[Servant of Mehdi]

Salaamun Alaykum

This article I was reading below, and it makes a lot of sense. I know this issue becomes topical especially in Ramadhan, but oh well whatever excuse to gain more knowledge.


The following document has been written following the lecture of Sheikh Arif Abdul Hussain in Birmingham. Individuals interested in listening to the full lecture can do so at www.almuntazar.com, where the eminent Shaikh gives a detailed explanation of the current situation and the choices that we have.

The centuries old debate of resolving when to establish the new lunar month has come to the fore in the United Kingdom, especially over the last 3 years. Primarily this has come as a result of the rulings of Ayatullah al Udhma, Samahat as Sayid Ali Husaini Sistani on the theory of differing horizons. Whilst certain communities such as the World Federation have made a concerted effort to aid their community’s understanding of the edicts issued by the Marja, many have found fundamental flaws in the arguments that have been presented. It is however important to assert that the community are not questioning the edicts of the Grand Ayatullah, but rather the arguments that have presented for the application of the edicts in the United Kingdom.

There have always been two camps on the issue of the new moon crescent. One camp supports the theory that the world has one sky, or a unity of horizons, and therefore a sighting of the moon in the east necessarily applies to the west. The other camp advocates differing horizons, on the basis of the hadith which states “Fast when you see the moon, end the fast when you see the moon”, suggesting a sighting must be local. This article does not intend to debate this issue, or try and prove one over another. The aim of this article is to aid the understanding of the choices that are available when making a decision on the start and end of the month.

There are currently three published works that can be referred to that discuss Ayatullah Sistani’s rules on the differing horizons. The quotations that follow are from these publications. The detailed texts can be found at www.sistani.org.

Islamic Laws

“1744 If the first day of a month is proved in a city, it is also proved in other cities if they are united in their horizon. And the meaning of having a common horizon in this matter is that if new moon was sighted in a city, there would be a distinct possibility of sighting it in the other cities, if there were no impediments, like, the clouds etc.”

A code of practice for Muslims in the west

1. Question: If the new moon is sighted in the East, does it apply to us also in the West? And if it is sighted in America, does it apply to Europe also?

Answer: If the new moon is sighted in the East, it also applies to the West as long as the latitude of the two locations are not greatly further away from one another. If the new moon is sighted in the West, it does not apply to the East unless it is proven—even by the moon staying on the first [Western] horizon for the length of time that is longer than the difference between the sunset of the two locations. [For example, if the sunset in the Eastern city was half an hour before the Western city where the moon was sighted, and the moon stays on the horizon longer than half an hour —the Eastern city can follow the moon sighted in the Western city.]
Jurisprudence Made Easy

- You should be able to know that by sighting the new moon in your country or nearby countries that share the same horizon; in other words, if the crescent is sighted in one country, it should be seen in the other, were it not for natural barriers, such as clouds, mountainous terrain, and the like.

The above quotations allow us to define the horizon in 2 ways. The first definition, in accordance with “Islamic Laws” and “Jurisprudence Made Easy” would be to say that any city where the moon might be seen would be considered to be on the same horizon as the city where the moon is seen due to the possibility of it being seen in the first city, even if it was not actually seen. Therefore, the horizon varies on a month-to-month basis. The second definition, in accordance with “A Code of practice for Muslims in the West”, would be to say that 2 cities share a horizon if the two locations are not far apart. Both these definitions will be dealt with separately.

Definition 1 – Sharing of the horizon on the basis of the possibility of sighting the moon.

There are certain astronomical methods that need to be understood before delving further into understanding the horizons on the basis of the first definition. Three sets of astronomical data are required to calculate the possibility of sighting the moon - elongation, altitude and crescent age. The data itself cannot be faulted, as over time this data has been proven to be highly accurate. However, the calculations relating to the possibility of sighting the moon are not as fine a science.

According to the first definition of Ayatullah Sistani’s ruling, a city where there is a possibility of sighting the moon would share the horizon of another city that did see the moon. This raises the important question of defining how the possibility is calculated. So far, the majority of the community have relied upon a criterion that has been devised using data over the last 30-40 years. Gathering data is important, however this data, as with all scientific data and scientific conclusions are only based on the evidence available at the time.

There are various criteria that the astronomers use to calculate the possibility of sighting the moon, and there could be reliance on these calculations, if over time they had shown that the data was consistently accurate. Too frequently however the recognised criteria has been proven to be completely inaccurate. As an example, according to the astronomical calculations it was impossible for the moon to be seen in Najaf on Tuesday 4th October 2005, but despite this Ayatullah Sistani declared Wednesday 5th October 2005 as the first of Ramadhan. It must be understood, that neither the actions nor the fatwas of our beloved Marja are being questioned. We applaud Ayatullah Sistani’s decisive actions in Iraq that have saved the country and its people from civil war. Sayid Sistani is a Marja of the highest degree, and we pray that Allah increases strengthens him and prolongs his life. We are only questioning the calculations that are used to define the possibility of sighting the moon.
With reference to the scenario in Najaf, scientific calculations using the astronomical data showed that it was impossible for the moon to be seen there on Tuesday 4th October , and yet Sayid Sistani declared the first of Ramadhan on Wednesday 5th October. This allows us to reasonably assume that either the moon was seen in Najaf, and hence the declaration. In this case, we can say that the scientific data was proven to be invalid as the moon was seen, or at least there was a chance of seeing the moon in Najaf, which placed the city on the same horizon as East Africa where the moon was seen. In either case the scientific calculations are discredited.

