفطروا لرؤيته، فإن غم
عليكم فعدوا ثلا ثين ثم أفطروا. (رواه الترمذى: ٤٧ ١، باب ما جاء لا
تتقدموا الشهر بصوم)
278

Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi Wa Adillatuhu:
إذا كان بين القطرين قريب بحيث تتحد المطالع فلا يعتبر، وإن كانت بعيدة
بحيث تختلف المطالع فيعتبر فلو صام أبل قطر ثلاثين يوماً برؤية، وأبل قطر
آخر تسعة وعشرين يوماً برؤية، فعليهم قضاء يوم إن كان بين القطرين قرب
بحيث تتحد المطالع، وإن كانت بعيدة بحيث تختلف، لا يلزم أحد القطرين
حكم الآخر، فالقرب مثل سورية، والعراق، والبعد مثل الكويت والمغرب،
وجاء عن ابن عباس وعائشة رضي الله عنهما صوم كل جماعة يوم يصومون،
وفطربم يوم يفطرون. (الفقه الحنفى وأدلته: ١٣٨٩، قبول خبر الواحد فى روية
بلال رمضان، دمشق)
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
A few questions related to different horizons
Question
Nowadays there are various opinions and views with regard to the
sighting of the crescent. What is the root of this? Kindly answer the
following questions:
1. If the people of one city sight the crescent, on how many other cities
is it necessary for them to follow this sighting? What is the extent of
sighting the crescent? Up to how many kilometres is one horizon
considered?
2. How many neighbouring countries' sighting of the crescent will be
considered for this country [South Africa]? Is the horizon for
Johannesburg and Cape Town the same, or is it different?
3. Can we take the sighting of Madinah Munawwarah into
consideration? If not, why not?
Answer
As per the Zahir ar-Riwayah in the Hanafi madh-hab, the testimony of
the east suffices for the west provided the information reaches in the
correct manner, or it falls under the definition of information which is
known to a very large number of people. Those who calculate
differences in horizon on the basis of kilometres, then apart from their
views being conflicting, such a calculation does not fall under the
general rule. In most cases it is based on estimation. However, the
279

erudite 'ulama' take differences in horizon into consideration for
distant countries. Details in this regard were given previously.
2. If the crescent was certainly sighted in this country, and there is no
blemish or defect in the information as per the principles of the Hanafi
madh-hab, then it ought to be accepted. In the same way, the
testimony of neighbouring countries will also be accepted.
3. One of the reasons for not accepting the testimony of Saudi Arabia is
that its testimony in most cases is contrary to the obvious because the
crescent is seen in the east and west on the same day. Whereas
astronomers of the past and present say that this is not possible.
Furthermore, the crescent is not sighted anywhere else. In fact, many
times the day after the sighting, although the horizon is clear, the
crescent is not sighted in general; and at times it is not specifically
sighted. Sometimes the crescent is only 5-6 hours old and claims of
sighting it are made. In fact, there are times when claims of sighting it
are made even before the birth of the moon. Thus, how can a
testimony which is against the obvious be accepted?
The other reason is that according to them - in the light of Hambalī
jurisprudence - the testimony of one person [for Ramadan] and two
persons for 'id and other months is sufficient. Whereas, according to
Hanafis, if the horizon is clear, then the testimony of a very large
number of people is required. Nevertheless, it is easy to save ourselves
from this difference because when a Hambalī judge accepts such a
testimony and passes his decision, the Hanafis can accept it. However,
it is very difficult to accept a testimony which is against the obvious.
Furthermore, most people do not have knowledge of the details of
their testimony. Instead, because it is an individual kingship, it
becomes difficult if not almost impossible to obtain those details. This
should not be misconstrued to mean that the testimony of Saudi
Arabia is always wrong. It is, nonetheless, not too reliable according to
the 'ulama'. Also, bear in mind that erudite scholars are of the view
that different horizons are taken into consideration for distant lands.
Based on various reasons, they [Saudis] are not followed.
After answering all these questions, there still was the fear of disunity
and disharmony in this country. And there are some so-called
modernists who were spreading the view that Saudi Arabia be
followed for Ramadan, 'id, and so on. This, despite the fact that all
three 'ulama' bodies of this country (Cape Town, Natal and Gauteng)
are rendering services in this regard and have been issuing unanimous
verdicts on the sighting of the crescent. In order to remove these
doubts and misgivings, Hadrat Muftī [Rada al-Haqq] Sahib has written
280