Fiqh of Ramadaan – 12/30
Things that Invalidate the Fast

Things that invalidate the fast are as follows:

1- Intercourse

This is the most serious and the most sinful of the things that invalidate the fast.

Whoever has intercourse during the day in Ramadaan deliberately and of his or her own free will, in which the two circumcised parts meet and the tip of the penis disappears in either of the two passages, has invalidated his fast, whether he ejaculates or not. Allaah (the most High) said:

{أُحِلَّ لَكُمْ لَيْلَةَ الصِّيَامِ الرَّفَثُ إِلَى نِسَآئِكُمْ هُنَّ لِبَاسٌ لَّكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ لِبَاسٌ لَّهُنَّ عَلِمَ الله أَنَّكُمْ كُنتُمْ تَخْتانُونَ أَنفُسَكُمْ فَتَابَ عَلَيْكُمْ وَعَفَا عَنكُمْ فَالآنَ بَاشِرُوهُنَّ وَابْتَغُواْ مَا كَتَبَ الله لَكُمْ وَكُلُواْ وَاشْرَبُواْ حَتَّى يَتَبَيَّنَ لَكُمُ الْخَيْطُ الأَبْيَضُ مِنَ الْخَيْطِ الأَسْوَدِ مِنَ الْفَجْرِ ثُمَّ أَتِمُّواْ الصِّيَامَ إِلَى الَّليْلِ}

{It has been made permissible for you the night preceding fasting to go to your wives [for sexual relations]. They are clothing for you and you are clothing for them. Allah knows that you used to deceive yourselves, so He accepted your repentance and forgave you. So now, have relations with them and seek that which Allah has decreed for you. And eat and drink until the white thread of dawn becomes distinct to you from the black thread [of night]. Then complete the fast until the sunset} ([1])

Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah said:

((فأذن في المباشرة فعُقل من ذلك: أن المراد: الصيام من المباشرة، والأكل والشرب... ))

((So He permitted intercourse (during the night) from which it is understood that the meaning of Siyaam (fasting) is to fast or abstain from intercourse, eating, and drinking)) ([2])

Hence intercourse during the day in Ramadaan, for the one who is not excused, is Haraam and an invalidator of the fast, due to evidence from the Book, the Sunnah and the Ijmaa.

As for the Book, then it is what’s mentioned in the verse above.

As for the Sunnah, Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) narrates: ((A man came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said, “I am doomed, O Messenger of Allaah!” He said, “Why are you doomed?” He said, “I had intercourse with my wife (during the day) in Ramadaan”….)) ([3]). And the Prophet (ﷺ) agreed with him, meaning, he too considered this act as a cause of doom.

As for the Ijmaa’, then Ibn al-Mundhir rahimahullah said:

((ولم يختلف أهل العلم أن الله - عز وجل - حرَّم على الصائم في نهار الصوم: الرَّفث: وهو الجماع، والأكل والشرب))

((The Scholars have not differed on the fact that Allaah – the mighty and sublime – has prohibited ar-Rafath during the day for a fasting person, and it means sexual intercourse, as well as eating and drinking.)) ([4])

Imaam Ibn Hazm rahimahullah said:

((واتفقوا على أن الأكل لما يُغَذِّي من الطعام مما يستأنف إدخاله في الفم، والشرب، والوطء حرام ... ))

((And they have agreed upon the fact that consuming anything that gives nourishment such as food and drink that are taken by mouth, as well as intercourse, are Haraam…)) ([5])

So when a fasting person has intercourse, his fast becomes invalid, whether it is the obligatory fast or the voluntary fast. Additionally, if it was an obligatory fast, then it is obligatory upon him to make up this fast as well as offer an expiation for it, due to the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu):

((بينما نحن جلوس عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، إذ جاءه رجل فقال: يا رسول الله هلكت. قال: «ما لك؟» قال: وقعت على امرأتي وأنا صائم، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: «هل تجد رقبة تعتقها؟» قال: لا، قال: «فهل تستطيع أن تصوم شهرين متتابعين»، قال: لا، فقال: «فهل تجد إطعام ستين مسكينا». قال: لا، قال: فمكث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، فبينا نحن على ذلك أتي النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم بعرق فيها تمر - والعرق المكتل - قال: «أين السائل؟» فقال: أنا، قال: «خذها، فتصدق به» فقال الرجل: أعلى أفقر مني يا رسول الله؟ فوالله ما بين لابتيها - يريد الحرتين - أهل بيت أفقر من أهل بيتي، فضحك النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى بدت أنيابه، ثم قال: «أطعمه أهلك»))

