Forgotten to make up missed Ramadhan.

Forgotten to make up the missed fasts before new Ramadhan.

What is the ruling on one who forgets to make up missed fasts before the next Ramadhan comes?

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
All the praise and thanks is due to Allah, the Lord of the Al-Alamin. Peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Evidence.

1. The Issue of Forgot.

The fuqaha’ unanimously agreed that in cases of one who forget [or fail to remember], he is forgiven, which means there would be no sin or accountability in all matters, because of a great deal of evidence in the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Allah Says:

 “Our Lord! Punish us not if we forget or fall into error”

[Al-Baqarah, 2:286].

The Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

 “Whoever breaks his fast in Ramadhan out of forgetfulness, he does not have to make that day up and he does not have to offer any expiation (kafarah).”

[Narrated and classified as sahih by Al-Hakim]

Abu Hurairah (radiallāhu`anhu) reported that the Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) said:

“Whoever forgets that he is fasting and eats or drinks, let him complete his fast, for the One Who fed him and gave him to drink was Allah.”

 [Al-Bukhari, Muslim].

2. In The Case Of Forgotten to Qadha' the Missed Ramad'an Fasts.

In the case of someone who forgot to qadha' or make up the missed fasts of Ramadhan before the next Ramadhan comes, the scholars unanimously agreed that he still must made up after the second Ramadhan, and they are not waived as a result of forgetting.

View Differed On The Issue Of Fidyah.

But they differed as to whether the fidyah [expiation], which is feeding a poor person, is required when making up the missed fast [after the second Ramadhan has come and gone]. In relation to this issue there are two views:

1. That the fidyah is not required, because in the case if someone forgot, he is forgiven which means that there is no sin and the fidyah is waived. This was the view of most of the Shafi’es and some of the Malikis.

[See: Tuhfat Al-Muhtaj by Ibn Hajar Al-Haitami (3/445); Nihayat Al-Muhtaj (3/196); Minah Al-Jalil (2/154); Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil (2/263).]

2.That the fidyah is not waived and still required, even forgetting is forgiven due to forgetfulness. This was the view of Al-Khatib Al-Sharbini among the Shafi’es, who said in Mughni Al-Muhtaaj (2/176): “It seems that it means there is no sin only, and that the fidyah is not waived” This was also the view of some of the Malikis.

[See: Mawahib Al-Jalil Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil (2/450).]

The Correct View

The more correct view is the first view above, meaning that the fidyah is not required, because in the case if someone who forgot, he is forgiven-not accountable of his misdeeds which mean that there is no sin and the fidyah is waived for three reasons:

1.The general meaning of the verses and ahadith which say that people are not held accountable in cases of forgetting, such as the verse in which Allah says:

“Our Lord! Punish us not if we forget or fall into error”

[Al-Baqarah 2:286]

2. The basic principle that one is not subject to any expiation or fidyah except with evidence, and there is no reliable evidence in this case.

3.There is a difference of opinion as to whether the fidyah is required in the first place, even in the case of one who delays making up the fasts deliberately. The Hanafis and Zahiris are of the view that it is not obligatory and Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaimin was of the view that it is not mustahabb, because there is no hadith to suggest that it is prescribed except from the actions of some of the sahabah, which is not strong enough to suggest that people be obliged to follow it, let alone oblige them to do it in a case where Allah has granted an excuse[forgiven].

Thus one has to make up the missed fasts, and he does not have to feed the poor [fidyah], what he should make them up after Ramadhan.

The Issue of Fidyah [expiation]

The condition to pay fidyah, feeding the poor would arise due to the following situation.

1.When someone is given an exemption from fasting due to :

1.1.Sickness, that have no chances to recover:

Allah Says:

 “…And upon those who are able [to fast, but with hardship]-a ransom [as substitute] of feeding a poor person [each day]… "

[Al-Baqarah, 2:184]

1.2.Old Age which makes difficult to observe the fast:

Ibn ‘Abbas (radiallāhu`anhu) said: “It was permitted for the very elderly man (or woman) to feed a poor person for every day (that he did not fast), and he did not have to make up for the days.”

[Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Hakim]

2.If someone intentionally breaks the fast by having sexual intercourse with the wife [he has committed a great sin and violated the sacredness of this month, and must make up the fast for that day. In addition, he is required to free a slave if it is possible to do so, if not, he has to fast two consecutive months [60 days] and if he is unable to do so,] then to he has feed sixty poor and needy people [fidyah].This is in pursuance of a hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah RA that a person came to see the Apostle of Allah (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) and said:

“O Messenger of Allah, I am undone. The Holy Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) asked him: What has brought about your ruin? The man said: I have had intercourse with my wife during the month of Ramadhan. Upon this the Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: Can you find a slave to set him free? He said: No. Then Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) said: Can you observe fast for two consecutive months? He said: No. The Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) then said: Can you provide food to sixty poor people? He said: No. He then sat down and (in the meanwhile) it was brought to the Apostle of Allah (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) a basket which contained dates. The Prophet (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) finally said: Give these (dates) in charity. The man said: Am I to give to one who is poorer than me? There is no family poorer than mine between the two lava plains of Madinah. The Apostle of Allah (sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) broke into laughter that his molar teeth became visible and said: Go and give it to your family to eat.”

 [Muslim]

3. Delaying Making Up Fasts. [Majmu’ Fatawa al-Maqalat li’l-Shaikh Ibn Baaz, 6/19.]

What is meant by feeding a poor person here is giving half a saa’ of the local staple food for each day; half a saa’ is equivalent to one and a half kilograms.

And Allah Almighty Knows best.

[ Islam Q&A ]

Situation Which Exempted A Person From Fasting.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All the praise and thanks is due to Allah, the Lord of the Al-'Alamin. Peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

1. Situation Which Exempted A Person From Fasting.

It is from the mercy of Allah and the lenience of the religion that we are allowed to break the fast if there is any danger, hardship or difficulty in it. Allah Says:

"...He (Allah SWT) has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty..." [Al-Hajj, 22:7.8]

1.1. Sick And Travellers.

It is allowed for those who has a legitimate syar’ie excuse, such as [not chronically] ill [menstruation, pregnancy or labour or childbirth, breastfeeding that endanger the child welfare], travelling to break their fasts during Ramadhan, but they must make up the days they missed.

Allah Says: "[Fasting for] a limited number of days. So whoever among you is ill or on a journey [during them]-then an equal number of days [are to be made up]..." [Al-Baqarah, 2:184]

a.The ayat stipulates that if fasting during travelling could be done, then it is better to fast. If fasting would be difficult then breaking the fast is much better with the provision to make it up before the next Ramadhan, the equal number of days he missed or broke it.

Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri said: "we used to travel for war expeditions with the Messenger of Allah during Ramadhan. Some of us would fast and some of us would not fast, and the fasting person would not find fault with the one who was not fasting, and the person who was not fasting would not find fault with the person who was fasting. Then they thought that the person who had the strength would fast and that was better. And they thought that the person who felt weak would not fast and that was better." [Muslim]

If the person is ill during Ramadhan, and is able to fast without difficulty, then he should fasts. If he is unable to do it then he should breaks his fast.

b.If the ill person expects to recuperate from his illness, he waits until he recuperates and then he makes up for whatever days he did not fast. However, if he is not expected to recover, he breaks his fast and gives charity for each day that he does not fast.

Allah Says: "...And upon those who are able [to fast, but with hardship]-a ransom [as substitute] of feeding a poor person [each day]... “[Al-Baqarah, 2:184]

1.2. Elderly Person

As for the elderly person who has reached an old age, at which he doesn't have the strength to fast, he may break the fast and give charity for every day that he did not fast.

