__________________________________________
| |
| || || | || |
| o_,_7 _|| . _o_7 _|| 4_|_|| o_w_, |
| ( : / (_) / ( . |
|__________________________________________|
Fasting,
According to Five Islamic Schools of Law
(Part I)
By: 'Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah
Translated from the Arabic by Mujahid Husayn
Fasting in the month of Ramadan is one of the 'pillars' of the
Islamic faith. No proof is required to establish its being obligatory
(wajib) and one denying it goes out of the fold of Islam, because it is
obvious like salat, and in respect of anything so evidently established
both the learned and the unlettered, the elderly and the young, all stand
on an equal footing.
It was declared an obligatory duty (fard ) in the second year of
the Hijrah upon each and every mukallaf (one capable of carrying out
religious duties, i.e. a sane adult) and breaking it (iftar) is not
permissible except for any of the following reasons:
1. Hayd and nifas: The schools concur that fasting is not valid
for women during menstruation and puerperal bleeding.
2. Illness: The schools differ here. The Imamis observe: Fasting
is not valid if it would cause illness or aggravate it, or intensify the
pain, or delay recovery, because illness entails harm (darar) and causing
harm is prohibited (muharram). Moreover, a prohibition concerning an
'ibadah (a rite of worship) invalidates it. Hence if a person fasts in
such a condition, his fast is not valid (sahih). A predominant likelihood
of its resulting in illness or its aggravation is sufficient for
refraining from fasting. As to excessive weakness, it is not a
justification for iftar as long as it is generally bearable. Hence the
extenuating cause is illness, not weakness, emaciation or strain, because
every duty involves hard- ship and discomfort.
The four Sunni schools state: If one who is fasting (sa'im) falls
ill, or fears the aggravation of his illness, or delay in recovery, he has
the option to fast or refrain. Iftar is not incumbent upon him; it is a
relaxation and not an obligation in this situation. But where there is
likelihood of death or loss of any of the senses, iftar is obligatory for
him and his fasting is not valid.
3. A woman in the final stage of pregnancy and nursing mothers.
The four schools say: If a pregnant or nursing woman fears harm
for her own health or that of her child, her fasting is valid though it is
permissible for her to refrain from fasting. If she opts for iftar, the
schools concur that she is bound to perform its qada' later. They differ
regarding its substitute (fidyah) and atonement (kaffarah). In this regard
the Hanafis observe: It is not at all wajib. The Malikis are of the
opinion that it is wajib for a nursing woman, not for a pregnant one. The
Hanbalis and the Shafi'is say: Fidyah is wajib upon a pregnant and a
nursing woman only if they fear danger for the child; but if they fear
harm for their own health as well as that of the child, they are bound to
perform the qada' only without being required to give fidyah. the fidyah
for each day is one mudd, which amounts to feeding one needy person
(miskeen).1
The Imamis state: If a pregnant woman nearing childbirth or the
child of a nursing mother may suffer harm, both of them ought to break
their fast and it is not valid for them to continue fasting due to the
impermissibility of harm. They concur that both are to perform the qada'
as well as give fidyah, equaling one mudd, if the harm is feared for the
child. But if the harm is feared only for her own person, some among them
observe: She is bound to perform qada' but not to give fidyah, others say:
She is bound to perform qada' and give fidyah as well.
4. Travel, provided the conditions necessary for salat al-qasr, as
mentioned earlier, are fulfilled as per the opinion of each school. The
four Sunni schools add a further condition to these, which is that the
journey should commence before dawn and the traveler should have reached
the point from where salat becomes qasr before dawn. Hence if he commences
the journey after the setting in of dawn, it is haram for him to break the
fast, and if he breaks it, its qada' will be wajib upon him without a
kaffarah. The Shafi'is add another condition, which is that the traveler
should not be one who generally travels continuously, such as a driver.
Thus if he travels habitually, he is not entitled to break the fast. In
the opinion of the four Sunni schools, breaking the fast is optional and
not compulsory. Therefore, a traveler who fulfills all the conditions has
the option of fasting or iftar. This is despite the observation of the
Hanafis that performing salat as qasr during journey is compulsory and not
Optional.
The Imamis say: If the conditions required for praying qasr are
fulfilled for a traveler, his fast is not acceptable. Therefore, if he
fasts, he will have to perform the qada' without being liable to kaffarah.
