Section III: The Conditions of Fasting
Firstly: Islam
1. Islam as a condition:
Islam is a condition in the obligation of fasting and its validity. Fasting is not wajib for the disbeliever nor is it accepted from him if he performs it. Consensus has been quoted on this matter by: Ibn Hazm, al-Jasani, al-Zayla`i, Muhammad ibn Muflih, Ibrahim ibn Muflih, and Ibn Hajar al-Haytami.
2. The original disbeliever (other than the apostate) accepting Islam:
- Ruling of the making up of fasts for the original disbeliever if he accepts Islam
If the original disbeliever accepts Islam, then there is no fasting to be made up during his time in disbelief. This is the overall summarised position. [779] There is difference among them in what one must do if he accepts Islam within the month, as is to follow. Consensus has been quoted over this by: Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, and al-Shirbini.
- Ruling of a disbeliever making up what he missed of Ramadan if he accepts Islam during it
If the disbeliever accepts Islam during Ramadan, he does not need to make up the days he missed when he hadn't accepted Islam. This is by agreement of the four schools of jurisprudence, and it is the position of a group of the Salaf.
- Disbeliever fasting the rest of Ramadan if he accepts Islam during it
If the disbeliever accepts Islam during Ramadan, then he must fast what remains of the month. Ibn Qudamah and al-Shawkani have quoted consensus over this.
- Ruling of withholding in a day and making it up if a disbeliever accepts Islam during it in Ramadan
If a disbeliever accepts Islam in one of the days of Ramadan, then he must withhold for the rest of that day, and he does not need to make it up. This is the position of the Hanafis and the choice of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn `Uthaymin.
3. The apostate from Islam re-accepting:
- Ruling of the apostate making up the fasts he missed in his apostasy
If the apostate re-accepts Islam, then he does not need to make up what he left of fasting during his apostasy. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis, Malikis, and Hanbalis.
- The apostate making up fasts he missed before his apostasy
If an apostate accepts Islam, and he has fasts to make up from before he apostatised, then he must make them up. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
- Ruling of the apostate during a fast
Whoever leaves Islam while fasting, then his day has become invalid, and he must make up that day if he re-enters into Islam. This is explicitly mentioned by Shafi`is and Hanbalis.
Secondly: Puberty
1. Puberty as a condition:
Puberty is a condition for the obligation of fasting. Consensus has been quoted on this by Ibn Hazm, Ibn Rushd, al-Nawawi, Muhammad ibn Muflih, and Ibrahim ibn Muflih.
2. The pubescent making up past fasts before puberty:
It is not wajib for the one who has reached puberty to make up fasts from before he had reached it. Consensus has been quoted on this by al-Nawawi.
3. Commanding the young boy to fast:
If a young boy is able to withstand fasting without it negatively affecting him, then it is wajib for his guardian to command him to fast so that he may train for it and be comfortable with it. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis, Shafi`is, Hanbalis, [780] They differed over the exact age where the young boy is commanded. a position among Malikis, and the position of a group of the Salaf.
4. Ruling of making up days if a boy reaches puberty during Ramadan:
If the boy reaches puberty during the month of Ramadan, then he fasts the rest of the month without making up previous days. This is regardless whether he fasted them or not. This is by agreement of the four schools of jurisprudence and the position of the majority of scholars.
5. Ruling of making up and withholding if a boy reaches puberty while not fasting:
If a boy reaches puberty during a day of Ramadan while fasting, then he must withhold for the rest of the day, and there is no making up of any fasts required. This is the position of the Hanafis and a narration from Ahmad that is chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn `Uthaymin.
Thirdly: Reason
1. Reason as a condition:
Reason is a condition for fasting to become wajib. Consensus has been quoted over this by: Ibn Hazm, Ibn Rushd, Muhammad ibn Muflih, and Ibrahim ibn Muflih.
2. Disappearance of reason through insanity:
- Ruling of fasting for the insane
Fasting is not wajib for the insane, and it is not valid if he were to fast. Consensus has been quoted over this by al-Nawawi and Ibn Taymiyyah.