((While we were sitting with the Prophet (ﷺ), a man came and said, “O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), I am doomed." Allaah's Messenger (ﷺ) asked, “Why are you doomed?” He replied “I had sexual intercourse with my wife while I was fasting [in another narration: during Ramadaan].” Allaah's Messenger (ﷺ) asked him, “Can you afford to manumit a slave?” He replied in the negative. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) asked him, “Can you fast for two successive months?” He replied in the negative. The Prophet (ﷺ) asked him, “Can you afford to feed sixty poor people?” He replied in the negative. The Prophet (ﷺ) kept silent and while we were in that state, a big basket full of dates was brought to the Prophet (ﷺ). He asked, “Where is the questioner?” He replied, "I (am here)." The Prophet (ﷺ) said (to him), "Take this (basket of dates) and give it in charity." The man said, "Should I give it to a person poorer than me? By Allah; there is no family between its (i.e. Medina's) two mountains which is poorer than me." The Prophet (ﷺ) smiled till his premolar teeth became visible and then said, “Feed your family with it.”)) ([6]).

In another narration, it says:

(( ... فأُتي بِعَرِقٍ فيه تمر – قدر خمسة عشر صاعاً – وقال فيه: ((كُلْهُ أنت وأهل بيتك وصُمْ يوماً واستغفر الله))

((Then a huge basket containing fifteen saa's of dates was brought to him. He (ﷺ) said: “Eat it yourself and your family and keep one fast (for the day you had intercourse) and beg pardon of Allah”)) ([7])

A similar narration is also narrated from Aa’ishah in Saheeh Muslim.

We can extract the following benefits from this hadeeth:

First: Intercourse during the day in Ramadaan is among the most heinous of acts that become the cause of one’s doom, because the man said: “I am doomed” and in another narration, he said: “I am burnt”, and the Prophet (ﷺ) affirmed his saying.

Second: Whoever has intercourse with his spouse during the day in Ramadaan, while he is not traveling and is healthy, then four things become obligatory on him to do:

a)   Offer the binding Kaffaarah (expiation); the expiation, in order, is to: Free a believing slave, and if he cannot find or afford it, then: fast for two consecutive months without missing any fast in between without a valid excuse. And valid reasons include: The days of two Eeds, The days of Tashreeq (the three days following eed al-adha) (because fasting in these days is not permissible), or other reasons like: Sickness, Traveling without the intention to forsake fasting, Menstruation and Nifaas etc. And if one breaks even one fast during the course of this two months without a valid reason, then he will have to start fasting all over again from the beginning, in order to achieve successiveness.

And if he is unable to fast for two consecutive months, then he should feed sixty poor people, giving each of them half a saa’ of the local staple food (i.e. 1.5 kg).

b)  He must observe abstinence for the remainder of the day, in which he had the intercourse, because he broke his fast without a valid excuse, so there is no meaning of his eating and drinking, nor is it a concession that he is taking advantage of.

c)   He has to make up the day in place of the day in which he had the intercourse, due to the narration of Abu Dawood: ((And fast one day)).

d)  He is obliged to seek repentance and forgiveness from Allaah, due to the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ) in the narration of Abu Dawood: ((And beg pardon of Allaah)).

Third: The kaffaarah (expiation) is obligatory on the one who had intercourse during the day of Ramadaan, deliberately, without an excuse, no matter he ejaculated or not.

Fourth: The Prophet (ﷺ) was a man of excellent characteristics and mercy, as he did not punish or even get angry at this man for his crime, on the contrary, he (ﷺ) smiled when the man said: “Should I give it to a person poorer than me”, to which the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “Feed your family with it”.

Fifth: The one who has intercourse on multiple days during the daytime in Ramadaan, then he has to offer multiple expiations, one for each day, and also make up the number of days he had intercourse in ([8]) ([9]).

2- Willing Ejaculation of Semen  

That may be through kissing, touching, masturbation, or lustfully looking for the purpose of pleasure and ejaculation, or anything else ([10]), because this is a part of sexual desire, and the fast is not valid if it is not avoided.

