Swimming when fasting? (2)

There are three groups of narrations relevant to this topic, the first two of which I will cover in this blog.

Group 1 – advise against immersing your head in water whilst fasting

                                            

·         Sahih narration of Hariz from Abu Abdullah (AS): “He said – ‘the person fasting and the person in ihram does not immerse their head into water’” (Wasa`il, volume 8, page 24; chapters on what someone who is fasting should abstain from, chapter 3, hadith 8)

·         Sahih narration of al-Halabi from him (AS): “He said: ‘a person who is fasting can soak himself in water (يستنقع) but does not immerse his head.” (Wasa`il, volume 8, page 24; chapters on what someone who is fasting should abstain from, chapter 3, hadith 7)

The implication of these narrations in advising against doing it, but are not clear in implying they are haram in and of themselves rather they imply that these should not be done whilst fasting.

And therefore, from these narrations alone, one cannot infer that immersing one’s head breaks the fast, only that it is not allowed whilst fasting [note that this would only be the understanding if there were no other narrations on the topic].

Group 2 – imply that immersing your head in water breaks the fast but is not forbidden

Marfu’ narration in Saduq’s al-Khusal from Abu Abdullah (AS): “He said: ‘5 things break the fast: eating, drinking, intercourse, immersing into water and lying against Allah, the Prophet and the Imams (AS).” (al-Khusal of al-Saduq, page 286, hadith 39) – however, the chain of narration is weak due to it being marfu’.

There are some narrations that are good enough to use (mu’tabar) which are close to being clear about implying immersing your head in water breaks the fast e.g.:

·         Sahih narration of Muhammad ibn Muslim: “I heard Abu Ja’far (AS) say: the one who is fasting is not affected by what occurs if he avoids three things: eating and drinking, women and immersing [one’s head?] in water.” (Wasa`il, volume 8, page 18; chapters on what someone who is fasting should abstain from, chapter 1, hadith 1)

Here it is clear that “is not affected” is because of the fast, not because of the person fasting himself – and this must mean it results in the fast not counting.

One might say that the apparent meaning of the narration is that you should avoid these things in general when fasting (even for non-wajib fasts) – but for non-wajib fasts, it cannot be haram to dip one’s head in water so therefore “is not affected” must be with regards to it invalidating the fast, not that it is haram taklifi.

If there was nothing other than these two sets of narrations, one might conclude that immersing one’s head in water would invalidate the fast. However, there is another narration that suggests the opposite, which will be discussed in the next post.

Swimming when fasting? (1)

After a long break, as the month of Ramadan is approaching, I thought I would tackle a few pertinent issues about fasting that people often ask.

This set of blogs will be a detailed analysis of Ayatullah Khui's view on whether immersing one's head in water breaks the fast.

Before we start - the views of other major scholars:

• Ayatullah Sistani: highly discouraged but not haram (http://sistani.org/index.php?p=831716&id=5&pid=601)
• Ayatullah Fadlallah: it is haram as a precaution, but does not invalidate the fast (e.g. http://arabic.bayynat.org.lb/ListingFAQ2.aspx?cid=321&Language=1)
• Ayatullah Makarem Shirazi: invalidates the fast (Ihtiyat Wajib), if the entirety of the head is immersed in water (http://makarem.ir/Question/ViewQuestion.aspx?lid=2&mid=238250)

For Ayatullah Khui's view, we refer to his main work (al-Mustanad fi sharh al-urwat al-wuthqa, vol. 11, p160 e.g.http://www.alkhoei.net/arabic/pages/book.php?bcc=718&itg=36&bi=70&s=ct) - I will go through his main argument, which has the following approach: sets out the differences of opinion and the major scholars of the past who had these opinions; then lays out the different groups of narrations (which imply different rulings) with an attempt to reconcile these different groups at the end.
  
In this blog, I will focus on the differences of opinion that Ayatullah Khui discusses:

• Majority consider it breaks the fast (some claimed there was consensus but there cannot be given the below group, for example did not agree) – Ayatullah Khui

• A group (including Allama Hilli, Shahid al-Thani and Muhaqqiq al-Hilli in Shara`i al-Islam, and the author of al-Madarik (al-Syed Muhammad al-Amili)) say that it is haram when you are fasting (so is a sin) but does not break the fast and therefore does not require you to do qada ((1) الاستبصار 2 : 85 ، المختلف 3 : 270 ، المسالك 2 : 16 ، الشرائع 2 : 15 ، المدارك 6 : 48 .) – Ayatullah Fadlallah (he uses the term it should be avoided as a precaution)

• Some say that it is makruh (i.e. not sinful) e.g. Sayyid Murtada and ibn Idris ((2) جمل العلم والعمل (رسائل الشريف المرتضى 3) : 54 ، السرائر 1 : 386 ـ 387 .) – Ayatullah Seestani

In the next blog, I will look at some of the narrations used to justify these positions.

Moonsighting (12)

Unity

 

It is interesting to note that very few (if any at all) Shi’i scholar considers the unity of the community as a factor in determining when the first of a month is, other than for Hajj, where it is agreed by all scholars that the day of Arafah is the same for all – and based on the Saudi decision. 

For Ramadan, this is not a factor, and the rationale is that unity itself does not have a legal standing in this matter, given the presence of sahih narrations on the topic (that would specify [and take precedence over] any general pronouncement on the importance of unity).  

