Islamic Fiqh > Fasting > Ramadan: fasting, rules and dispensations > Crescent visibility and different countries
Contents
Updated on 27 September 2026 at 3:52 AM
The sheets on this page deal with establishing the crescent of Ramadan and its consequences: the number of witnesses it requires, whether the sighting of one land binds the other lands, then the case of countries where the day is very long or very short.
The opinions are reported as the sheets assign them, with the hadiths, their grades and the works referenced.
The sheet opens with a rule of precaution narrated from Ali, Abu Hurayra and Aisha: I prefer fasting a day of Sha'ban to breaking a day of Ramadan; the fast is treated with precaution: it is established by the report of one man, while breaking it takes place only by the testimony of two (al-Mughni 4/122, 124; Fath al-Qadir 2/313; al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyya 77; al-Majmu' 7/445 and following; al-Ifsah 1/386).
The jurists then differ over establishing the crescent of Ramadan: does one witness suffice, or are two witnesses required, as for the other months?
The Hanafis, the Shafi'is in the school and the Hanbalis in the school hold it is established by the testimony of one upright man. Ibn Umar reports: the people sighted the crescent, I informed the Messenger of Allah that I had seen it, he fasted it and ordered the people to fast it (reported by Abu Dawud (2340), a sahih hadith). And Ibn Abbas reports that a Bedouin came to the Prophet and said: I have seen the crescent, meaning that of Ramadan; he asked him: do you testify that there is no god but Allah? He said: yes. He asked: do you testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah? He said: yes. He said: Bilal, announce to the people that they fast tomorrow (reported by Abu Dawud (1993); al-Albani weakened it in Da'if Abi Dawud (507), al-Nawawi authenticated it in al-Majmu' (7/471)). Fatima bint al-Husayn reports that a man testified before Ali to sighting the crescent of Ramadan; he fasted, and, she believes, ordered the people to fast, and said: fasting a day of Sha'ban is dearer to me than breaking a day of Ramadan (reported by ash-Shafi'i in al-Musnad (721) and in al-Umm (2/94), and by al-Bayhaqi through his chain (4/213); al-Nawawi authenticated it in al-Majmu' (7/472)).
Those who accept the single witness reason thus: reporting the sighting of the crescent is a matter of narration (rivaya), not of testimony; for the informer is himself bound to fast, while the sworn witness carries nothing; and number is not a condition of narration. The report of one man on sighting the crescent is therefore acceptable, with the conditions required of anyone transmitting a religious report: Islam, reason, puberty and probity (al-Bada'i', 2/593).
The Malikis, some Shafi'is and Ahmad in one narration require, for sighting the crescent of Ramadan, the testimony of two upright men, by what an-Nasa'i reports from Abd ar-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn al-Khattab: he addressed the people on the day of doubt and said:
I kept company with the companions of the Messenger of Allah and asked them, and they informed me that the Messenger of Allah said: fast for its sighting, break the fast for its sighting and perform the rites for it; if it is obscured from you, complete thirty days; if two witnesses testify, fast and break the fast.
sahih hadith, reported by an-Nasa'i (2116)
And by analogy with Shawwal and the other months (adh-Dhakhira 2/488-489; Mawahib al-Jalil 2/386; al-Mudawwana al-Kubra 1/174; Bidayat al-Mujtahid 1/347; Kashshaf al-Qina' 2/305; al-Mughni 4/124).
Divergence in the crescent's risings is a real matter between distant lands, like divergence in the sun's risings. The question is whether that divergence counts for the start of the Muslims' fast and for fixing their two festivals and the other months, so that start and end differ among them, or whether it does not count and the Muslims unite in their fast and their festival. This is the question: if the people of one land sight the crescent without the others. The jurists answer it with two views.
The Hanafis in the school, the Malikis in the school, some Shafi'is and some Hanbalis in the school hold that no account is taken of differing risings: if the people of a land sight the crescent, the fast binds all lands, by the word of Allah:
So whoever of you witnesses the month, let him fast it.
Surah al-Baqara, 185
And by the word of the Prophet: fast for its sighting and break the fast for its sighting (reported by al-Bukhari (1909) and Muslim (1081), a sahih hadith). This hadith makes fasting obligatory on all Muslims through any sighting, without restricting it to a place.
Ibn Qudama writes: this day is part of the month of Ramadan by the testimony of trustworthy people; the fast is therefore obligatory on all Muslims; the month of Ramadan runs between the two crescents, and it is established that this day is part of it in all the rulings: settlement of debt, occurrence of divorce, manumission, obligation of vows and the rest; fasting it is therefore obligatory, by text and consensus; the upright testimony bore witness to the sighting of the crescent, so the fast is due, as if the lands were close (al-Mughni 4/122; see Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 2/393; al-Bada'i' 2/598; al-Ikhtiyar 1/129-130; Sharh Fath al-Qadir 2/313; adh-Dhakhira 2/296; Ahkam al-Qur'an of Ibn al-Arabi 1/121; al-Insaf 3/273; Majmu' al-Fatawa 25/104; al-Majmu' 7/456, 458; Nayl al-Awtar 4/267).