Shaikh Arif Abdul Hussein, an eminent scholar and founder of the Al Mahdi Institute for Islamic studies recently stated in a recent lecture relating to this discussion that he had once asked Ayatullah Sistani how Najaf had declared the start of the month when the calculations had shown it was impossible to see the moon. Ayatullah Sistani replied stating that he could not help it if the data was inconsistent with what actually happened.

Furthermore, we find that certain variables cannot be calculated for. For example, astronomers have agreed that atmospheric conditions can affect the sighting of the moon. Indeed if on a particular day it had rained and there was no dust in the atmosphere, it would be possible to sight the new crescent where normally the calculations would state the contrary.

It is therefore apparent that to cite a city shares a horizon with another city places an immense reliance on the scientific calculations relating to the sighting of the moon if the criteria for sharing a horizon is the possibility of sighting the moon. Those people who have reliance on this information can comfortably decide whether their city shares a horizon with the cities that have reported a sighting of the new crescent. Conversely, based on the information presented, many people will find it difficult to rely on the calculations, as the science of these calculations is still in its infancy. An individual must therefore question the application of the criteria that our community has chosen to set and derive personal satisfaction from it.

On the issue of Eid, the scientific data shows that in the UK at sunset on Thursday 3rd November, the moon is less than 1 degree above the horizon, and the proponents of the scientific calculations argue that it is impossible to sight the new crescent in England. As such, UK residents who are convinced by the scientific argument would have to conclude 30 days of Ramadhan and celebrate Eid on Saturday 5th November. For those that have no certainty in the calculations, it would be reasonable for them to say that the moon will be over 30 hours old, and therefore could be seen, as it has not been proved that the moon cannot be seen when it is less than 1 degree above the horizon. Ultimately this would allow them place England on the same horizon as the cities where the moon is seen. The reports of the moon being seen in the Middle East would therefore be valid for them, and they would be able to celebrate Eid on Friday 4th November.

Definition 2 – Cities being on the same horizon as long as they are not too far apart

The statement “not too far apart” appears to be extremely vague, and currently there does not seem to be clarification on what the maximum distance between two cities should be for them to be considered to be on the same horizon. This definition would require further investigation, however it seems that the arguments being presented by bodies such as the World Federation rely on the first definition. For those that rely on the scientific calculations, there is a possibility of the moon being sighted in Milan, Bordeaux and Nice and it would be necessary for them to establish whether these cities fall into the same horizon as the United Kingdom

Following another Marja on the issue of the moon

Many people have been led to believe that there are no choices other than to follow Ayatullah Sistani’s edicts on differing horizons with regards to the sighting of the new moon crescent. This is only true if the followers of Ayatullah Sistani believe him to be the single and most learned jurist in the world. For those that except Sayid Sistani as the ‘A’alam’, his edict on this issue of the moon is not Ehtiyat Wujubi (obligatory based on precaution), and therefore there is no facility to refer to another Marja.

However, if a person does Tab’eedh, the individual has a number of choices. Before discussing the options, it is necessary to reacquaint with the rules regarding Taqleed. The following is an extract from “Islamic Laws” by Ayatullah Sistani:

3. There are three ways of identifying a Mujtahid, and the A'alam:
(i) when a person is certain that a particular person is a Mujtahid, or the most learned one. For this, he should be a learned person himself, and should possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'alam;
(ii) when two persons, who are learned and just and possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or the A'alam, confirm that a person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that two other learned and just persons do not contradict them. In fact, being a Mujt ahid or an A'lam can also be established by a statement of only one trusted and reliable person;
(iii) when a number of learned persons who possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'lam, certify that a particular person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that one is satisfied by their statement.

4. If one generally knows that the verdicts of Mujtahids do vary in day to day matters, and also that some of the Mujtahids are more capable than the others, but is unable to identify the most learned one, then he should act on precaution based on t heir verdicts. And if he is unable to act on precaution, then he should follow a Mujtahid he supposes to be the most learned. And if decides that they are all of equal stature, then he has a choice.

As the majority of people are not qualified to identify the most learned, they must follow items (ii) and (iii) of the above criteria. This however places a dependency on learned scholars to determine the A’alam. Historically, this criteria has been very easy to follow. In the time of Sayid al Khoei and Sayid al Hakim, the vast majority of learned scholars meeting the above criteria had a consensus on the A’alam jurist and accordingly Sayid Al Hakim and Sayid al Khoei were regarded as the A’alam in their times.