Due to the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

((كل عمل ابن آدم يضاعف الحسنة بعشر أمثالها إلى سبعمائة ضعف، قال الله تعالى: ((إلا الصوم؛ فإنه لي وأنا أجزي به، يدع شهوته وطعامه من أجلي)). ولفظ البخاري: ((يترك شهوته، وطعامه، وشرابه من أجلي، الصيام لي وأنا أجزي به، والحسنة بعشر أمثالها))

((Every deed of the son of Adam will be multiplied for him, receiving anywhere from tenfold up to as many as seven hundredfold rewards (for each deed). Allaah the most high said: {With the exception of fasting, for it is for me and I will give the reward for it, for one abandons his desires and food for My sake.})) And the words of al-Bukhaari are: ((He abandons his desires, his food, and his drink for My sake; fasting is for me and I will give the reward for it, and a good deed is rewarded with ten times its reward.)) ([11])

However, if kissing and touching is not associated with the ejaculation of manee (semen) then the fast is not invalidated, due to the hadeeth of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha):

((كان النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - يُقَبِّل ويُباشر وهو صائم، وكان أملككم لإرْبِهِ))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) would kiss and fondle while fasting (in one narration: during Ramadaan), and he had the most control of all of you over his desires)) ([12])

And Umar ibn al-Khattaab (radiallah anhu) narrates:

هَشَشْت فقبَّلت وأنا صائم، فقلت: يارسول الله! صنعت اليوم أمراً عظيمًا، قبَّلْتُ وأنا صائم، قال: ((أرأيت لو مَضْمَضْتَ من الماء وأنت صائم؟)) قلت: لا بأس به، قال: ((فَمَهْ؟))

((I got excited, so I kissed (my wife) while I was fasting, I then said: O Messenger of Allaah, I have done a big deed today; I kissed while I was fasting. He (ﷺ) said: “What do you think if you rinse your mouth with water while you are fasting?” I said to him: “There is no harm in it”. He (ﷺ) said: “Then what’s wrong with this?”)) ([13])

However, if the one fasting fears that he might ejaculate by kissing or otherwise, or he fears that he might advance into intercourse due to lack of control in his sexual desires and weakness of his Eemaan, then it is Haraam for him, in this case, to kiss or fondle, as an attempt to block the means and protect his fast from invalidating ([14]) and to prevent himself from falling into the disobedience of Allaah. This is why, and Allaah knows best, the Prophet (ﷺ) forbade the young man who asked him about fondling (with one’s wife) while fasting, and he allowed it to an older person. Hence, Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) narrates:

((أن رجلاً سأل النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - عن المباشرة للصائم فرخّص له، وأتاه آخر فسأله؟ فنهاه، فإذا الذي رخّص له شيخ، والذي نهاه شاب))

((A man asked the Prophet (ﷺ) whether one who was fasting could embrace (his wife) and he gave him permission; but when another man came to him, and asked him (the same question), he forbade him. The one to whom he gave permission was an old man and the one whom he forbade was a youth.)) ([15])

And this is also why the Prophet (ﷺ) forbade a fasting person from sniffing water into the nose (during wudoo) excessively due to the fear of water going into the stomach, which will invalidate the fast. So anything without which an obligatory act cannot be completed, is also obligatory.

As for ejaculation while sleeping (i.e. seeing a wet dream) or through mere thinking without acting upon it or intending it, this does not invalidate the fast, because the wet dream (Ihtilaam) is something a person has no power over, and merely thinking about it without acting it or intending it, is forgiven ([16]), due to the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ):

((إن الله تعالى تجاوز لأمتي عما حدّثت به أنفسها ما لم تعمل أو تتكلم به))

((Verily Allaah has forgiven my Ummah for what comes to their mind, so long as it is not put into action or words)) ([17])

3- Eating or Drinking  

This invalidates the fast due to evidence from the Book, the Sunnah and the Ijmaa’.

As for the book, then Allaah says:

{وَكُلُواْ وَاشْرَبُواْ حَتَّى يَتَبَيَّنَ لَكُمُ الْخَيْطُ الأَبْيَضُ مِنَ الْخَيْطِ الأَسْوَدِ مِنَ الْفَجْرِ ثُمَّ أَتِمُّواْ الصِّيَامَ إِلَى اللَّيْلِ}

{And eat and drink until the white thread of dawn becomes distinct to you from the black thread [of night]. Then complete the fast until the sunset} ([18])

As for the Sunnah, the Prophet (ﷺ) said in a Hadeeth Qudsi:

(( ... يترك شهوته، وطعامه، وشرابه من أجلي، الصيام لي وأنا أجزي به، والحسنة بعشر أمثالها))

((… (Allaah says: My slave) leaves his desires, his food, and his drink, for the sake of Me. (Know) Fasting is for me, and I will give the reward for it. And every good deed has ten times its reward)) ([19])

As for the Ijmaa’, the Scholars have unanimously agreed that the consumption of anything from food and drink that is used as food and drink invalidates the fast, as for the things that are not used as food and drink, then the majority of the Scholars are of the view that it also invalidates the fast ([20]).

