Moonsighting (9)

2. Sharing the night/unity of horizon (cont.)

In this blog, we will start looking at the sharing of the night – and why some scholars believe in this (giving the alternative view as well).

1. Sharing the night (night is defined as between sunset and the beginning of Fajr (1)) - this is based on several narrations:
• The sahih narration of Hisham ibn al-Hakm from the 5^th Imam (AS) (2), asking about those who have fasted 29 days: “If he has evidence that is from a just source that people of Egypt have fasted 30 days based on sighting the moon, then he must do qada’ of one day.” This is implying that if the month is 30 days in Egypt, it is 30 days in the whole of Egypt (not just those who share horizons – if the Imam had meant that, he would have said it – so by itlaq given he did not say it when he was in a position to say it, we can assume he did not mean that)

Ayatullah Seestani’s view on narration of Hisham ibn Hakam (and others like the mu’tabar narration of Suma’a(3)) is that the narration is actually pointing to the fact that the sighting has been confirmed by definitive (qati) widespread view of the people of Egypt. Therefore, the hadith points to the fact that it is not enough to have two witnesses seeing the moon in every situation (e.g. if these two people claim they have seen the moon whilst there were many people who could have seen it). He supports this through the narration of Suma’a:

He asked Abu Abdullah (AS) about a day on which there was a difference of opinion on in the month of Ramadan: “If the people of Egypt agree on fasting on it due to seeing it, then do Qada for that day [if you did not fast] if the inhabitants of Egypt are 500 people”

He then concludes saying that in usul al-fiqh, if there are two potential implications (the itlaq that is used to support the sharing night theory, and Ayatullah Seestani’s view), and you are sure of one (the latter view), and doubt the former (the itlaq), then you only consider that which you are sure of.

• The sahih narration of Ishaq bin Ammar (4) who asked the 6th Imam (AS) about the crescent of Ramadan when it is cloudy on the 29th Sha'ban, and he said: "Don't fast unless you see it. And if someone in another country sees it, then fast" (and similarly the sahih narration of Abd al-Rahman (5) son of the 5^th Imam (AS)) – rationale as above. However, some (including Ayatullah Seestani (6)) might argue that this is only relevant to situations where there are obstacles e.g. clouds preventing a definite sighting; and cannot be extended to where the moon is definitely not sightable in your location.

In the next blog, we will look at other narrations that support the "sharing the night" theory; and then we will look at other theories. 
 

Sources:

Fiqh works by the major maraji’

Thubut al-hilal tibqan li-qawl al-falaki by Muhammad al-Husayni (pages 3-4)

Minhaj al-Salihin of Ayatullah Wahid Khurasani, volume 1, page 296 onwards

Questions and answers about sighting the moon according to Ayatullah Seestani (Arabic) - http://www.sistani.org/downloads/helal.pdf  (this is also the source for the other footnotes below)

 
(1)   Fiqh al-Shari’ah by Sayyid Fadlallah, volume 1, Page 249 (explaining the meaning of night when talking about Maghrib prayers)
(2)   Tahdhib al-Ahkam Vol 4, 158
(3) Man la yahdhuruhu al-faqih, vol 2, page 77
(4)   Tahdhib al-Ahkam Vol 4, 178
(5)   Tahdhib al-Ahkam Vol 4, 157
(6)   Questions and answers about sighting the moon according to Ayatullah Seestani (Arabic)

Moonsighting (8)

2. Sharing the night/unity of horizons

In the previous blog, I was looking at whether seeing with the physical eye is a requirement, or if you can use an optical aid, or if calculations were sufficient. In this (and the next) blog, we will go into the detail of where this must occur. In essence, this is the core reason for the differences.

If the moon is seen in South Africa, is that sufficient for people in London? Or must it be seen in the locality? Or does it only count in Makkah?

Here, again there are different views:

1. Sharing the horizon (“theory of differing horizons”) - two places are said to share a horizon if, by seeing it in one locale, it will be seen in the other¹ (assuming that there were no obstructions like mountains...etc.) - so Harrow and Northwood for example. However, some have stretched this to include entire countries or the entire curve on moonsighting curves (not sure what this is based on though). This is the view of the majority of current scholars including Ayatullahs Seestani and Khamanei. However, it was not the view of earlier scholars other than potentially Ayatullah Tusi.