This is if he starts his journey before midday, but if he starts it at
midday or later, he will keep his fast and in the event of his breaking it
will be liable to the kaffarah of one who deliberately breaks his fast.
And if a traveler reaches his hometown, or a place where he intends to
stay for at least ten days, before midday without performing any act that
breaks the fast, it is wajib upon him to continue fasting, and in the
event of his breaking it he will be like one who deliberately breaks his
fast.
5. There is consensus among all the schools that one suffering
from a malady of acute thirst can break his fast, and if he can carry out
its qada' later, it will be wajib upon him without any kaffarah, in the
opinion of the four schools. In the opinion of the Imamis, he should give
a mudd by way of kaffarah. The schools differ in regard to acute hunger,
as to whether it is one of the causes permitting iftar, like thirst. The
four schools say: Hunger and thirst are similar and both make iftar
permissible. The Imamis state: Hunger is not a cause permitting iftar
except where it is expected to cause illness.
6. Old people, men and women, in late years of life for whom
fasting is harmful and difficult, can break their fast, but are required
to give fidyah by feeding a miskeen for each fast day omitted: similarly a
sick person who does not hope to recover during the whole year. The
schools concur upon this rule except the Hanbalis, who say: Fidyah is
mustahabb and not wajib.
7. The Imamis state: Fasting is not wajib upon one in a swoon,
even if it occurs only for a part of the day, unless where he has formed
the niyyah of fasting before it and recovers subsequently, whereat he will
continue his fast.
Disappearance of the Excuse:
If the excuse permitting iftar ceases such as on recovery of a
sick person, maturing of a child, homecoming of a traveler, or termination
of the menses --it is mustahabb in the view of the Imamis and the Shafi'is
to refrain (imsak) from things that break the fast (muftirat) as a token
of respect. The Hanbalis and the Hanafis consider imsak as wajib, but
Malikis consider it neither wajib nor mustahabb.
Conditions (Shurut) of Fasting:
As mentioned earlier, fasting in the month of Ramadan is wajib for
each and every mukallaf. Every sane adult (al-baligh al-'aqil) is
considered mukallaf. Hence fasting is neither wajib upon an insane person
in the state of insanity nor is it valid if he observes it. As to a child,
it is not wajib upon him, though valid if observed by a mumayyiz. Also
essential for the validity of the fast are Islam and niyyah (intention).
Therefore, as per consensus, neither the fast of a non-Muslim nor the
imsak of one who has not formed the niyyah is acceptable. This is apart
from the afore-mentioned conditions of freedom from menses, puerperal
bleeding, illness and travel.
As to a person in an intoxicated or unconscious state, the
Shafi'is observe: His fast is not valid if he is not in his senses for the
whole period of the fast. But if he is in his senses for a part of this
period, his fast is valid, although the unconscious person is liable to
its qada', whatever the circumstances, irrespective of whether his
unconsciousness is self-induced or forced upon him. But the qada' is not
wajib upon an intoxicated person unless he is personally responsible for
his state. The Malikis state: The fast is not valid if the state of
unconsciousness or intoxication persists for the whole or most of the day
from dawn to sunset. But if it covers a half of the day or less and he was
in possession of his senses at the time of making niyyah and did make it,
becoming unconscious or intoxicated later, qada' is not wajib upon him.
The time of making niyyah for the fast in their opinion extends from
sunset to dawn.
According to the Hanafis, an unconscious person is exactly like an
insane one in this respect, and their opinion regarding the latter is that
if the insanity lasts through the whole month of Ramadan, qada' is not
wajib upon him, and if it coves half of the month, he will fast for the
remaining half and perform the qada' of the fasts missed due to insanity.
The Hanbalis observe: Qada' is wajib upon a person in a state of
unconsciousness as well as one in a state of intoxication, irrespective of
whether these states are self-induced or forced upon them. In the opinion
of the Imamis, qada' is only wajib upon a person in an intoxicated state,
irrespective of its being self-induced or otherwise; it is not wajib
upon an unconscious person even if his loss of consciousness is brief.
Muftirat:
The muftirat are those things from which it is obligatory to
refrain during the fast, from dawn to sunset. They are:
1. Eating and drinking (shurb) deliberately. Both invalidate the
fast and necessitate qada' in the opinion of all the schools, though they
differ as to whether kaffarah is also wajib. The Hanafis and the Imamis
require it, but not the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis. A person who eats and
drinks by an oversight is neither liable to qada' nor kaffarah, except in
the opinion of the Malikis, who only require its qada'. Included in shurb
[ drinking] is inhaling tobacco (smoking)
2. Sexual intercourse, when deliberate, invalidates the fast and
makes one liable to qada' and kaffarah, in the opinion of all the schools.