Anything that enters the stomach through the nasal passage, such as intentionally sniffing water deep into the nose, also invalidates the fast, due to the hadeeth of Laqeet bin Sabirah (radiallah anhu) who said, I asked: Messenger of Allaah, tell me about wudoo He said:

((أسبغ الوضوء، وخلل بين الأصابع، وبالغ في الاستنشاق إلا أن تكون صائماً))

((Perform the Wudoo' well, cleanse the base of your fingers and sniff water deep into the nose except when you are observing fast)) ([21])

This points to the fact that the nasal passage opens into the stomach ([22]). As for sniffing the different kinds of smells or scents then it does not invalidate the fast because it does not have any substance which may reach the stomach ([23]). However, there is a difference of opinion on inhaling (not just smelling) Bukhoor (incense) or steam, as according to one opinion, it may invalidate the fast because these have particles which may reach the stomach ([24]), so a fasting person should avoid them, and Allaah knows best ([25]).

4- Anything that resembles eating and drinking  

These are two things:

First: Infusion of blood into the fasting person:

Such as when a person suffers from loss of blood or he is bleeding, and he is in need of blood, and he is administered some blood in his body, then this is something that invalidates the fast. That is because blood is the ultimate source of nourishment through food and drink, and when this is achieved by the person through the direct infusion of blood in his body, it invalidates the fast. Therefore, the body is running on blood, and if the blood were to diminish, the person would die. And blood is formed from food and drink, so based on this, it is similar to food and drink. Therefore, when food and drink are lacking, the body becomes weak and the person may even die if he is deprived of it completely. The same is true for blood.

Second: Receiving via a needle (as in the case of a drip) nourishing substances which take the place of food and drink:

When a person receives a nourishing substance through injections or via a needle, it invalidates the fast, because this is the same as food and drink.

As for injections that are not an alternative to food and drink; rather they are for the purpose of medical treatment – such as penicillin, insulin, treatments to energize the body, or vaccinations – they do not affect the fast, whether they are intramuscular or intravenous, because they are neither food nor drink and they do not also come under the same meaning as food and drink, so the ruling of food and drink do not apply to them ([26]).

But to be on the safe side, these injections may be administered at night.

Kidney dialysis, which requires removal of blood to clean it, then returning it with the addition to the blood of some chemical and nutritional substances, such as sugars and salts and the like, is regarded as invalidating the fast ([27]).

Saline solutions that are given to some patients intravenously do invalidate the fast, because they come under the heading of nutrients, as they contain salts and fluids that enter the bloodstream and benefit the body.

Defining what is regarded as nutritional and non-nutritional, Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: ((The scholars regarded as invalidating the fast everything that comes under the same heading as food and drink, such as nutritional injections.

That which energizes the body or heals sickness is not regarded as nutritional; rather nutritional injections are an alternative to food and drink. Based on that, all injections that are not alternatives to food and drink do not invalidate the fast, whether they are administered intravenously or via injection in the thigh or elsewhere on the body.)) ([28]) ([29]).

Using Eye-drops and Ear-drops while fasting:

There is nothing wrong with the fasting person using ear drops and eye drops, and his fast is not invalidated by that. Some scholars are of the view that it invalidates the fast if the taste of it can be felt in the throat, so in order to be on the safe side it is better to avoid that during the day in Ramadaan, and if the one who feels the taste of it in his throat repeats that fast, then that is better.

It says in a statement of the Islamic Fiqh Council (as mentioned above):

((The following things are not regarded as breaking the fast: eye drops, ear drops, having the ears syringed, nose drops and nasal sprays, so long as one avoids swallowing anything that may reach the throat))

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

((Cleaning the teeth with toothpaste or a siwaak does not invalidate the fast, but the fasting person must avoid letting any of that reach his stomach, but if it happens without him intending it to, then he does not have to make up the fast. The same applies to eye drops and ear drops. They do not break the fast according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions, but if he finds the taste of the drops in his throat, he should make up the fast in order to be on the safe side, but it is not obligatory, because these are not openings through which food and drink enter the body. But nose drops are not permissible, because the nose is an opening through which food and drink may enter the body. Hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Snuff water up into the nose deeply, unless you are fasting. Narrated by al-Tirmidhi (788) and Abu Dawood (142); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.