Since then however, a number of factors have changed. Today, there are many learned scholars, who are jurists in their own rights who regard Ayatullah Sistani as the A’lam. There are also many eminent, pious and learned scholars who regard Ayatullah Wahid Khorasani as A’alam. Similarly, there are many pious jurists who support that Ayatullah Lankarani, Aytaullah Khamenei and Ayatullah Tabrizi are A’alam. Since many of us individually do not have the qualifications to determine the A’alam, we must rely on options (ii) and (iii) of the above criteria. Due to the differences however, it becomes very difficult to have certainty in which Jurist is the most learned. As many of the leading Marajah that have been vetted as A’alam by other learned scholars, it is reasonable to assume that all have same level of ilm, and in effect are equally A’alam. On this basis, people have the option to do Tab’eedh.
Tab’eedh, very simply, is a procedure where one chooses any of the equally learned maraja’ on any issue. Article 4 of ‘Islamic Laws’ states “And if decides that they are all of equal stature, then he has a choice.” Literally this allows the individual to mix and match on any fatwa of those jurists he believes to be equally A’alam. Tab’eedh should not be confused with ehtiyat (to act on precaution) as ehtiyat is for the person who is unable to decide who is the A’alam. Tab’eedh is an option for those who deem all the maraja’ to be equal.

Shaikh Arif argued in a recent lecture that it is absurd for any individual to act on the premise that one jurist is the A’alam in this day and age. Most individuals are unlikely to meet the first criteria of article 3 of ‘Islamic Laws’ and due to the diverse opinions of the scholars, it is impossible to determine the A’alam under criteria (ii) and (iii). Ultimately, an individual can choose any marja’ on the issue of the new moon if they have understood the concept of Tab’eedh and have validated the various issues discussed above.

It is therefore possible, on the edicts relating to the start of the month, for families who wish to celebrate Eid together to follow another marja’ who believes in the unity of horizons or the sharing of the night.

To conclude, each individual has the facility to make his or her own choices. We are the mujtahid when it comes to the issue of Taqleed and also for Tab’eedh. No one should be fooled into thinking that a particular body must be followed simply because the majority of communities follow them. Allah (SWT) has blessed us with intellect, and it is our responsibility to use this gift. The arguments have been presented, and it is now our decisions that we must follow.

This article is neither intended to bring disunity nor to challenge the edicts of his eminence Ayatullah Sistani. The section discussing the science does not challenge the fatwa’s of Sayid Sistani but rather the application of the fatwas on the basis that dubious facts cannot be the basis for fiqh. Ultimately, each person must make his or her choice, and inshallah this will be accepted by Allah SWT. As this article has not been written by an Aalim or a jurist, all readers are requested to seek reassurance and guidance from the learned Ulema we have been blessed with in this country. These include, but are not limited to:

Ayatullah Sayid Fadhil Milani
Shaikh Bahmanpoor
Shaikh Arif Abdul Hussain

We pray to Allah to guide us all, and to hasten the re-appearance of our twelfth Imam who will bring a conclusion to all the matters we dispute.

And finally, all praise is due to Allah the lord of the worlds

[SpIzo]

Servant of Mehdi, on Sep 18 2008, 02:36 AM, said:

Individuals interested in listening to the full lecture can do so at www.almuntazar.com,

You mean www.almuntazar.org which redirects to http://www.ksmnet.org/. almuntazar.com is a different site.

[huda]

Servant of Mehdi, on Sep 17 2008, 09:06 PM, said:

Shaikh Arif argued in a recent lecture that it is absurd for any individual to act on the premise that one jurist is the A'alam in this day and age.

Alhamdulillah. That was presented very nicely. Btw, I do tab'eed in taqleed. I know about 20 people who do it. Most people don't even know what it is. I am glad our 'Ulama are explaining this option to people. I pray it becomes more popular.

[Servant of Mehdi]

SpIzo, on Sep 18 2008, 02:56 AM, said:

You mean www.almuntazar.org which redirects to http://www.ksmnet.org/. almuntazar.com is a different site.

Salamun Alaykum. Thanks for the correction. I recieved the article from an email from a friend who practices tab'eed. Anyway Sister your a well respected member of the forums, do you know people that do tab'eed, which Marja they consider equal?.

huda, on Sep 18 2008, 03:31 AM, said:

Alhamdulillah. That was presented very nicely. Btw, I do tab'eed in taqleed. I know about 20 people who do it. Most people don't even know what it is. I am glad our 'Ulama are explaining this option to people. I pray it becomes more popular.

Which Marja do you consider equal?

[SpIzo]

Servant of Mehdi, on Sep 18 2008, 10:38 AM, said:

Anyway Sister your a well respected member of the forums, do you know people that do tab'eed, which Marja they consider equal?.

Wa Alaykum Salam,

Unfortunately brother, I don't know anyone personally who does tab'eed.

Allah Knows Best.