The Shafi'is on the soundest view with them, some Hanafis, some Malikis, and the Hanbalis on a view chosen by the shaykh of Islam Ibn Taymiyya hold that, if the risings differ and the lands are distant, the fast does not bind the people of the other land; if the lands are close, they rank as one land, and the people of the other are bound to fast without dispute. Their proof is that Ibn Abbas did not act on the sighting of the people of Syria, by the hadith of Kurayb:
Umm al-Fadl bint al-Harith sent Kurayb to Mu'awiya in Syria. He said: I arrived in Syria and discharged her errand; the crescent of Ramadan appeared while I was in Syria, and I sighted it on the night of Friday. I returned to Medina at the end of the month. Abdullah ibn Abbas questioned me, then mentioned the crescent and asked: when did you sight it? I said: we sighted it on the night of Friday. He said: did you sight it yourself? I said: yes, and the people sighted it and fasted, and Mu'awiya fasted. He said: but we sighted it on the night of Saturday, and we shall not cease fasting until we complete thirty days or sight it. I said: are the sighting of Mu'awiya and his fasting not enough for you? He said: no, thus the Messenger of Allah commanded us.
reported by Muslim (1087)
Al-Nawawi writes (al-Majmu' 7/456-458): if the lands are close, they rank as one land and the people of the other are bound to fast without dispute; if they are distant, two famous ways stand opposed. The sounder: the fast does not bind the people of the other land, and by it the author decided, with the shaykh Abu Hamid, al-Bandaniji and others, while al-Abdari, ar-Rafi'i and most scholars authenticated it. The second: the fast binds, the view of as-Saymari, authenticated by the qadi Abu at-Tayyib, ad-Darimi, Abu Ali as-Sinji and others; these answer the hadith of Kurayb that there was no establishment, for Ibn Abbas, of a sighting in another land by two upright witnesses. The first is correct.
Three criteria of distance and proximity are debated. The soundest, by which the majority of the Iraqis, as-Saydalani and others decided: distance varies with differing risings, like the Hijaz, Iraq and Khurasan; and proximity is their coincidence, like Baghdad, Kufa, Rayy and Qazvin, for the rising of these is the rising of those: if these sight it, its absence to the others is due to their lack of care or to an impediment, unlike those whose risings differ. The second criterion: the unity or divergence of the region (iqlim), the view of as-Saymari and others. The third: distance is the two-day travel distance (masqat al-qasr) and proximity is less than that; the view of al-Fawrani, the imam of the two sanctuaries, al-Ghazali, al-Baghawi and other Khurasanis; the imam of the two sanctuaries even claimed consensus, for taking risings into account would require computation and recourse to astrologers, which the law rejects, so the two-day travel distance, on which the law hangs many rulings, must be the measure; this last view is weak, for the crescent has no connection to a two-day travel distance; the correct is taking the risings into account, as stated.
On what precedes: if one doubts the coincidence of the risings, the fast does not bind those who did not sight it, for the origin is absence of obligation, and fasting is obligatory only through sighting, by the hadith, while no sighting was established for them, their proximity to the land of the sighting being unestablished. This is what is famous among the school's companions on both ways. Al-Mawardi and as-Sarakhsi each isolated a way of their own. Al-Mawardi: if the people of one land sight it without another, three views: all are bound, for the obligation of Ramadan does not vary with lands and Ramadan is established; none are bound, for risings and settings vary with the lands, and each people is addressed by its own rising and setting, as dawn rises early in one land and late in another, and the sun sets early in one land and late in another, each land being ruled by its own dawn and setting; or else: if they belong to one region, they are bound, otherwise not. As-Sarakhsi: if the people of a district sight it without another and the distance is small, all are bound; the criterion of proximity is that, when these sight it, it stays hidden from the others only through an impediment, at a two-day travel distance or otherwise; if the distance is great, three views: all are bound, the choice of Abu Ali as-Sinji; none are bound; or else: if the distance is such that the crescent can be imagined neither visible nor hidden from those people without an impediment, they are bound, and if it can stay hidden from them, not. In all, the question holds six views:
Before turning to those countries, the sheet notes further, on the single sighting: our school holds only the people of the land of the sighting are bound; Ibn al-Mundhir reports from Ikrima, al-Qasim, Salim and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh that they held the same; and he reports from al-Layth, ash-Shafi'i and Ahmad that all are bound; he knows no other holder than the Medinan and the Kufan, that is, Malik and
Abu Hanifa (al-Majmu' 7/456, 458, and the previous sources).
Then comes the question of lands where the day is very long and the night very short. It is well known that Allah commanded abstention from the nullifiers of the fast from the rise of dawn to the night. But in some places, like the Scandinavian countries of northern Europe, the night lasts months and the day months: how do the people of those lands fast? Likewise, if the day is very long and the night very short, to the point they cannot break the fast, how do they fast? This question was unknown to the early jurists, for it did not exist in the lands conquered in their era; the first among the jurists to treat it, as far as the sheet found, is the imam as-Suyuti, of the Shafi'i jurists, earlier scholars having cited it after him; the imam Ibn Abidin, of the Hanafi jurists, followed him. With them, the question concerned fasting in lands where dawn rises right after sunset, or where, hardly has the maghrib prayer been performed, dawn rises and breaking the fast becomes impossible.
