If the stomach of a fasting person becomes agitated, is he required to hold it in, or may he vomit until he feels relieved?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Some people ask: If one’s liver, meaning his stomach, becomes agitated, is he required to hold it in? And is he permitted to vomit until he feels relieved? Because sometimes the stomach churns and becomes agitated, and a person would like to vomit.
The Shaykh : So do we say: You must hold it in, even if it wants to reach the throat? You must hold it in and push it back down if your fast is obligatory? Or do we say: If it becomes agitated and churns, then bring it out so that you settle down and are not disturbed, or perhaps it may be harmful to you? What is the answer? The second option?
The second option: bring it out. Yes, and this breaks the fast. Yes, if there is harm, there is no doubt that we say: bring it out and break the fast. But if there is no harm, then we say: do not bring it out and do not push it back down. If it overcomes you, let it go. If it settles down, do not bring it out. Some scholars said that the view that vomiting and cupping break the fast is a view contrary to the standard of analogy (qiyas), and it is not acted upon, because breaking the fast is by what enters, not by what exits. Just as wudu is broken by what exits, not by what enters. Glory be to Allah, for the sake of the rules. Wudu is broken by what exits, not by what enters, so that wudu is not broken by the meat of camels. Because the meat of camels is what enters. And they said: breaking the fast is by what enters, not by what exits, so that the fast is not invalidated by cupping and vomiting. So we say: May Allah forgive you. We cannot contradict the saying of Allah and His Messenger with such weak explanations. And where did you take these rules from? From the Book, or from the Sunnah, or from consensus? Who said this? Wudu is broken by what the Shari'ah has made a cause for breaking it, whether it enters or exits. And breaking the fast is by what the Lawgiver has made a cause for breaking the fast, whether it enters or exits. This is the correct view. As for establishing rules that have nothing but a mere application in most issues, that is not correct. It is true that most of what is transmitted is that what exits does not break it, but what enters does. But if the Sunnah comes, we must say by it. Likewise, in the issue of breaking the fast, the majority is that what enters does not break it, but what exits does. But despite that, we break the fast. Then we say to them: What do you say if one performs istinba (urinating while standing) and fears? Does he break the fast or not? And it is from what? Exits.
It is from what exits, not from what enters? It is from what exits. So the important thing in any case is that it is not possible for a person to contradict the Book and the Sunnah without there being a flaw in his statement. The first flaw is the contradiction, then the refutation by the defects and the rulings that he acknowledges in any case. The correct view, then, is that if one vomits intentionally, he breaks the fast. And if vomiting overcomes him, he does not break the fast. And if one cups or is cupped, he breaks the fast. Yes.
The questioner : There is no question, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : The same question. We have not reached the question. We have not reached the question.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. Regarding the hadith, it says: I have it. It was narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Hakim, and al-Bayhaqi, and its chain is authentic.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : From the one whose vomit...
The Shaykh : Yes, the first one. Yes.
The questioner : It was narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Hakim, and al-Bayhaqi, and its chain is authentic. And as for the hadith "The one who cups and the one who is cupped have broken the fast," he also says: The hadith of Thawban and al-Shaddad, as Imam Ahmad said, their chains are authentic.
The Shaykh : Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) has a small treatise titled "The Reality of Fasting." It is very beneficial for the student of knowledge. If you refer to it, you will benefit, if Allah wills. Yes.
The Shaykh : So do we say: You must hold it in, even if it wants to reach the throat? You must hold it in and push it back down if your fast is obligatory? Or do we say: If it becomes agitated and churns, then bring it out so that you settle down and are not disturbed, or perhaps it may be harmful to you? What is the answer? The second option?
The second option: bring it out. Yes, and this breaks the fast. Yes, if there is harm, there is no doubt that we say: bring it out and break the fast. But if there is no harm, then we say: do not bring it out and do not push it back down. If it overcomes you, let it go. If it settles down, do not bring it out. Some scholars said that the view that vomiting and cupping break the fast is a view contrary to the standard of analogy (qiyas), and it is not acted upon, because breaking the fast is by what enters, not by what exits. Just as wudu is broken by what exits, not by what enters. Glory be to Allah, for the sake of the rules. Wudu is broken by what exits, not by what enters, so that wudu is not broken by the meat of camels. Because the meat of camels is what enters. And they said: breaking the fast is by what enters, not by what exits, so that the fast is not invalidated by cupping and vomiting. So we say: May Allah forgive you. We cannot contradict the saying of Allah and His Messenger with such weak explanations. And where did you take these rules from? From the Book, or from the Sunnah, or from consensus? Who said this? Wudu is broken by what the Shari'ah has made a cause for breaking it, whether it enters or exits. And breaking the fast is by what the Lawgiver has made a cause for breaking the fast, whether it enters or exits. This is the correct view. As for establishing rules that have nothing but a mere application in most issues, that is not correct. It is true that most of what is transmitted is that what exits does not break it, but what enters does. But if the Sunnah comes, we must say by it. Likewise, in the issue of breaking the fast, the majority is that what enters does not break it, but what exits does. But despite that, we break the fast. Then we say to them: What do you say if one performs istinba (urinating while standing) and fears? Does he break the fast or not? And it is from what? Exits.
It is from what exits, not from what enters? It is from what exits. So the important thing in any case is that it is not possible for a person to contradict the Book and the Sunnah without there being a flaw in his statement. The first flaw is the contradiction, then the refutation by the defects and the rulings that he acknowledges in any case. The correct view, then, is that if one vomits intentionally, he breaks the fast. And if vomiting overcomes him, he does not break the fast. And if one cups or is cupped, he breaks the fast. Yes.
The questioner : There is no question, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : The same question. We have not reached the question. We have not reached the question.
The questioner : May Allah reward you. Regarding the hadith, it says: I have it. It was narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Hakim, and al-Bayhaqi, and its chain is authentic.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : From the one whose vomit...
The Shaykh : Yes, the first one. Yes.
The questioner : It was narrated by Abu Dawud, al-Hakim, and al-Bayhaqi, and its chain is authentic. And as for the hadith "The one who cups and the one who is cupped have broken the fast," he also says: The hadith of Thawban and al-Shaddad, as Imam Ahmad said, their chains are authentic.
The Shaykh : Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) has a small treatise titled "The Reality of Fasting." It is very beneficial for the student of knowledge. If you refer to it, you will benefit, if Allah wills. Yes.
Source
قناة «فضيلة الشيخ محمد بن صالح العثيمين»، 2122 - إذا هاجت معدة الصائم هل عليه أن يمسكها أو يستقيء حتى يستريح؟ ابن عثيمين — youtube.com
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.