- Ruling of the insane person’s fast if he returns to reason during the day in Ramadan
If the insane returns to sanity during one of the days of Ramadan, he must hold his fast for the rest of the day. This is the position of the Hanafis, a narration from Ahmad, and the choice of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn `Uthaymin.
- Ruling of making up past fasts for the insane when he returns to sanity
There is no making up fasts necessary for the insane person when he returns to sanity, regardless if it is a few days or many, and regardless whether he returns to sanity during or after Ramadan. This is the position of the Shafi`is, Hanbalis, the choice of Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Hazm, Ibn Baz, and Ibn `Uthaymin.
- Ruling of the fast for one who intended it at night then was struck with insanity and did not return until after sunset
Whoever intends to fast the next day during the night of the previous day, and was then afflicted with insanity which did not subside until after sunset, then his fast is not valid. This is the position of the majority: Maliki, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
- Ruling of making up the fast for the one who was afflicted with insanity while fasting
Whoever was fasting and was then afflicted with insanity while in that state, then he does not have to make up any fasts. This is the position of the Hanafis, and the choice of Ibn Hazm.
3. Imbecility (`Atah):
Linguistically: It is feeble-mindedness without insanity or bewilderment.
Terminologically: It is a psychological state which is characterised by a mental ailment that confuses the one afflicted by it. Some of his speech resembles that of the reasonable, and some of the insane.
- Ruling of the fasting of the imbecile
The imbecile who is mentally unstable though not to the degree of insanity has no fasting prescribed upon him without making up. Consensus has been quoted over this by Ibn `Abd al-Barr.
4. Dementia (Kharaf):
It is mental feebleness and instability due to old age.
- Ruling of the fast of the demented
There is no fast or making up thereof for the demented person. This is the choice of Ibn Baz and Ibn `Uthaymin.
5. Lack of reason through passing out:
- Ruling of the one who intended the fast but passed out for the duration of the whole day
If a person's loss of consciousness takes over the whole day, meaning, a person passes out before fajr and does not regain it until after sunset, then his fast is invalid and he must make up that day. This is the position of the majority: Malikis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
- Ruling of the one who intends to fast then passes out for a portion of the day
If a person passes out but regains consciousness during the day even if for a moment, then his fast is valid and he does not have to repeat it. This is the position of the Shafi`is and Hanbalis.
- The one who loses consciousness due to anaesthesia
Whoever loses consciousness due to anaesthesia, then his ruling is like that of passing out. [781] See, the fast of the one who passed out.
6. Memory loss
Whoever loses his memory does not have to fast. This is the verdict of the Permanent Committee and Ibn `Uthaymin.
Fourthly: Residency Fasting is wajib for the resident. Consensus has been quoted by Ibn Hazm.
Fifthly: Ability to fast
The fast is not wajib except upon the one able to undertake it. [782] Benefit: Those with arduous jobs are legally competent, and do not take the same ruling was the sick or the travelling. They must therefore renew their intentions overnight, and wake up fasting. If his intensely physical work takes such a toll on him that he fears over his wellbeing, then he may break his fast and consume what will rejuvenate him and then abstain until sunset. He must also make up his fasts which he broke. Consensus has been quoted on this by: Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyyah, and Ibn Muflih.
Sixthly: Purity from menstruation and postnatal bleeding
1. Purity from menstruation and postnatal bleeding as a condition:
It is a condition for the obligation of fasting upon the woman that she is pure from menstrual and postnatal bleeding. Consensus has been quoted on this by Ibn Hazm, al-Nawawi, and al-Shawkani.
2. Ruling if the fast of the woman experiencing menstrual or postnatal bleeding:
Fasting, both its wajib and voluntary, is haram for the woman experiencing menstrual or postnatal bleeding, and it is invalid of they perform it, and they must make it up. Consensus has been quoted on all or some of this by: Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Ibn Rushd, al-Nawawi, and Ibn Taymiyyah.
