The Ruling on the Disagreement Among Muslims Regarding Fasting in Ramadan

The questioner : It is a matter of agreement among the scholars of the Muslims in terms of the Shari'ah.

The Shaykh : If they began the day fasting and news reached them that it was yesterday that we saw the crescent moon, they should break their fast and make up the day, yes.

The questioner : No matter how late your arrival is.

The Shaykh : This is the second scenario; we now come to the third and final one. As long as the Muslims, both governments and people, are as their Lord of the Worlds said: . That is, this state remains in its condition and that state remains in its condition, until in some of the past years it reached the point where, for example, some people fasted on the first day, some fasted on the second day, and some fasted on the third day. What is this?
This is possible from the Shari'ah perspective, and it is his saying (peace be upon him) the month, there is no responsibility, Allah does not burden a soul beyond its capacity. But I want to say that as long as the Muslims are now different with the governments. And this is the point of my speech. Which perhaps you felt from my words that you are circling around it, that we here have reached the point that Saudi Arabia is fasting. So some people fast with Saudi Arabia, taking from them the principle that we mentioned at the beginning.
We say this is the principle as we established previously, but this leads to a harm, and this harm has actually occurred in some past years and perhaps in this year. In one house there is one who breaks the fast and one who fasts, the father, for example, breaks the fast and the son fasts, or the reverse. And this is undoubtedly, from the Shari'ah perspective, a harm. And we have the scientific principle of usul al-fiqh. That if a Muslim falls between two evils, he chooses the lesser of the two evils.
So in this case, I say, from the perspective of "do not force your brother to be a sinner," do not invalidate the fast of your country, and to clarify this matter. There is no doubt that the disagreement of governments, and let us assume only two governments, and if Allah wills they will become one government, let us assume two governments, one is fasting and one is not fasting. This is a faction that contradicts the principle. This faction is enough for us, we do not create a faction now in the same people because some fast with that government and some fast with this government. Peace be upon you, how are you? So this is what I have regarding this issue, I mentioned it to you in detail. We need to see what Abdul Aziz has. Thank you. That you have something when. May Allah reward you with good. No, but remember, I am fine, if you have something, let us hear it?

The questioner : By Allah, it is just, I mean, the issue of harm, I mean, why did you consider it to be a harm if you took the correct basic opinion? I mean, if I am convinced to rely on the basic opinion, why do I consider it a harm? If I do not, I mean, I do not try to spread it, I mean, I am done, I said, my mother and my wife fasted, they fasted, so there was no difference. It is possible that if there was a brother with an opinion like yours, I might differ with him, we would discuss things, but this did not happen, I mean, it did not create a harm for me in my house, in my family, it did not create. On the contrary, most of the people who I might discuss with are convinced of the opinion that I told you, which is to fast upon seeing it and break the fast upon seeing it, meaning not because there are imaginary borders, so I mean, I give a close example, if you tell me that the people of the Darah area, in Aqaba, between it and the field is one hundred meters, my brother. This is the Dabbi, this is the Dabbi from another party. So one hundred meters, because this belongs to this country and that belongs to that country.

The Shaykh : This statement, we mentioned it, we referred to it, that its origin is not correct because it contradicts the Qur'an, it contradicts the Sunnah so let them fast, fast upon seeing it and break the fast upon seeing it, and so on.
This statement relates to the principle, we are now talking about whether every principle must be applied in every circumstance and every occasion, or does it accept consideration and not rushing to issue a ruling? Here is the point, ah. Now. If a knowledgeable Muslim jurist sees an evil. There is no doubt that it is obligatory upon him to denounce it, but if his opinion prevails that this denunciation of the evil will create a harm, I think you will agree with me that he does not denounce this evil, so what will he be? He will have left an obligation without a doubt, because whoever among you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand, if he cannot, then with his tongue, and so on of the hadith, he left an obligation, why did he leave an obligation? Fear of harm, and from this hadith and others, and I will mention one hadith, the scholars, the jurists, said, if the matter revolves between benefit and harm, the harm prevails over the benefit and the harm is delayed.
And the hadith that I mentioned, or I said I would mention, is when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) entered Makkah as a conqueror, and he entered and prayed two rak'ahs in the interior of the Ka'bah, thanking Allah for opening for him the city of shirk (associating partners with Allah), which is the best of Allah's lands on earth. The Lady Aisha, and what do you know of the Lady Aisha in her piety and in her knowledge and her fiqh, and so on, wanted to do as her Prophet and her husband did, to enter the Ka'bah, so he (peace and blessings be upon him) said the Ka'bah, here is the point now, and if not that your people are recent from shirk, I would have demolished the Ka'bah, O Beautiful, I would have demolished the Ka'bah, what would the people say to him, there is still sickness or weakness in their hearts, or so on.
Another hadith, by the way. The Messenger (peace be upon him). It was known or reported to him that the Jews. And this is a belief of theirs, they do not mix with the menstruating woman. Even if she is in a room and he is in a room. So he (peace be upon him) said. anything except that he wants to contradict us even in the issue of sex, if not that your people are recent from shirk, I would have demolished the Ka'bah, , the Messenger of Allah in terms of his capability, especially after Allah opened for him the noble Makkah, he does not care in terms of fighting and Allah has helped him, but he feared for the weak in faith, therefore he said, if not that your people are recent from shirk, so he left the Ka'bah with the deficiency that Quraysh built when the Ka'bah was hit by the fire, from this hadith and that hadith, the scholars took this principle, it is very important. That it is the weighing of benefits and harms, so whichever prevails over the other, it is acted upon, now imagine with me, professor, that this son fasted and the father did not fast. Does the other advance in fasting, when will he be punished? They pray for themselves. So this is a difference as a natural result of the first difference. If it goes, there will be a difference in the designation and a difference in the fasting, no. As it was said, and with this I end my speech, may Allah have mercy on you, some evil is lighter than some, this is what we adorn with Allah, if Allah wills.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, if it means, it is enough, our Shaykh, we rest.

The Shaykh : Yes.