Ibn ‘Abbas said: "It was permitted for the very elderly man (or woman) to feed a poor person for every day (that he did not fast), and he did not have to make up for the days." [Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Hakim]

2. Breaking The Fast Without A Legitimate Excuse

2.1. Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaimin (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on breaking the fast during the day in Ramadhan without syari’e legitimate excuse.

He replied:

Breaking the fast during the day in Ramadhan without valid excuse is a major sin, which makes a person a fasiq (rebellious evildoer). He has to repent to Allah and make up the day when he broke the fast. This means that if he fasted then during the day he broke the fast with no excuse, then he is a sinner, and he has to make up that day when he broke the fast, because when he started the fast it became binding upon him to complete it, as in the case of a vow. But if he deliberately did not start to fast at all with no excuse, then he does not have to make it up, because that will be of no benefit to him, for it will never be accepted from him.

The basic principle with regard to every act of worship that is connected to a specific time is that if it is delayed beyond that time with no excuse, it will not be accepted, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

“Whoever does an action that is not in accordance with this matter of ours will have it rejected.”

And this is a transgression of the sacred limits of Allah, and transgressing the sacred limits of Allah is zulm (wrongdoing), and the wrongdoer’s deeds are not accepted. Allah says:

“And whoever transgresses the limits ordained by Allah, then such are the Zalimun (wrongdoers)” [Al-Baqarah 2:229]

If he did act of worship before the time for it prescribe, it would not be accepted from him, and by the same token if he does it after the time for it is over, it will not be accepted from him, unless he had an excuse.

[Majmu’ Fatawa Al-Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaimin, 19, question no. 45.]

2.2. Regarding the one who intentionally breaks the fast by having sexual intercourse with his wife during the daytime in Ramadhan, then he has committed a great sin and violated the sacredness of this month, and must make up the fast for that day. In addition, he is required to free a slave if it is possible to do so, if not, he has to fast two consecutive months and if he is unable to do so, then to he has feed sixty poor and needy people.The same is required of the wife as is required of her husband, if she freely consented to having sexual intercourse. However, if she was forced, then nothing is required of her according to the predominant opinion of the scholars.

This is in pursuance of a hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah RA that a person came to see the Apostle of Allah SAW and said:

“O Messenger of Allah, I am undone. The Holy Prophet SAW asked him: What has brought about your ruin? The man said: I have had intercourse with my wife during the month of Ramadhan. Upon this the Prophet SAW said: Can you find a slave to set him free? He said: No. Then Prophet SAW said: Can you observe fast for two consecutive months? He said: No.The Prophet SAW then said: Can you provide food to sixty poor people? He said: No. He then sat down and (in the meanwhile) it was brought to the Apostle of Allah SAW a basket which contained dates.The Prophet SAW finally said: Give these (dates) in charity. The man said: Am I to give to one who is poorer than me? There is no family poorer than mine between the two lava plains of Madinah. The Apostle of Allah SAW broke into laughter that his molar teeth became visible and said: Go and give it to your family to eat.” [Muslim].

If one intentionally breaks his fast by eating or drinking without a legitimate excuse, then again he has committed a great sin and violated the sacredness of this month. Such a person has a severe threat awaiting him. Prophet Muhammad said:

"Whoever breaks fasting of Ramadhan without having a legitimate excuse or being ill, he cannot make up for that day, even if he undertakes a perpetual fast.” [Al-Bukhari]

Imams Ahmad, Ash-Shafi’e, Sa’id Ibn Al-Musaiyib and Al-Shabby and others said that one should sincerely repent and seek the forgiveness of Almighty Allah and make up the day later [followed by observing the righteous deeds: taqwa,charity,sadaqah jariyah, naafi fasts and prayers, zikirullah etc].

This is what some of scholars regarded as an expiation that is required for breaking the fast of Ramadhan without a valid reason. They say, one should fast for two months consecutively or feed sixty poor people as well as to make up the day later with any of both forms of expiation. The most right things to do is a total repentance and embarking on righteous deeds.