From a traditional Shi’i perspective, this can only change in one of three ways:
 

1. If all scholars could all sit in a room, and agree (an idea brought by the late Shahid Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr). The main problem is that it requires a scholar to allow someone to follow a rule that contradicts his own methodology in cases – and that is very difficult, especially given the majority’s understanding of taqlid. Furthermore, it may slow down thought development, as alternative opinions outside the agreements would be frowned upon. A way to overcome this, would be to focus on only issues where unity may be considered important such as this but this may be seen as inconsistent! 
2.  If the methodology of the derivation of Islamic law were to change. This could be either to make it more results-based and using utilitarian concepts such as those of maslaha (public interest), which is a way of thinking that was proposed in the Shi’i world by Ayatullah Khumayni; or it could be “progressive” methodology which considers the context of the narration in the past limiting its usage i.e. the fact that the Prophet (SAW) did not have a telescope or access to communications like we do, means that we cannot apply the narration blindly without considering this fact and contextualising the narration. This second approach is very “radical” and is one of the ways that many “progressive” scholars are trying to reform the way Islamic law is derived in general 
3. The final way, is a specific change in this area e.g. if the qunut of Eid, is used as a specific narration indicating the importance of unity for Eid itself. This (I believe) is the view of Sayyid Kamal Hayderi, who also seems to be an advocate of a change in the usul al-fiqh methodology, with a greater role for time and place in the derivation of law.

It is interesting to see whether these methods will be used in the coming years.

We have finally come to the end of the series on Moonsighting! In the next few blogs, we will move onto Hajj – and the discussion surrounding the Shi’i view on putting on Ehram at Jeddah (or if you have to go to Juhfa).

Moonsighting (11)

So far we have discussed what is "seeing" the moon (i.e. with your eye / optical aid / calculations), and the two most popular opinions as to where the moon must be seen (i.e. sharing the night and sharing the horizon). This blog will briefly cover the two less common opinions and ones that I think do not have any supporters nowadays! 

Opinion 3 about where the moon must be seen: 

If it is seen in one location, it is considered the same for all locations west of that location. I have not seen a rationale for this point of view but believe it was held by the late Ayatullah Sabzwari and Gulpaygani⁹. The problem with this position, is that astronomical calculations show that being further westwards does not affect sightability at all latitutdes.

Opinion 4 about where the moon must be seen: 

Saudi Arabia / Makkah - i.e. it must be seen / possible to be seen in Makkah for it to count around the world (this is not the view of any major Shi'i scholar as far as I'm aware but major Sunni schools do use this)

 
In the next blog, we will look at the final section – unity!

Moonsighting (10)

In this blog, we will continue on the arguments on “sharing the night” (aka unity of horizons).

In addition to the narrations directly on the topic discussed in the previous blog, there are several narrations on how to pray Eid prayers, in which there is a statement: "...I have made this day as an Eid for Muslims" - implying one day of Eid; and for all Muslims not just some. Furthermore, the verse in Surah Qadr that the one Laylat al-Qadr is better than 1000 months also implies one day. 

These all imply (according to the scholars who hold this view) that there is one day of Eid and first Ramadan - with the only restriction being the sharing of the night (and this is based on the idea that if the moon is seen in the Polynesian Islands, it would mean the next day is Eid so those who share the night should not start fasting the next day).

This is the view of the late Ayatullahs Khui and Fadlallah; and the view of the majority of earlier scholars e.g. Allamah Hilli in al-Muntaha; al-Kashani in al-Wafi; and Bahrani in al-Hada`iq; Shahid al-Awwal in al-Durus; Najafi in Jawahir; Naraqi in al-Mustanad; …etc.*

Now one might argue that according to Fadlallah, why do you need a sharing of the night rule, given modern communications, we are able to have a single day of Eid, and announce it in advance based on the astronomical calculations. His office responded to me saying that: “the condition of sharing a part of the night is a natural condition based on the difference in night and day in various parts of the world; and it is not based on the fact that the lunar month is the same throughout the world. Rather we say that the earth is one place from the angle of the beginning of the lunar month, other than in countries where the day and night are different…”

The main counter-argument against this, is that this still results in two Eids / first of the month, which shows the fact that the first of the month is not absolute but is relative based on your position on the Earth and that this narration, is talking about there be only one type of day like Eid!

Furthermore, based on this theory of sharing nights, it is one month (e.g. Shaban) up to the moment where the moon is sighted in another country; after which the month changes suddenly (e.g. Ramadan) – OR the night is split such that it is one month until the moon is possible to be seen somewhere in the earth; after which the month changes. However, this does not sit well with the ‘urf’s understanding of how a month works.

There is also one relevant narration from Muhammad bin Isa (1) – he said Abu Umar wrote to him the following: “Tell me O master, we have a doubt about the crescent of Ramadan. We do not see the moon, just the sky and no reason [e.g. clouds] so the people eat and we eat with them (i.e. not fast). And one of the astronomers said in front of us that the moon would be seen on that very night in Egypt, Africa and Spain. Is it possible, O master that this is correct that even if that means that the obligation of fasting in Egypt is different to when we fast? The Imam (AS) replied: Do not fast based on a doubt – rather you should fast and stop fasting based on sighting” Now given that this individual did not even ask about whether that sighting affected his country, implies that it does not, supporting the idea that only sharing of the horizon matters.

In the next blog, we will look at the other two theories (that do not have that much support in the Shi’i world).

*Note - Ayatullah Wahid Khurasani believes it should be sharing most the night (unsure of rationale); note also that this idea of sharing of the night (rather than whole world) seems to not be required if you use astronomical calculations throughout but this is not the view of any Shi'i scholar

(1)   Tahdhib al-Ahkam, vol 4: 159