What is the ruling on one who saw the crescent of Ramadan but did not bring two just witnesses, and his testimony was rejected by the court? Does he fast or break his fast?

The questioner : Regarding the sighting of the crescent, one of the brothers asks: What is the ruling on one who saw the crescent of Ramadan but did not bring a just witness, and his testimony was rejected by the court? Does he fast because he saw the crescent, or does he break his fast with the people?

The Shaykh : This is a matter in which there is scholarly disagreement among the people of knowledge. What appears to be correct is that he should fast, but he should not oppose the congregation, meaning that he should not display his fasting, so that he does not become one who opposes the congregation. We chose this opinion based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): And he saw it. The fact that his testimony was rejected, whether due to his open sinfulness or due to ignorance of his state, does not prevent the obligation of fasting, since he saw it. However, he should not display the opposition. Similarly, if he saw the crescent of Shawwal, but the crescent of Shawwal is stricter than the crescent of Ramadan, because the crescent of Shawwal is not established except with two witnesses. Therefore, the one who saw the crescent of Shawwal alone in a place far from the people should not oppose the congregation; we tell him to break his fast. As for the one who is with the people, he does not break his fast, even though some scholars have permitted him to break his fast in secret. As for doing it openly, that is not permissible, because this is opposing the Muslims. And in the hadith from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): .