The kaffarah is the manumission of a slave, and if that is not possible,
fasting for two consecutive months; if even that is not possible, feeding
sixty poor persons. The Imamis and the Malikis allow an option between any
one of these; i.e. a mukallaf may choose between freeing a slave, fasting
or feeding the poor. The Shafi'is, Hanbalis and Hanafis impose kaffarah in
the above-mentioned order; i.e. releasing a slave is specifically wajib,
and in the event of incapacity fasting becomes wajib. If that too is not
possible, giving food to the poor becomes wajib.
The lmamis state: All the three kaffarahs become wajib together if
the act breaking the fast (muftir) is itself haram, such as eating any-
thing usurped (maghsub), drinking wine, or fornicating. As to sexual
intercourse by oversight, it does not invalidate the fast in the opinion
of the Hanafis, Shafi's and Imamis, but it does according to the Hanbalis
and the Malikis.
3. Seminal emission (masturbation; al-'istimna'): There is
consensus that it invalidates the fast if caused deliberately. The Hanbalis
say: If madhy is discharged due to repeated sensual glances and the like
the fast will become invalid. The four schools say: Seminal emission will
necessitate qada' without kaffarah. The Imamis observe: It requires both
qada ' and kaffarah.
4. Vomiting: It invalidates the fast if deliberate, and in the
opinion of the Imamis, Shafi'is and Malikis, also necessitates qada'. The
Hanafis state: Deliberate vomiting does not break the fast unless the
quantity vomited fills the mouth. Two views have been narrated from Imam
Ahmad. The schools concur that involuntary vomiting does not invalidate
the fast.
5. Cupping (hijamah) is muftir only in the opinion of the
Hanbalis, who observe: The cupper and his patient both break the fast.
6. Injection (of vitamines or other nutritions) invalidates the
fast and requires qada' in the opinion of all the schools. Imami legists
observe: It also requires kaffarah if taken without an emergency.
7. Inhaling a dense cloud of suspended dust invalidates the fast
only in the opinion of the Imamis. They say: If a dense suspended dust,
such as flour or something of the kind, enters the body the fast is
rendered invalid, because it is something more substantial than an
injection or tobacco smoke which are also invalidating.
8. Application of kohl invalidates the fast only in the opinion of
the Malikis, provided it is applied during the day and its taste is felt
in the throat.
9. The intention to discontinue the fast: If a person intends to
discontinue his fast and then refrains from doing so, his fast is
considered invalid in the opinion of the lmamis and Hanbalis; not so in
the opinion of the other schools.
10. Most Imamis state: Fully submerging the head, alone or
together with other parts of the body, under water invalidates the fast
and necessitates both qada' and kaffarah. The other schools consider it
inconsequential.
11. The Imamis observe: A person who deliberately remains in the
state of janabah after the dawn during the month of Ramadan, his fast will
be invalid and its qada' as well as kaffarah will be wajib upon him. The
remaining schools state- His fast remains valid and he is not liable to
anything.
12. The Imamis observe: A person who deliberately ascribes some-
thing falsely to God or the Messenger (S) (i.e. if he speaks or writes
that God or the Messenger said so and so or ordered such and such a thing
while he is aware that it is not true), his fast will be invalid and he
will be liable to its qada' as well as a kaffarah. A group of Imami
legists go further by requiring of such a fabricator the kaffarah of
freeing a slave, fasting for two months, and feeding sixty poor persons.
This shows the ignorance or malice of those who say that the Imamis
consider it permissible to forge lies against God and His Messenger (S).
__________________________________________
| |
| || || | || |
| o_,_7 _|| . _o_7 _|| 4_|_|| o_w_, |
| ( : / (_) / ( . |
|__________________________________________|
Fasting,
According to Five Islamic Schools of Law
(Part II)
By: 'Allamah Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah
The Various Kinds of Fasts:
The legists of various schools classify fasts into four
categories: Wajib, mustahabb (supererogatory), muharram (forbidden),
and makruh (reprehensible).
