The ruling on breaking the fast in Ramadan and the ruling on one who assists in that

Question:
His other question actually presents a problem that occurred to him in Ramadan. He says: I have a married daughter, and she and her husband came to visit us in the month of Ramadan. After we had fasted for a week, the husband’s colleagues came, and they went out to the open countryside. Satan mixed with them, so they ate and drank. The next morning, the daughter’s husband said to his wife: “I want you to give me food.” His wife refused, and he divorced her. He swore an oath that she would not make him any food. So she became confused between my son-in-law and my daughter, because he had divorced her, and she had sworn an oath. I forced my son’s wife to make him food, but she refused, so I compelled her. She was not willing, but she got up and made him food. He ate and drank while we were present in the house with him, but we did not eat with him. What is required of us? Do we bear any sin, or are we required to give charity?
Please advise us. May Allah reward you a thousand times for us.

Answer:
There is no doubt that breaking the fast in Ramadan without a valid religious excuse is a major sin and one of the great abominations, if it is done without a valid religious excuse.
As for if it is due to the excuse of travel, if they traveled a distance that does not count as travel, which is approximately eighty kilometers, or approximately seventy kilometers, the distance of a day and a night approximately, by mounts and on foot, then what is equivalent to that and close to it is called travel, and there is no harm in breaking the fast in it.
As for what is in the house or in the outskirts of the town, and is not called travel; then breaking the fast in it is a major sin, and the one who assists the one who is breaking his fast in his breaking of the fast shares in the sin with him; because Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, says: [Al-Ma'idah: 2] So the one who assists one who breaks the fast in Ramadan without an excuse by providing food or coffee or tea or any other of the drinks or foods; is sinful, sharing with the one who broke the fast in the sin, but his fast is valid, his fast is not invalidated by the assistance, but he is sinful, and he must repent to Allah.
And upon you, O brother, when you compelled the girl to make the food, you must repent to Allah, for you have erred when you ordered her to make the food for him, so she did well and was correct in not obeying him; because there is no obedience to a created being in disobedience to the Creator, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So if her husband orders her to present to him food in the fast of Ramadan, and he has no excuse, he is not sick, he has no excuse; then this is forbidden and an abomination, he has no right to break the fast, and he has no right to order his wife to prepare a breakfast for him, and she has no right to assist him in what Allah has forbidden, even if he is angry, even if he divorces, it is not permissible for her to assist him in what Allah has forbidden for him and for her, and obedience to Allah takes precedence over obedience to the husband, and over obedience to the father, and over obedience to the ruler, and over obedience to the prince; because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: And he also said, (peace and blessings be upon him): Yes, Allah is the One to be sought for help.

The presenter: But perhaps what we just read in the message of the listener (A. L. H.) from the land of Ghamid makes it clear that the husband is a traveler, and that his colleagues who came to him are also travelers?

The Shaykh: No, he says in the house……, in the house.

The presenter: Yes, that is correct.

The Shaykh: He ordered her in the house after they returned.

The presenter: No, they are still traveling in the land of Ghamid, traveling; because he says: My daughter and her husband came to us, they visited us during the day of Ramadan, and his colleagues also visited him, so they all became travelers.

The Shaykh: If they are travelers, and they have resolved to stay for more than four days; then it is obligatory for them to fast, this is the stronger opinion, and it is the opinion of the majority of the scholars of knowledge: if they have resolved to stay for more than four days with their companions; they fast with them, but if it is less than four days, four days or less, it is not obligatory for them to fast if they are travelers, they passed by as visitors; then it is not obligatory for them to fast, and if they fast, there is no harm, and no blame, but if they have intended to stay with them for more than four days; then what is recommended in this case is fasting, to avoid the disagreement of the scholars, and to act according to the opinion of the majority; and because the original ruling is fasting, and there is doubt in the permissibility of breaking the fast, yes.