3. Ruling of withholding the rest of the day if she becomes pure in the day of Ramadan:
Scholars have differed on the woman experiencing menstrual or postnatal bleeding who becomes pure during the day of Ramadan, whether she should withhold for the rest of the day or not. This is according to two views:
The first: It is that she does not need to withhold for the rest for the day. This is the position of the Malikis, Shafi`is, a narration from Ahmad, and the choice of Ibn Hazm and Ibn `Uthaymin.
The second: It is that she must withhold. This is the position of the Hanafis, the correct position of the Hanbalis, and the choice of Ibn Baz.
4. Ruling of period delay tablets to fast the full month in one go:
It is permissible to use period delay tablets whether in Ramadan to fast the whole month in its time, or for general use, as long as there is no perceived harm. [783] In al-Hattab’s Mawahib al-Jalil (538/1), it states: “Ibn Rushd said: ‘Malik was asked about the woman who fears the early start of her cycle; is it permissible for her to brew a drink that delays it? He said: ‘This is not correct’, and he disliked it.’ Ibn Rushd said: ‘He disliked it fearing this will cause her harm in her body.’” Ibn `Uthaymin was certain in their harm, saying: “I do not view that the woman should have these pills in Ramadan or outside of it, as trusted doctors have informed me it is very harmful for the woman, on her womb, nerves, and blood. Every harmful thing is prohibited.” Majmu` al-Fatawa wa Rasa’il al-`Uthaymin (259/19). This is explicitly mentioned by the jurists of the Hanbalis, and is the choice of Ibn Baz.
Seventhly: Intention for fasting
1. Ruling of the intention for fasting:
Fasting is invalid without an intention, and this is by agreement of the four schools of jurisprudence.
2. Ruling of having the intention overnight:
It is wajib to have the intention for the fast of a day on the previous night before the entering of fajr. This is the position of the majority: Malikis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
3. Ruling of renewing the intention every Ramadan night:
Scholars have differed over the necessity of renewing the fasting intention on a nightly basis in Ramadan according to two views:
The first: It is that it is a condition to renew the intention on a nightly basis in Ramadan. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
The second: It is that whenever there is continuity in fasting, a single intention suffices in the beginning. If that continuity is broken for some legitimate reason and is then restarted, then the fasting person must renew their intention. This is the position of the Malikis, the position of Zufar from the Hanafis, and the choice of Ibn `Uthaymin.
4. Ruling of having the intention overnight for voluntary fasts:
It is not a condition to have an overnight intention in voluntary fasts. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis, Shafi`is, and Hanbalis.
5. The valid time of the intention in the morning of voluntary fasts:
It is permissible for those to fast voluntarily to make their intention during the day regardless whether before the sun's zenith or after it, as long as no nullifiers were committed in that time. This is the position of the Hanbalis, a position among Shafi`is, a group of the Salaf, and the choice of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn `Uthaymin.
6. Ruling of the fast of the uncertain in his intention for the wajib fast:
Whoever is uncertain in his intention of fasting a wajib fast whether he should fast it or not, and this uncertainty continues until the next day, then he fasts, then his fast is invalid and he must repeat it. This is the position of the majority: Malikis, Shafi`is, Hanbalis, and some Hanafis.
7. Ruling of hanging the intention of the fast on a condition:
Whoever has the intention to fast based on the next day being a day of fasting or not, like holding the intention to fast the next day on what is potentially the last night of Sha`ban depending if it is the first day of Ramadan or not, saying: "If tomorrow is the first day of Ramadan, then I will fast," then their fast is valid if it turned out to be Ramadan. This is a narration from Ahmad which Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn `Uthaymin adopted.
8. Ruling of the fast of a person who intends to break it on a particular day:
Whoever intends to break his fast on a day of Ramadan, then his fast breaks and becomes invalid, and he has to make up that day as well as withhold for the rest of it if he is not from those for whom breaking it is permissible, like the sick and the traveller. In the latter case, only making it up is required. This is the position of the Malikis, Hanbalis, and the choice of Ibn `Uthaymin.
9. Ruling if the fast of one who had uncertainty in his intention of breaking it:
Whoever is uncertain in his intention of breaking his fast, then it is valid until he is certain in breaking it. This is the position of the majority: Hanafis, Shafi`is, and the correct position among Hanbalis.
feqhia