The rationale for this point of view is that the lunar month is a time measurement which Arabs used before Islam (not the solar month), and for them, the beginning of the month at a specific location was based on the sightability of the moon at that location; as they did not have a means of quick communication / calculations; and 2:189 is clear in saying that the times of Hajj / fasting are based on lunar months that were already in practise; therefore, this is the base position i.e. if there is no evidence to the contrary, this would be the position. The other positions require evidence….

In addition, the idea that the Prophet (SAW) and Imams (AS) did not have access to the communication techniques required to do the other options, also supports this viewpoint. If you believe in the concept that the Prophet/Imams know unseen things e.g. whether the moon was sightable in another location, but they did not use it – rather did something Haram e.g. fasting on Eid, that seems impossible? Furthermore, there is one narration³, for example, by Abu Ali bin Rashid where he dates his letter to the 11^th Imam (AS), and he says they fasted on the Friday as the 1^st of Ramadan even though from calculations we have worked out that on the night of the Thursday it was possible for the moon to be seen!

In the next blog we will look at the rationale for the sharing of the night and other options.

(1)   Minhaj al-Salihin by Ayatullah Seestani, page 336, issue 1044. Note, however, others believe that the unity of horizons is based on the visibility arc i.e. the unity of horizons is different each month. E.g. a few years ago, when the sighting in Frankfurt of the crescent allowed those residing in London to also start the new month, but two years later, another crescent sighting in Frankfurt did not apply to London. The difference, as explained by Ayatullah Sistani himself with the aid of the visibility curve charts, was that in the first instance there was a possibility of sighting by naked eye in London also, so the horizons would be shared by London and Frankfurt, allowing a sighting in one area to apply in another, but in the second instance there was no scientific and mathematical possibility of sighting in London, so the horizons were not shared and the sighting in Frankfurt could not apply to London. This is not clear from sources however, and does not seem to be based in any religious texts.

(2)   Tahdhib al-Ahkam, vol 4: 167

Moonsighting (7)

In the previous blog we looked at the three main interpretations of “sighting” the moon i.e. is it physically seeing with your eye, or potentially with an optical aid, or are calculations sufficient from an usul al-fiqh perspective.

Now, I’d like to step back a moment and highlight the key issues with a more calculation-based approach. This is explicitly not what was done at the time of the Prophet (SAW), and therefore, did the Prophet (SAW) do the wrong “actual” day? Here lies a key difficulty being faced, as there are two options:

• The Prophet (SAW) did not base his view on the first of the month on astronomical calculations as they weren’t available
• Or because they are wrong

Now if it is the former, does this mean that there is no “true night of Qadr”, or that it used to be on one day (based on actual sighting) but now has changed? These questions, unfortunately are not answered in any work that I have seen. The latter implies they may have done something wrong e.g. fasted on Eid!

Another question / point to consider is the presence of miracles. If you use astronomical calculations, some of the “magic” of Ramadan and sighting the moon may be removed – and it removes the potential for a miracle by Allah…However, the counter argument might be that the months of the year are clear and fixed (refer to 2:189) so this is not really the point. In addition, you can still look for the moon, even if the date has been confirmed.

 “Inside the Mind of a scholar” focusses on the views of the scholars, so I will stop here but hopefully you will see the difficulties facing the scholars in their endeavours here. In the next blog we will look at the sharing of the night discussion.

Moonsighting (6)

1. Seeing / visual aid / astronomy (cont.)

In the previous blog, we showed how what is needed is not seeing the moon, but anything that gets you knowledge that the month has started; and that astronomy is a way to get you there.

However, there is one point that has not been covered – and that is, how do you know when the month has started. Why can it not be the case that the month starts with the new moon? Of course in the olden days, the only way to be sure that this had occurred was through an actual sighting but now we can be sure through astronomical calculations. The reason for not starting with the new moon, rather with the sightable moon, is what the common person (‘urf) would understand from the narrations and Qur’anic verses noted above. However, it is possible to argue against this as well, by:

• Arguing that the Qur’anic verses are not relevant to the discussion (as shown earlier)
• Considering that the narrations are not talking about seeing the moon, but determining the first of the month which may be the new moon; and therefore sighting is a sufficient but not necessary requirement
• Some argue that using astronomy is the ‘urfi understanding¹

View of Ayatullah Seestani

The books of Fiqh seem to indicate Ayatullahs Seestani (and Khui) require actual sighting of the moon (e.g. “The first day of a month will not be proved by the prediction made by the astronomers. However, if a person derives full satisfaction and certitude from their findings, he should act accordingly” given that satisfaction/certitude are always a hujja² for a rule, this makes it clear that his view is that sightability cannot be determined by astronomers).