Obligatory fasts:
All the schools concur that the wajib fasts are those of the month
of Ramadan, their qada', the expiatory fasts performed as kaffarah, and
those performed for fulfilling a vow. The Imamis add further two, related
to the Hajj and i'tikaf. We have already dealt in some detail with the
fast of Ramadan, its conditions and the things that invalidate it. Here we
intend to discuss its qada' and the kaffarah to which one who breaks it
becomes liable. Other types of obligatory fasts have been discussed under
the related chapters.
Qada' of the Ramadan Fasts:
1. The schools concur that a person liable to the qada' of Ramadan
fasts is bound to perform it during the same year in which the fasts were
missed by him, i.e. the period between the past and the forth- coming
Ramadan. He is free to choose the days he intends to fast, excepting those
days on which fasting is prohibited (their discussion will soon follow).
However it is wajib upon him to immediately begin their qada' if the days
remaining for the next Ramadan are equal to the number of fasts missed in
the earlier Ramadan.
2. If one capable of performing the qada' during the year
neglects it until the next Ramadan, he should fast during the current
Ramadan and then perform the qada' of the past year and also give a
kaffarah of one mudd (1) for each day in the opinion of all the schools
except the hanafi which requires him to perform only the qada' without any
kaffarah. And if he is unable to perform the qada' such as when his
illness continues throughout the period between the first and the second
Ramadan -he is neither required to perform its qada' nor required to give
kaffarah in the opinion of the four schools, while the Imamis say: He will
not be liable to qada' but is bound to give a mudd as kaffarah for each
fast day missed.
3. If one is capable of performing the qada' during the year but
delays it with the intention of performing it just before the second
Ramadan, so that the qada' fasts are immediately followed by the next
Ramadan, and then a legitimate excuse prevents him from performing the
qada' before the arrival of Ramadan, in such a situation he will be liable
only to qada' not to kaffarah.
4. One who breaks a Ramadan fast due to an excuse, and is capable
of later performing its qada' but fails to perform the qada' during his
lifetime, the Imamis observe: It is wajib upon his eldest child to perform
the qada' on his behalf. The Hanafis, Shafi'is, and Hanbalis state: A
sadaqah of a mudd for each fast missed will be given on his behalf.
According to the Malikis, his legal guardian (wali) will give sadaqah on
his behalf if he has so provided in the will: in the absence of a will it
is not wajib.
5. In the opinion of the four schools, a person performing the
qada' of Ramadan can change his intention and break the fast both before
and after midday without being liable to any kaffarah provided there is
time for him to perform the qada' later.
The Imamis observe: It is permissible for him to break this fast
before midday and not later, because continuation of the fast become
compulsory after the passing of the major part of its duration and the
time of altering the niyyah also expires. Hence if he acts contrarily and
breaks the fast after midday, he is liable to kaffarah by giving food to
ten poor persons; if he is incapable of doing that, he will fast for three
days
Fasts of Atonement (kaffarah):
The fasts of atonement are of various kinds. Among them are
atonement fasts for involuntary homicide, fasts for atonement of a broken
oath or vow, and atonement fasts for zihar. These atonement fasts have
their own rules which are discussed in the related chapters. Here we shall
discuss the rules applicable to a person fasting by way of kaffarah for
not having observed the fast of Ramadan. The Shafi'is, Malikis and Hanafis
say: It is not permissible for a person upon whom fasting for two
consecutive months has become wajib consequent to deliberately breaking a
Ramadan fast to miss even a single fast during these two months, because
that would break their continuity. Hence, on his missing a fast, with or
without an excuse, he should fast anew for two months.
The Hanbalis observe: If he misses a fast due to a legitimate
excuse, the continuity is not broken.
The Imamis state: It is sufficient for the materialization of
continuity that he fast for a full month and then a day of the next month.
After that he can skip days and then continue from where he had left. But
if he misses a fast during the first month without any excuse, he is bound
to start anew; but if it is due to a lawful excuse, such as illness or
menstruation, the continuity is not broken and he/she will wait till the
excuse is removed and then resume the fasts. The Imamis further observe:
One who is unable to fast for two months, or release a slave or feed sixty
poor persons, has the option either to fast for 18 days or give whatever
he can as sadaqah. If even this is not possible, he may give alms or fast
to any extent possible. If none of these are possible, he should seek
forgiveness from God Almighty .
The Shafi'is, Malikis and Hanafis state: If a person is unable to
offer any form of kaffarah, he will remain liable for it until he comes to
possess the capacity to offer it, and this is what the rules of the
Shari'ah require .