2.3. Vomiting: if done deliberately, invalidates the fast, and necessitates making up for the fast. However, if vomit overcomes one and exits without one’s choosing, the fast is not nullified.
Allah the Exalted knows best.

©Islamweb

Focus On Reform Agenda

Ceritalah

By Karim Raslan on July 8, 2008

A more open, fair and law-abiding Malaysia will be the legacy for the future.

Malaysians have been appalled by the succession of press conferences, statutory declarations, accusations and counter-accusations hogging our headlines for the past two weeks.

The mudslinging has made our country the laughing stock of Asia. However, we can’t just turn our backs on what’s happened because there are important lessons to be learnt from the experience.

First and foremost is the need to proceed with the stalled reform agenda. Back in 2004, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi promised us change. He failed to deliver and suffered the consequences on March 8, after which he reiterated the same promises.

Now, more than ever (amidst the debris of the two scandals), the entire nation can see the extent to which our institutions – the police, the judiciary and the prosecution service in particular – have been weakened and politicised.

We cannot wait for the Umno leadership battle to be resolved and the Prime Minister cannot disappoint us again. Malaysians will not be so forgiving of either him or his party.

He must act and push the conservatives within the Cabinet – Syed Hamid, Najib Razak and Nazri Aziz – to move forward.

Secondly, the government’s credibility needs to be safeguarded. As Shabery Cheek, one of the more open-minded men in the Cabinet says: “credibility is something you build up. But once it’s lost it’s very difficult to regain.”

Given current pathetic levels of trust, the Malaysian government has a lot of work to do.

Thirdly, Umno needs to be brought to heel and disciplined. Many of the current problems faced by the nation are due to Umno’s overwhelming influence within the administration and the inability to control prominent party members, especially the all-powerful division chiefs.

There are a web of relationships linking the party, the civil service, business and the security apparatus. This network needs to be opened up and subjected to more transparency. The backroom deals have to be exposed to the light of day and full media scrutiny.

For decades, Umno has presented itself as the saviour of the Malays and the arbiter of the national consensus. In the past, the party’s leaders – men such as Tun Dr Ismail and Tun Razak – were wise and pragmatic, balancing out the conflicting demands of our multiracial society as they delivered economic growth and prosperity.

However, the party has long since become middle-aged and lazy. The wheeler-dealer businessman in his black SUV has usurped the cikgu ethos of the past. Now, as the Malay proverb says pagar makan padi – the fence devours the rice – the guardian has turned on its charges.

Umno leaders, warlords and their financial backers must learn they are responsible and accountable to the Constitution and the institutions of state. If they break the law they will suffer the consequences.

This is where the reform agenda – the calls for a more open, fair and law-abiding Malaysia are important. We need Abdullah Badawi to remain focused on this agenda.
Get it right and the reform agenda will be his legacy for the future. Get it wrong and nothing else will save him.

As I said, we need to return the Constitution and the institutions of the nation (especially the police, the courts and the prosecution service) to their true position – namely, above the party, halting decades of deterioration.

However, as I said, many in the party don’t consider this to be a priority. For them it’s something secondary – the kind of issue beloved of ‘Bangsar liberals’, spoilt middle class journalists and noisy lawyers – people like me and you – people that Umno leaders felt ‘betrayed’ them on March 8.

Well, I have news for them: we didn’t ‘betray’ them – they betrayed us (fully 49% of the voters opted for the opposition). Interestingly they also betrayed the original culture and traditions of Umno’s founders.

Certainly, whenever I discuss these issues with Umno types they’ll reply – “Karim, the voters in my kawasan don’t care about these things”.

Once again, I have to disagree with them on this point: Umno’s poor showing on March 8 was due to its refusal to acknowledge and address core issues of justice, fairness and equality – issues that we experience across the country when ‘enterprising’ and ‘clever’ Umno leaders suddenly acquire large houses, countless expensive cars and go on lavish foreign holidays.

