Issue: Is the fasting person excused if he does something that breaks the fast while knowing it is forbidden, but not knowing what consequences follow from it?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : If a fasting person does something that breaks the fast, knowing that it is forbidden, but he does not know what consequences follow from it, is this an excuse for his action or not?
The student: It is not an excuse.
The Shaykh : It is not an excuse. For example,
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That is, okay, it is not an excuse. Rest now, the question is understood. Now, a man knows that this action breaks the fast, but he does not know what consequences follow from it, so he performs this action while knowing that it breaks the fast and invalidates it. Do the consequences that he was ignorant of apply to him, or do they not apply? That is the question.
The student: The consequences do not apply to him.
The Shaykh : The consequences do not apply to him, and your brother says that they do apply.
The student: The principle is that he knows the ruling that it breaks the fast. For example, intercourse during the day in Ramadan; the expiation is that if one has intercourse during the day in Ramadan intentionally, he owes the expiation and making up the fast. If he is ignorant of the expiation, it does not apply to him.
The Shaykh : That is, he does not owe the expiation.
The student: Yes, that is correct, it does not apply to him.
The Shaykh : Okay, rest now. We understood that your answer is correct, meaning we understood that the man understands the issue. However, we say that he breaks his fast, even if he is ignorant of what follows from it. We tell this man: If you know that intercourse invalidates the fast, then your fast is invalid and you owe the expiation, even if you were ignorant of it. The evidence for this is that the man who had intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadan in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) came to ask, saying, "What is upon me?" He had had intercourse while not knowing what was obligatory upon him, and yet the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) obligated him to pay the expiation. But if a person has intercourse while not knowing that intercourse invalidates the fast and comes to ask, is anything obligatory upon him? No, that is the one for whom nothing is obligatory because he does not know its ruling. As for the one who knows the ruling but does not know what follows from the action, he is obligated to fulfill what follows from the action, even if he is ignorant of it, because he violated the sanctity of fasting by doing an act he knows is forbidden, so its implications and consequences are obligatory upon him. Pay attention to this difference, because some people think that ignorance of what follows from the action is like ignorance of the ruling of the action, and that is not the case. If he knows the ruling of the action, what follows from it is obligatory upon him, even if he is ignorant of what follows from it. Okay, these are three conditions for invalidating the fast with these things that break the fast.
And by this, we know that this religion, praise be to Allah, is easy and that there is no hardship in it, and that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) only legislated it for His servants and obligated them with it for their rectification, not for their punishment. And Allah the Exalted said:[An-Nisa 4:147] And Allah the Exalted said: [Al-Hajj 22:78] And He the Exalted said: [Al-Baqarah 2:185] And it is known that if we obligated people, or if we invalidated people's worship due to ignorance of what invalidates it, there would be difficulty and hardship in that.
The student: It is not an excuse.
The Shaykh : It is not an excuse. For example,
The student: ...
The Shaykh : That is, okay, it is not an excuse. Rest now, the question is understood. Now, a man knows that this action breaks the fast, but he does not know what consequences follow from it, so he performs this action while knowing that it breaks the fast and invalidates it. Do the consequences that he was ignorant of apply to him, or do they not apply? That is the question.
The student: The consequences do not apply to him.
The Shaykh : The consequences do not apply to him, and your brother says that they do apply.
The student: The principle is that he knows the ruling that it breaks the fast. For example, intercourse during the day in Ramadan; the expiation is that if one has intercourse during the day in Ramadan intentionally, he owes the expiation and making up the fast. If he is ignorant of the expiation, it does not apply to him.
The Shaykh : That is, he does not owe the expiation.
The student: Yes, that is correct, it does not apply to him.
The Shaykh : Okay, rest now. We understood that your answer is correct, meaning we understood that the man understands the issue. However, we say that he breaks his fast, even if he is ignorant of what follows from it. We tell this man: If you know that intercourse invalidates the fast, then your fast is invalid and you owe the expiation, even if you were ignorant of it. The evidence for this is that the man who had intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadan in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) came to ask, saying, "What is upon me?" He had had intercourse while not knowing what was obligatory upon him, and yet the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) obligated him to pay the expiation. But if a person has intercourse while not knowing that intercourse invalidates the fast and comes to ask, is anything obligatory upon him? No, that is the one for whom nothing is obligatory because he does not know its ruling. As for the one who knows the ruling but does not know what follows from the action, he is obligated to fulfill what follows from the action, even if he is ignorant of it, because he violated the sanctity of fasting by doing an act he knows is forbidden, so its implications and consequences are obligatory upon him. Pay attention to this difference, because some people think that ignorance of what follows from the action is like ignorance of the ruling of the action, and that is not the case. If he knows the ruling of the action, what follows from it is obligatory upon him, even if he is ignorant of what follows from it. Okay, these are three conditions for invalidating the fast with these things that break the fast.
And by this, we know that this religion, praise be to Allah, is easy and that there is no hardship in it, and that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) only legislated it for His servants and obligated them with it for their rectification, not for their punishment. And Allah the Exalted said: