The sighting of the Shawwal crescent for a person in a country other than his own, then he returns to his country and finds them fasting, so what does he do?

The questioner: Our teacher, regarding the issue of determining the day of the festival or determining the entry into Ramadan, naturally, given the current disagreement among Muslims in Islamic countries?

The Shaykh : Unfortunately.

The questioner: Unfortunately, the issue of the festival, let us take it as an example. If, for instance, the last day of Ramadan enters, and it is established, for example, in Saudi Arabia that tomorrow is the festival, and here on the same night they say that tomorrow is the completion of the month?

The Shaykh: The completion of the month, yes.

The questioner: So if a man is traveling from Saudi Arabia, or let us say from Amman to Saudi Arabia, on the same night he is a resident of the people of Jordan, meaning on the same night, or on the morning of the festival which is in Saudi Arabia and the morning of the thirtieth day in Jordan, he travels. Is it permissible for him to consider fasting that day there, or is it the festival?

The Shaykh: I was asked, I do not say about this exact question, but about something similar to it. I was asked, on the occasion of this disagreement you mentioned, more than once, about some Jordanians who were performing 'Umrah, and the announcement of Saudi Arabia reached them that the month was twenty-nine days. So some of them fasted and some of them broke their fast. My answer was as follows: The Jordanian who broke his fast while he was still in Saudi Arabia has hit the mark. But if he entered Jordan, as is the case with most residents of Jordan, and what I mentioned reached them, the Jordanians divided into two groups: some fasted with Saudi Arabia, some broke their fast with Saudi Arabia and fasted with Jordan, and some did the opposite. So my opinion in this matter is that his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): to the end of the hadith, is a general text that every Muslim must respond to, and one should not look at what is said about the difference of horizons and regions and the like. Rather, whoever this establishment reaches, he must respond to his saying (peace and blessings be upon him). But unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, the states or governments existing today are different. I wish the disagreement were only in this ruling, but this is part of that, so such disagreement and confusion occurs. So I say the original principle is that it is obligatory for all Muslims to fast simply because a Muslim state announces the establishment of the crescent, whether for entry or exit. And related to this issue is that questions came to me from Europe, from Germany and others, saying: We are accustomed to disagree, and if Muslims in their countries disagree, what about them when they are outside their countries?! The important thing is that my answer was: You must fast with any announcement that is issued before the other announcement, regardless of whether it is Saudi or Jordanian, and so on.

Another questioner: Even if their announcement is based on solar calculations?

The Shaykh: This has another ruling, and I hope to postpone it temporarily for now, and if I forget, remind me. There are two rulings now regarding the disagreement that occurs. I said the original principle is that all Muslims fast and do not separate, as is the reality. This reality is a disagreement between one people and another, one state and another. But it is observed that this disagreement intensifies to the point that it includes one people, and this people divides itself into two parts. And I remember clearly that in some past years, such confusion occurred, and I was asked by some people, not in the same country, in the same house, the father was fasting and the son was breaking his fast, or the opposite. And I also remember clearly that in some of my travels and 'Umrahs, I arrived by car, naturally, to a place on the way to Madinah called al-'Ashash. There was an old car with me at the time, it heated up and boiled. When I checked the radiator, I found that it was losing water and the cap was not tight. So I stopped there, and you know there are some shops there. My journey led me to a shop with an old bearded man, his beard was not bad. We started talking to each other, and it turned out he was Kuwaiti and said that he was fasting with Kuwait, and he was a resident in Saudi Arabia. So here I entered into a discussion with him, and this is what I now want to repeat. So I say that among the rules of the Shari'ah is preventing the phenomenon of disagreement as much as possible. So now we said the original principle is that all Muslims fast with the sighting of one country, but this is not the reality. So if we remain on this original principle in the same country, the division will become a wider circle than the division that we do not control. We do not have the power to impose our ideas and opinions on the governments, and especially they do not accept our opinions in what Muslims have agreed upon in order to reduce the phenomenon of disagreement. I say we fast with the country we are in, on the condition that we do not fall into a fundamental contradiction that no scholar says, for example, it is not possible to fast twenty-eight days, it is not possible to fast thirty-one days. If the matter falls into such disagreement, and the resident in his country fasts with the sighting of his country, and it does not exceed thirty and does not fall below twenty-nine, then this is less evil than fasting with another country, because this will increase the disagreement and the division. This is what I see. In summary: There is a general text that must be submitted to and there is an opinion and ijtihad that a person can adopt or contradict with a type of ijtihad, and that is to fast with the people of the country and break the fast with the people of the country, without falling into that fundamental contradiction, or to fast with the country that announced that this is the original principle. And here the precision in the issue becomes, as is the case in many issues that are from the places of disagreement, contention, and ijtihad. This is my answer to what you asked.