The one who does that has to make up the fast because of this hadeeth and similar reports, if he finds the taste of that in his throat)) ([30])

He also said:

((The correct view is that drops do not break the fast, although there is a difference of opinion among the scholars and some of them said that if the taste of them reaches the throat then they do break the fast. But the correct view is that they do not break the fast at all, because the eye is not an opening through which food reaches the body. But if the one who uses them and finds the taste of that in his throat repeats the fast in order to be on the safe side and to avoid an area of scholarly difference of opinion, there is nothing wrong with that. But the correct view is that they do not break the fast whether they are eye drops or ear drops)) ([31]) ([32])

Using Asthma Medication while fasting:

There are many kinds of medication for asthma, some of which break the fast and some do not. The most well-known of these medicines and treatments are puffers, oxygen, vaporizers and capsules.

1-   Puffer: The puffer uses a compressed gas that is used by the patient, which reaches the lungs via the trachea to expand the lungs. It is not food or drink or anything resembling them. The scholars of the Standing Committee have ruled that the fast is not broken by using this kind of medicine. This is also the ruling of Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen and most of our scholars ([33]).

2-   Oxygen: With regard to oxygen, it too is neither food nor drink. Based on this, it may be used when fasting with no problems.

3-   Vaporizer: With regard to vaporizers, these are usually devices which change the medicine – which is usually carried in a sodium base – from liquid to gas and fine particles. The medicine is placed in a small vessel and when the device is activated, air is blown at high speed which causes the medicine to turn into a gaseous form, so it can be inhaled by the patient either via a mask that is placed over the mouth, or by means of a small tube that is placed inside the mouth.

It is inevitable that some drops of water and salt will reach the stomach via this device, and the patient will not be able to avoid that. Based on this, if he uses this method, he should break his fast and he should make up that day later on.

4-   Capsule: Capsules contain the medicine in the form of a fine powder. These capsules are placed inside a special device which crushes the capsules in order to release the medicine, which is inhaled from the device via the mouth. Using these capsules invalidates the fast, because some of this powder mixes with the saliva and goes down into the stomach.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: Some people have asthma and need to use puffers when fasting. What is the ruling on that? He replied:

((Some people are affected by constriction of breathing which is known as asthma. We ask Allaah to keep us and them safe and sound. Two types of medicine are used, one of which is known as capsules. This type breaks the fast because it is a powder that has substance and can enter the stomach. The fasting person should not use it in Ramadaan except in the case of necessity. If he uses it in the case of necessity then he has broken his fast and may eat and drink for the rest of the day, and make up another day in its place. If it so happens that this sickness is ongoing, then he is like an old man who has to feed one poor person for each day, and he does not have to fast.

The second type of asthma medicine is a gas which contains nothing but air which opens the airways so that the person can breathe easily. This does not break the fast; the fasting person may use it and his fast is valid)) ([34])

The Shaykh (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: There is a person who has asthma and cannot read Qur’aan without using oxygen. Can he use it during the day in Ramadaan?

He replied:

((If it is not essential for him to use oxygen, then it is better for him not to use it. The fasting person is not obliged to read Qur’aan such that we would say that he should use it in order to read Qur’aan. But some of those who are afflicted with this sickness say, “I cannot stop using it, and if I do not use it I fear that I may not be able to breathe.” So we say there is nothing wrong with using this oxygen, because according to what we have heard it does not reach the stomach, rather it reaches the veins and makes it easy to breathe. If that is the case, there is nothing wrong with it.

But there is a type of pill that is given to asthma patients, which is a capsule that contains powder. It is not permissible to use this when observing an obligatory fast, because when it is mixed with saliva it reaches the stomach, in which case it breaks the fast. If a person has to use it, then he should break his fast and make up that day later on. If he has to use it all the time, then he should break his fast and feed one poor person for each day. And Allaah knows best)) ([35])

And Allaah knows best ([36]).

It is appropriate to quote here the text of a statement made by the Islamic Fiqh Council concerning things that invalidate the fast in the medical field.

The session of the Islamic Fiqh Council held during its tenth conference in Jeddah, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 23-28 Safar 1418 AH (28 June-3 July 1997 CE) – after studying the research presented to the Council on the topic of what invalidates the fast in the medical field, and the studies, research and recommendations issued by the ninth Medical Fiqh Conference held by the Islamic Association for Medical Sciences, in cooperation with the Council and other bodies in Casablanca, Morocco, 9-12 Safar 1418 AH (14-17 June 1997 CE), and after listening to the discussion that took place on this topic with the participation of fuqaha’ and doctors, taking into account the evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the views of the fuqaha’ –

has determined the following:

The following things do not have any effect on the fast:

·        Eye drops, ear drops, ear syringing, nose drops and nasal sprays – so long as one avoids swallowing any material that may reach the throat.