The Hanbalis are of the opinion that if he is unable to give
kaffarah, his liability for the same disappears, and even in the event of
his becoming capable of it later, he will not be liable to anything. The
schools concur that the number of kaffarahs will be equal to the number of
causes entailing it. Hence a person who breaks two fasts will have to give
two kaffarahs. But if he eats, drinks or has sexual intercourse several
times in a single day, the Hanafis, Malikis and Shafi'is observe: The
number of kaffarahs will not increase if iftar occurs several times,
irrespective of its manner. The Hanbalis state: If in a single day there
occur several violations entailing kaffarah, if the person gives kaffarah
for the first violation of the fast before the perpetration of the second,
he should offer kaffarah for the latter violation as well, but if he has
not given kaffarah for the first violation before committing the second, a
single kaffarah suffices. According to the Imamis, if sexual intercourse
is repeated a number of times in a single day, the number of kaffarahs
will also increase proportionately, but if a person eats or drinks a
number of times in a single day, one kaffara will suffice.
Prohibited Fasts:
All the schools except the Hanafi concur that fasting on the days
of 'Id al-Fitr and 'Id al-'Adha is prohibited (haram). The Hanafis
observe: Fasting on these two 'Ids is makruh to the extent of being haram
The Imamis say: Fasting on the days of Tashriq is prohibited only
for those who are at Mina. The days of Tashriq are the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth of Dhu al-Hijjah.
The Shafi'is are of the opinion that fasting is not valid on the
days of Tashriq both for those performing Hajj as well as others.
According to the Hanbalis, it is haram to fast on these days for those who
do
not perform Hajj, not for those performing it. The Hanafis observe: Fasting
on these days is makruh to the extent of being haram.
The Malikis state: It is haram to fast on the eleventh and the
twelfth of Dhu al-Hujah for those who do not perform Hajj, not for those
performing it.
All the schools excepting the Hanafi concur that it is not valid
for a woman to observe a supererogatory fast without her husband's consent
if her fast interferes with the fulfillment of any of his rights. The
Hanafis observe: A woman's fasting without the permission of her husband
is makruh, not haram.
The Doubtful Days:
There is consensus among the schools that imsak is obligatory upon
one who does not fast on a "doubtful day" ( yawm al-shakk) that later
turns out to be a day of Ramadan, and he is liable to qada' later.
Where one fasts on a doubtful day that is later known to have been
a day of Ramadan, they differ as to whether it suffices without requiring
qada'.
The Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali schools observe: This fast will
not suffice and its qada' is wajib upon him. In the opinion of the
Hanafis, it suffices and does not require qada '.
Most Imamis state: Its qada' is not wajib upon him, except when he
had fasted with the niyyah of Ramadan.
Supererogatory Fasts:
Fasting is considered mustahabb on all the days of the year except
those on which it has been prohibited. But there are days whose fast has
been specifically stressed and they include three days of each month,
preferably the 'moonlit' days (al-'ayyam al-bid), which are the
thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth of each lunar month. Among them is
the day of 'Arafah (9th of Dhu al-Hijjah) Also emphasized are the fasts of
the months of Rajab and Sha'ban. Fasting on Mondays and Thursdays has also
been emphasized. There are other days as well which have been mentioned in
elaborate works. There is consensus among all the schools that fasting on
these days is mustahab.
Reprehensible (Makruh) Fasts:
It is mentioned in al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-'arba'ah that it is
makruh to single out Fridays and Saturdays for fasting. So is fasting on
the day of Now Ruz (21st March) in the opinion of all the schools except
the Shafi'i, and fasting on the day or the two days just before the month
of Ramadan.
It has been stated in Imami books on fiqh that it is makruh for a
guest to fast without the permission of his host, for a child to fast
without the permission of its father, and when there is doubt regarding
the new moon of Dhu al-Hijjah and the consequent possibility of the day
being that of 'Id.
Evidence of the New Moon:
There is a general consensus among Muslims that a person who has
seen the new moon is himself bound to act in accordance with his
knowledge, whether it is the new moon of Ramadan or Shawwal. Hence it is
wajib upon one who has seen the former to fast even if all other people
don't (2), and to refrain from fasting on seeing the latter even if
everyone
else on the earth is fasting, irrespective of whether the observer is
'adil or not, man or woman. The schools differ regarding the following
issues:
1. The Hanbalis, Malikis and Hanafis state: If the sighting
(ru'yah) of the new moon has been confirmed in a particular region, the
people of all other regions are bound by it regardless of the distance
between them; the difference of the horizon of the new moon is of no
consequence.