According to his work³, it seems that he actually believes that what is important is satisfaction (itmi’nan), whether it comes from seeing yourself, or from others, or from with using the view of astronomers. This seems to be my understanding of his rule. Furthermore, the situation in the UK in this year where he declared Eid before the moon was even sighted (and it was not in the end anyway) seems to support this view. Note, however, that this is not confirmed in writing as far as I’m aware.

Therefore, in this, his view is not very dissimilar from that of Ayatullah Fadlallah. This may, therefore, also be the case with Ayatullah Wahid Khurasani but I am unable to confirm this.

[NOTE: however, that from other students, this is not the impression they understand. They seem to suggest that “ru’ya” is a necessary condition (dakhl fi al-hukm) somewhere and that Ayatullah Seestani requires a sighting somewhere based on his interpretation of the ahadith. The only thing I can base it on, is the works and the statements of his office, which seem to imply the opposite]

When there is a conflict between sighting and astronomical calculations

There is another discussion about when there is a conflict between a sighting and astronomical calculations i.e. if there are sightings and astronomical calculations suggest it was impossible for the moon to be sighted.  This is something that only recently has been discussed by the major scholars (first by Shahid al-Sadr)⁴.

There are two types of astronomical calculations:

1. Mathematical calculations e.g. age of the moon, number of degrees above horizon – here most astronomers will be almost directly aligned although there may be minor differences
2. Things that are not so clear-cut e.g. sightability of the moon if it is 15 hours old / 13 hours old…etc.

If there is a sighting and type 1 says it cannot be there, then you probably would not agree with the sighting [Ayatullah Seestani and Fadlallah⁵ did this once in 1419 AH]. If there is a sighting and type 2 says it cannot be there, it would depend if you get certainty from type 2, in which case you would take that. In essence, the very requirement of two just witnesses is not absolute, rather it is predicated on an absence of there being knowledge / itmi’nan in doubting the two witnesses.

Summary of views of maraji’

In the end, it seems that in terms of the main maraji’, the difference at this level can be summarised as follows:

·        

•  Ayatullah Seestani requires the moon to be sightable (my understanding – even if it is not actually said directly) for the first of the month to be declared. This can be determined through deriving confidence that this is the case, which may be through sighting (in the absence of astronomical evidence against the sighting), or through calculations (on the condition that you derive confidence from it and it is only being used because there is an obstacle e.g. clouds…etc. preventing a sighting; if there was no sighting but the sky was clear, and the astronomical evidence is ambiguous / not definitive, then the non-sighting would take precedence). Note that in the case where you are not sure about the astronomical calculations (e.g. some of the criteria sightability), then this cannot be relied upon (e.g. perhaps around the edges of the curves).
• Ayatullah Fadlallah requires the moon to be sightable. However, in a subtle difference, he does not put the condition that you have to have confidence in the astronomical calculations in the actual ruling. Also he allows sightability even with an optical aid (which is difference to Ayatullah Seestani)
• Ayatuallah Khamanei seems to require actual sighting (either by the naked eye or with an optical aid)

In the next blog we will look at these discussions in a bit more detail.

Sources:                  

General: Fiqh works by the major maraji’

Specific sources:

1.      Thubut al-shahr bi-ru`yat al-ihlal fi balad akhar by Sayyid Hashimi (from Thubut al-Hilal by Muhammad al-Husayni, P135)

2.      As`ila hawla ru`yat al-hilal ma’a ajwibatiha according to Ayatullah Seestani, First edition, 2010 (1431 AH), Page 38

3.      http://www.al-islam.org/laws/fasting2.html#1739; Also see his written direct answer to a question in Thubut al-Hilal, P52 – which seems to support this view as he says that he has confidence in the astronomical calculations to say that some sightings were not possible at all; however, it does NOT say that he is okay with sightability for the first of a month directly)

4.      Al fatawa al-wadhiha by Shahid al-Sadr, page 630 (from Thubut al-Hilal by Muhammad al-Husayni, P137)

5.      Thubut al-Hilal by Muhammad al-Husayni, P138