·        Tablets or lozenges that are placed beneath the tongue for the treatment of angina pectoris etc., so long as one avoids swallowing any material that reaches the throat.

·        Vaginal pessaries, douching, use of a speculum, or internal digital examination.

·        Introduction of a scope or coil (IUD), etc., into the uterus.

·        Introduction of a scope or catheter into the urethra (male of female), or injection of dyes for diagnostic imaging, or of medication, or cleaning of the bladder.

·        Drilling of teeth (prior to filling), extraction or polishing of teeth, using a miswaak or toothbrush, so long as one avoids swallowing any material that reaches the throat.

·        Rinsing, gargling or applying topical treatment in the mouth, so long as one avoids swallowing any material that reaches the throat.

·        Injections, whether subcutaneous, intra-muscular or intra-venous – with the exception of those used for purposes of nutrition.

·        Oxygen.

·        Anesthetics, so long as they do not supply nutrition to the patient.

·        Medicines absorbed through the skin, such as creams, lotions and patches used to administer medication through the skin.

·        Introduction of a catheter into the veins in order to examine or treat the vessels of the heart or other organs.

·        Laparoscopy for the purpose of diagnosis or surgical treatment of the abdominal organs.

·        Biopsies of the liver and other organs, so long as this is not accompanied by the administration of nutrients.

·        Gastroscopy, so long as this is not accompanied by the administration of nutrients.

·        Introduction of medicine or instruments into the brain or spinal cord.

·        Involuntary vomiting (as opposed to self-induced vomiting) ([37]).

5- Vomiting Deliberately  

Deliberately vomiting invalidates the fast, because of the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

((من ذرعه القيء فليس عليه قضاء، ومن استقى عمداً فليقضِ))

((The one who cannot help vomiting does not have to make up the fast, but the one who vomits deliberately has to make up the fast)) ([38])

Imaam Ibn al-Mundhir (rahimahullah) said:

((وأجمعوا على أنه لا شيء على الصائم إذا ذرعه القيء))

((The Scholars are unanimously agreed that the one who vomits involuntarily does not have to do anything (as his fast is valid).))

And he said:

((وأجمعوا على إبطال صوم من استقى عامداً))

((And the Scholars are unanimously agreed that the fast of one who vomits deliberately is invalidated)) ([39])

Imaam Ibn Qudaamah said:

((معنى استقاء: تقيأ مستدعياً للقيء، وذرعه: خرج من غير اختيار منه، فمن استقاء فعليه القضاء؛ لأن صومه يفسد به، ومن ذرعه القيء فلا شيء عليه، وهذا قول عامة أهل العلم، قال الخطابي: لا أعلم بين أهل العلم فيه اختلافاً))

((What is meant by making oneself vomit is vomiting deliberately, and what is meant by “cannot help vomiting” is when it happens involuntarily. The one who makes himself vomit has to make up the fast because his fast has been spoiled, but the one who cannot help it does not have to do anything. This is the view of the majority of scholars. Al-Khattaabi said: I do not know of any difference of opinion among the scholars)) ([40])

Whoever vomits deliberately by sticking his finger in his throat, pressing his stomach, deliberately smelling something nasty or persisting in looking at something that makes him vomit, has to make up his fast later on.

If he vomits without his deliberate attempt, then this does not harm his fast. And if his gorge rises, he should not suppress it, because that will harm him ([41]).

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) said:

((If a person feels that his stomach is queasy and that its contents will be expelled, do we say that you have to try to stop it? No. Or that you have to make it happen? No. Rather we say: Take a middle approach – do not make yourself vomit and do not try to stop it, because if you make yourself vomit you will break the fast, but if you try to stop it, that will harm you. So leave it, and if it comes out without any action on your part, then it will not matter and that will not break your fast)) ([42])

Same is true for regurgitation, which is when a partly digested food or drink comes back up from the stomach to the mouth. If it comes up from one’s throat then returns back into the stomach involuntarily, the fast is not invalidated. But if he deliberately swallows it, then that invalidates the fast. As for when it comes up to his throat without any deliberate attempt from him and he spits it out, this too will not harm his fast, and all praise belongs to Allaah ([43]).

6- The blood of Menses and Nifaas

When a woman sees the blood of her period or nifaas (post-partum bleeding), her fast becomes invalid even if that is one moment before sunset.

Because of the hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (radiallah anhu) that the Prophet (ﷺ) said:

((أليس إذا حاضت لم تصلِّ ولم تَصُمْ؟))

((Is it not the case that when she gets her period, she does not pray or fast?)) ([44])

If a woman feels that her period has started but no blood comes out until after sunset, her fast is still valid ([45]).