Still, there are those in Cabinet like Zaid Ibrahim and Shahrir Samad who do recognise these weaknesses and have been trying to convince their colleagues that restoring trust in institutions is a top priority.

Shabery Cheek, for one, has been partly responsible for ‘freeing’ up the media.

As he says, refreshingly: “We need to realise that we do have a track record and culture of service. We needn’t be afraid of openness.”

Such courage – he’s also been willing to debate Anwar Ibrahim head-to-head – has earned Shabery the grudging respect of media practitioners.

Indeed, the ugly face-off between Anwar Ibrahim and Najib Razak is directly attributable to the current imbalance of authority – on the one hand a severely compromised security and legal apparatus and on the other a pumped up executive beholden to no one but the party and its warlords.

This has created an environment riddled with corruption, slovenliness, self-importance and racism.

The credibility crisis is literally eating away at our national consensus. It is undermining our capacity to move forward at a critical juncture economically when leadership and focus is required to guide the nation through a period of unprecedented inflationary turbulence.

The Malaysian people do not trust the security apparatus to act fairly and impartially.

Moreover, this failure has emboldened opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim to play to the gallery.
He knows that in the absence of a credible legal forum, the court of public becomes the ultimate arbiter of his innocence and/or guilt.

The party of Merdeka has got to come to terms with modernity. Yes, Umno in its earlier incarnation helped bring Independence to Malaya and yes it did ensure the position of the Malays within the Federation.

But the party of the 1950s and 60s is no more. Fifty years on and Umno is symbolised by the late Zakaria Mat Deros’ extraordinary mansion in Port Klang.

The party has lost all sense of propriety and service. The party is focused on serving its own needs. The mass of Malays and Malaysians have been forgotten.

©The star

The Seriousness of Fitnah

The Seriousness of Fitnah

Fethullah Gulen

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful;

All the praise and Thanks are due to Allāh, the Lord of the al-ā’lamīn. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allāh, and that Muhammad, sallallāhu alayhi wa sallam, is His Messenger.

The fitnah includes the acts like deceiving, confusing the hearts mind; differing; falling for something; sinning; disbelief; alluring beauty, property and children; testing someone, torture, creating misfortune, or troubling others.

In nearly sixty verses [ayat] of the Qur'an, we find either this word or another word that is derived from the same root. While even a disagreement between two people can be called fitnah, acts aiming to spread disbelief, turning people from the path of Allāh the Almighty, and causing terror in society are also categorized as fitnah. Making two people dislike each other is fitnah and this is an abhorrent sin; but there is also another type of fitnah that is so bad that it invokes divine wrath. It cannot be regarded as equal to other types of fitnah, it is the case of causing someone to fall into a pit of Hellfire and end their happiness in both worlds.

Allāh the exalted Says: “Fitnah is worse than killing…” [Al-Baqarah 2:191]

The ayat categorized fitnah is so destructive that it is considered even worse than murder. Such fitnah is that such as trying to spread disbelief through brute force, alienating Muslims from their values, and making younger generations strangers to their spiritual values, thereby throwing them into a terrible torment in both worlds, are all grave offenses that are far more dangerous than murdering an innocent person.

Therefore, in order not to face such a terrible end, we need to keep away from even the pettiest kind of fitnah and eliminate the words and actions that may lead to it from the very beginning before they become great crimes.

In some cases of murder, there is both fitnah and murder intermingled. For example, somebody assassinates an important figure and then disappears. After that, an innocent person or a group is blamed for that murder. In this way, the situation becomes a blood feud. Both the supporters of the victim and the slandered group suffer. Thus, the murder is not limited to a single event; it is followed by mutual accusations and it becomes a great fitnah. Finally, an unstoppable chain of fitnahs is ignited, and results in a condition of anarchy where thousands of murders are committed.

