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