If the bleeding of a woman who is menstruating or in nifaas ceases at night and she has the intention of fasting, then dawn comes before she does ghusl, the view of all the scholars is that her fast is valid ([46]).

And it has passed before that women going through menses and Nifaas have to make up their fasts later on, but they do not have to make up the prayers, due to the hadeeth of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha), she said:

((كُنَّا نحيض على عهد رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم -،فنؤمر بقضاء الصوم ولا نؤمر بقضاء الصلاة))

((We used to menstruate during the lifetime of Allaah’s Messenger (ﷺ); we were commanded to make up the fast, but we were not commanded to make up the prayer)) ([47])

It is preferable for a woman to keep to her natural cycle and to accept that which Allaah has decreed for her, and not to take any medicine to prevent her period. She should accept what Allaah has decreed for her of not fasting during her period, and make up those days later on. This is what the Mothers of the Believers and the women of the Salaf used to do ([48]). In addition, it has been medically proven that these means of preventing menstruation are harmful and many women have suffered menstrual irregularities as a result. If a woman takes pills and her period stops as a result, that is fine, she can fast and her fast is acceptable.

7- The intention of breaking the fast

According to some Scholars, if a person intends to break the fast and makes the firm determination to do so, when he is fasting, then he does not find anything with which to break his fast and he changes his mind again, he has broken his fast and he has to make up that day. This is based on the fact that actions are by intentions and everyone will have what he intended for. The Prophet (ﷺ) said:

((Actions are but by intention. Everyone will get what he intended for)) ([49])

Niyyah is a pillar of Siyaam, so long as the intention is accompanied by the fast, the fast is valid, but when one intends to break his fast, his intention got severed and he invalidated his fast because of that. Hence, if one intends that his fast is no longer valid, for him is what he intended, and once it is invalidated, there is no returning back and he has to make it up. This is the official position of the Hanbali Madhab, one of the strong narrations in Shaafi’ee Madhab (if not the mu’tamad position), one of the narrations in Maaliki Madhab and this is also the madhab of Abu Thawr and Ibn Hazm ([50]).

Al-Mardaawi al-Hanbali rahimahullah said:

((معنى قولهم: من نوى الإفطار أفطر: أي صار كمن لم ينوِ، لا كمن أكل، فلو كان في نفلٍ ثم عاد ونواه جاز، نص عليه، وكذا لو كان عن نذرٍ، أو كفارةٍ، أو قضاءٍ، فقطع نيته ثم نوى نفلاً جاز، ولو قلب نية نذرٍ وقضاءٍ إلى نفلٍ كان حكمه حكم من انتقل من فرض صلاة إلى نفلها على ما تقدم في باب نية الصلاة))

((The meaning of their saying: “Whoever intended to break his fast, has broken his fast” is that he becomes like the one who did not make the intention, not like the one who ate. This is true even for the one who is fasting a voluntary fast, but he changes his mind and re-forms the intention for a voluntary fast, that is permissible. This is narrated in the madhab. Similarly, if he was fasting to fulfill a vow, or as an expiation, or to make up the missed fasts of Ramadaan, and he breaks his intention then forms the intention of a voluntary fast (instead of the obligatory ones), that is permissible. Hence, if he changes his intention of the fast for nazr and qaza i.e. from obligatory to voluntary fast, then his ruling is the same as that of the one who changes his intention from an obligatory prayer to a voluntary prayer, as is mentioned before in the chapter: “Intention of Prayer”)) ([51])

This is also the opinion favored by Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen. However, he did not necessitate invalidation of the fast if the person is hesitant or he specifies a condition, contrary to the Hanbali position. Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah said:

((…when he intended to break the fast, he broke his fast. But if he had said ‘If I find water I will drink, otherwise I will carry on fasting,’ and he did not find any water, then his fast is valid, because his intention was not definite, rather breaking the fast was conditional upon finding something, but he did not find that thing, so his initial intention remained in effect.)) ([52])

According to the second opinion, the intention of breaking the fast does not invalidate the fast as long as the person has not done something that invalidates the fast such as: eating or drinking etc. This is the official position of the Shaafi’ee Madhab, the Maaliki Madhab and the Hanafi Madhab ([53]) and it is one of the narrations in Hanbali Madhab ([54]), and Allaah knows best.

In any case, it is still better to make up this day to be on the safe side.