The Imamis and the Shafi'is observe: If the people of a particular
place see the new moon while those at another place don't, in the event of
these two places being closeby with respect to the horizon, the latter's
duty will be the same; but not if their horizons differ.
2. If the new moon is seen during day, either before or after mid-
day, on 30th Sha'ban, will it be reckoned the last day of Sha'ban (in
which case, fasting on it will not be wajib) or the first of Ramadan (in
which case fasting is wajib)? Similarly, if the new moon is seen during
the day on the 30th of Ramadan, will it be reckoned a day of Ramadan or
that of Shawwal? In other words, will the day on which the new moon is
observed be reckoned as belonging to the past or to the forth- coming
month?
The Imamis, Shafi'is, Malikis and Hanafis observe: It belongs to
the past month and not to the forthcoming one. Accordingly, it is wajib to
fast on the next day if the new moon is seen at the end of Sha'ban, and to
refrain from fasting the next day if it is seen at the end of Ramadan.
3. The schools concur that the new moon is confirmed if sighted,
as observed in this tradition of the Prophet (S) ('Fast on seeing the new
moon and stop fasting on seeing it'). They differ regarding the other
methods of confirming it. The Imamis observe: It is confirmed for both
Ramadan and Shawwal by tawatur (i.e. the testimony of a sufficiently large
number of people whose conspiring over a false claim is impossible), and
by the testimony of two just men, irrespective of whether the sky is
clear or cloudy and regardless of whether they belong to the same or two
different nearby towns, provided their descriptions of the new moon are
not contradictory. The evidence of children, fasiq men and those of
unknown character is not acceptable.
The Hanafis differentiate between the new moons of Ramadan and
Shawwal; they state: The new moon of Ramadan is confirmed by the testimony
of a single man and a single woman, provided they are Muslim, sane and
'adil (just). The Shawwal new moon is not confirmed except by the testimony
of two men or a man and two women. This is when the sky is not clear. But
if the sky is clear -and there is no difference in this respect between the
new moon of Ramadan and Shawwal -it is not confirmed except by the
testimony of a considerable number of persons whose reports result in
certainty. In the opinion of the Shafi'is, the new moon of Ramadan and
Shawwal is confirmed by the testimony of a single witness provided he is
Muslim, sane, and 'adil. The sky's being clear or cloudy makes no
difference in this regard.
According to the Malikis, the new moon of Ramadan and Shawwal is
not confirmed except by the testimony of two 'adil men, irrespective of
the sky's being cloudy or cloudless. The Hanbalis say: The new moon of
Ramadan is confirmed by the testimony of an 'adil man or woman, while that
of Shawwal is only confirmed by the testimony of two 'adil men.
4. There is consensus among the schools, excepting the Hanafi,
that if no one claims to have seen the new moon of Ramadan, fasting will
be wajib after the thirtieth day allowing thirty days for Sha'ban.
According to the Hanafis, fasting becomes wajib after the twenty-
ninth day of Sha'ban.
This was with respect to the new moon of Ramadan. As to the new
moon of Shawwal, the Hanafis and the Malikis observe: If the sky is
cloudy, thirty days of Ramadan will be completed and iftar will be wajib
on the following day. But if the sky is clear, it is wajib to fast on the
day following the thirtieth day by rejecting the earlier testimony of
witnesses confirming the first of Ramadan regardless of their number.
The Shafi'is consider iftar as wajib after thirty days even if the
setting in of Ramadan was confirmed by the evidence of a single witness,
irrespective of the sky's having been cloudy or clear.
According to the Hanbalis, if the setting in of Ramadan was con-
firmed by the testimony of two 'adil men, iftar following the thirtieth
day is wajib, and if it was confirmed by the evidence of a single 'adl, it
is wajib to fast on the thirty-first day as well. In the opinion of the
Imamis, both Ramadan and Shawwal are confirmed after the completion of
thirty days regardless of the sky's being cloudy or clear, provided their
beginning was confirmed in a manner approved by the Shari'ah.
_________
FOOTNOTES:
(1) Approximately 800 grams of wheat or something similar to it.
(2) But the Hanafis observe: If he testifies before a qadi who rejects his
testimony, it is wajib upon him to perform its qada' without liability to
kaffarah (al-Fiqh 'ala al-madhahib al-'arba'ah).