Unfortunately, this kind of fitnah has taken place in the history of Islam and such acts have yielded far worse results than one single murder. For instance, the assassination of the second Caliph, `Umar ibn Al-Khattab was not just a simple murder; even more so since, as Hudzaifah Al-Yamani reported: ‘Umar was a locked door against fitnah. After his martyrdom, that door was opened; more correctly, it was broken down. Here we will examine this event in more detail.

One day, ‘Umar ibn Al-Khattab asked Hudzaifah about the words of the Messenger of Allāh (Sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) describing fitnah that surges like the waves of the sea. Hudzaifah answered: "O Commander of the believers, there is no harm on you from this fitnah; for there is a locked door between it and you." When `Umar asked: "Is that door going to open or be broken down?" Hudzaifah answered: "It is going to be broken down." `Umar then commented: "Then it will not be locked again until the end of the world." When one of his friends asked about that door, Hudzaifah’s answer was: "That door is ‘Umar himself."

In this respect, the assassination of ‘Umar cannot be taken as an ordinary murder; it was the breaking down of the door that blocked fitnah, and the opening of the way for fitnah to continue until the end of the world. The Qur'an mentions the condition of the person who murders an innocent person, stating that he will stay in Hellfire forever. Therefore, this must also encompass murderers like Umar's assassin.

Ibn ’Abbas and some of the scholars and imams from the generation following the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) inferred from the following verse that somebody who commits murder will suffer eternal punishment in Hellfire:

“Whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense (in the Hereafter) is Hellfire, therein to abide; and Allāh has utterly condemned him, excluded him from His mercy, and prepared for him a tremendous punishment”

 [An-Nisa’ 4:93]

Some interpreters of the Qur'an have commented differently: In the same way that a murderer deserves to be executed in return for the crime he committed, the same punishment must be given to the person who killed all mankind. There is no greater punishment to be given. Likewise, as the punishment of the murderer of a single person is eternal Hellfire, the punishment of the person who has murdered all mankind must be the same. Therefore, a person who has murdered a single person is like the one who has murdered all mankind. The divine statement: “Assuredly Allāh does not forgive that partners be associated with Him; less than that He forgives to whomever He wills” (An-Nisa’ 4:48) limits the meaning of the verse that was mentioned above. However, when we look at the whole issue, we see that even if it is not true that every murderer will stay in Hellfire forever, there is a type of murder that the person who commits it will suffer eternal torment.

Hence, as there are degrees of sins, like fitnah, murder too has different degrees as an offense. These degrees depend on the identity and status of the victim, as well as the results it will incur. Regardless of who the victim is, murder is a grave crime, but assassinating the commander of an army or the head of a state is not the same as killing an ordinary citizen in terms of the chain of events that follow. Again, a murder committed in the Sacred Mosque in Makkah where it is even forbidden to kill an insect or pick tree leaves will not be equal to a murder that is committed elsewhere.

For this reason, Ibn ‘Abbas considered killing a prophet or a leader of the believers as equal to killing all mankind. Therefore, those who execute a person whose fate is connected with that of a nation will have issued a decree of execution for the entire nation. Those who poison a man of action who devoted himself to the salvation of all mankind can be considered to have poisoned the entire nation. We could even say that they have poisoned Prophet Muhammad (Sallallāhu 'alayhi wa sallam) and his Companions. This is such a great atrocity that even if those who commit it are believers, they can never find their way to Paradise unless they are forgiven by all mankind.

 In conclusion, every kind of unjust murder is a great sin; although we can look it from different degrees, depending on the time, place and the identity and status of the victim.

Reference:

1. Excerpted with some modifications from http://en.fgulen.com

2. Fethullah Gulen is an influential Turkish Muslim intellectual who inspired a series of social activities, including a transnational education and business network, interfaith dialogue forums, and multicultural encounters.

[Via Islam Online Jan 8, 2008]