As-Suyuti answered these questions in a hundred-verse poem, of which the sheet quotes these lines: he among them for whom the sun of day scarce sets the length of a prayer, while dawn shows at once; the fast runs its course: if they pray, they lose the evening meal that would strengthen them for two duties; shall they eat and make up their maghrib obligation? What is their rule at evening? Answer me. As for questions fifty-nine and sixty, his answer is: al-Burhan al-Fazari issued a fatwa on the obligation of the isha prayer in that state; his contemporaries issued a fatwa to the contrary: that prayer is not obligatory for them, for lack of the cause of obligation, which is the time. The first view is supported by the hadith of the days of the antichrist (ad-dajjal), in which he says: estimate it at its measure; az-Zarkashi writes in al-Khadim: on that basis it is ruled for them, in Ramadan, that they eat by night until the time of dawn's rise in the lands nearest them, then abstain and break the fast by day; and likewise before sunset, when it has set elsewhere, as the Muslims eat and fast in the days of the antichrist (al-Hawi lil-Fatawa, 2/284, 304).
Ibn Abidin writes: I have not seen among us anyone who treated the ruling of their fast when dawn rises at the moment the sun sets or shortly after, the faster unable to eat what sustains his intention; nor can continuity of the fast be required of them, for it would lead to ruin. If we say the fast is obligatory, estimation must follow: is their night estimated by the nearest lands, as the Shafi'is say here too, or estimated by what suffices for eating and drinking, or does only making up bind them without performing? All are possible; let it be examined. One cannot say, as for isha among its holders, that there is no obligation at all: the reason for absence of obligation in isha, for its holders, is absence of the cause; but in fasting the cause exists, namely the passage of part of the month and the rising of each day's dawn. That is what appears to me (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 1/366).
The three possibilities for lands where dawn rises with sunset are therefore: first, their night is estimated by the nearest lands, as the Shafi'is say, and this is a Hanafi view; second, what suffices for eating and drinking is estimated for them, and this is a Hanafi view; third, only making up binds them, without performing, and this is a Hanafi view. Ibn Abidin concludes: all are possible; let it be examined (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin, 1/366).
As for lands where the night lasts one or two hours, as is the case for example in Norway: the people fast twenty-one hours there and there are three hours of night; this falls outside what the Hanafi and Shafi'i jurists issued fatwas on, and on their principles the fast is obligatory for them, with no estimation by the nearest lands. The sheet notes in the margin: the Academy of Islamic fiqh ruled that the fast is observed at true dawn and true sunset so long as the day and night hold a true dawn and a true sunset; the Egyptian House of Fatwa, for its part, issues fatwas on the basis of the fast of the people of Mecca or Medina, and some contemporary scholars issue fatwas estimating the fast by the nearest Islamic lands.
As for lands where the day lasts half the year and the night the other half, estimation applies there, by the hadith of the antichrist reported by Muslim and others, from an-Nawwas ibn Sim'an: we said: Messenger of Allah, how long will he stay on earth? He said:
Forty days: one day like a year, one day like a month, one day like a week, and the rest of his days like your days. We said: Messenger of Allah, the day that equals a year, will the prayer of one day suffice us? He said: no, estimate it at its measure.
reported by Muslim (2251)
Al-Nawawi writes (Sharh Sahih Muslim, 18/66): al-Qadi and others said: this is a ruling specific to that day, which the Lawgiver prescribed for us; without this hadith, had we been left to our own ijtihad, we would have held to the five prayers at the known times as on other days; the meaning of estimate it at its measure is: when there passes after dawn's rise the span that usually lies between dawn and noon, pray noon; then when there passes the span between it and the asr, pray the asr; then when there passes the span between this and the maghrib, pray the maghrib; likewise the isha and the dawn prayer, then noon, then the asr, then the maghrib, and so on until that day ends, having seen the prayers of a whole year, every obligation performed in its time; the day that equals a month and the one that equals a week follow the same estimation as the first. Al-Nawawi finally reports a similar question about the prisoner who knows no night from day, plunged in permanent darkness: an important question few have mentioned; Abu Bakr al-Marwazi transmits three views of the companions: that he fasts and makes up, for it is a rare excuse; that he does not fast, for the firm forming of the intention is not achieved with an unknown time; or that he takes precaution, fasts without making up, like the overcast day for the prayer. Al-Nawawi decides: the soundest is that he must take precaution and fast, without making up, unless the mistake becomes clear to him afterward; if he learns he met the night, making up is due from him without dispute (al-Majmu', 6/291).
Among most schools the crescent of Ramadan is established by the report of one upright man, and the breaking of the fast by two witnesses; the sighting of one land, on the soundest view, binds only the lands sharing its horizon; and in lands with nights of one or two hours the fast runs from true dawn to true sunset, while lands with a day or a night of several months fall under estimation, by the measure of nearby lands or by what suffices for eating and drinking.