8- Apostatizing from Islaam

Whoever becomes an apostate and leaves the fold of Islaam through his words, actions, beliefs, or doubt, or any of the nullifiers of Islaam, then his fast becomes invalid, in fact, all of his righteous acts become invalid, due to the saying of Allaah:

{لَئِنْ أَشْرَكْتَ لَيَحْبَطَنَّ عَمَلُكَ}

{If you should associate [anything] with Allah, your work would surely become worthless} ([55])

Imaam Ibn Qudaamah said: ((We do not know of any difference of opinion among the Scholars in the fact that the one who apostates from Islaam in the middle of the fast, he has invalidated his fast)) ([56]).

Does cupping (hijaamah) invalidate the fast?

This is one of those issues in which there is a lot of dispute among the Scholars and the Fuqaha. That is due to the presence of a number of seemingly contradictory ahadeeth in this issue, some of which point to one thing while some point to another. This issue is disputed upon in two well-known opinions:

First Opinion: Cupping does not invalidates the fast:

This is the opinion of a number of Sahaabah including: Abdullah bin Mas’ood, Ibn Abbaas, Ibn Umar, Anas bin Maalik, Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas, Al-Husayn bin Ali, Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri, Abu Hurayrah, Aa’ishah, & Zayd bin Arqam, as we will discuss later. And among the Taabi’een, this is the opinion of: Abu Abdur Rahmaan as-Sulami, Mujaahid, Abu Waa’il, Ibn Sireen, Sa’eed bin al-Musayyab, Urwah bin az-Zubayr, Al-Qaasim bin Muhammad, Saalim bin Abdullah, Sa’eed bin Jubayr, Sha’bee, Tawoos, Ikrimah, Ibraaheem an-Nakha’ee & Ataa bin Abi Rabaah (according to one narration from him).

And among the Fiqhi Schools of thought, this is the madhab of: Sufyaan ath-Thawree, Abu Haneefah, Maalik bin Anas, Shaafi’ee, Abu Thawr, Dawood az-Zaahiri and others. And this is also the opinion of Ibn Hazm, and this is what Al-Bukhaari has also inclined towards in his Saheeh. And this is the view favored by Ash-Shawkaani and As-Sana’aani.

Their evidences are as follows:

Evidence # 1: Hadeeth of Ibn Abbaas: “The Prophet was cupped while he was fasting”

Ibn Abbaas (radiallah anhu) narrates:

((أحتجم النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم وهو صائم))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) was cupped while he was fasting)) ([57])

In another wording:

((أحتجم النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم وهو صائم وأحتجم وهو محرم))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) was cupped while he was fasting and he was cupped while he was in Ihraam)) ([58])

In another wording:

((أحتجم النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم وهو صائم محرم))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) was cupped while he was fasting and wearing Ihraam)) ([59])

This hadeeth is Saheeh and is narrated by several people from Ibn Abbaas through several routes.

Evidence # 2: Hadeeth of Anas: “Abu Taybah cupped the Prophet (ﷺ) while he was fasting”

Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu) said:

((مر بنا أبو طبية فقال: «حجمت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وهو صائم»))

((Abu Taybah passed by us and he said: “I cupped the Prophet (ﷺ) while he was fasting”)) ([60])

Evidence # 3: Hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri: “A fasting person was permitted with regard to cupping and kissing”

Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (radiallah anhu) narrates:

((رخص رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم في القبلة وفي الحجامة للصائم))

((The Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) gave the concession to kiss (one’s wife) and do Hijaamah for a fasting person)) ([61])

In another wording, Abu Sa’eed said:

((رُخِّصَ للصائم في الحجامة والقبلة))

((The fasting person was given the concession to do Hijaamah and to kiss (his wife).)) ([62])

This hadeeth is Saheeh. Some Scholars have objected by saying that Ishaaq al-Azraq is alone in narrating it from Sufyaan as Marfoo’ while others have narrated it as the saying of Abu Sa’eed.

This can be answered by saying that Ishaaq al-Azraq is Thiqah and his hadeeth is authenticated by Ad-Daaraqutni and others. Moreover, Ishaaq al-Azraq is not alone in narrating it from Sufyaan, Abu Abdur Rahmaan al-Ashja’ee has also supported him in this as in the second narration. Moreover, it is also narrated through another route from al-Mu’tamar bin Sulemaan from Humayd from Abu al-Mutawakkil, from Abu Sa’eed as Marfoo’ as well ([63]).

Some people objected that the second wording of the hadeeth mentioned above, does not mention that it is from the Prophet, so it is Mawqoof.

The answer to that is, this is in passive form, i.e. Abu Sa’eed said: “Rukhkhisa” (It was made permissible i.e. by the Prophet), not “Rakhkhasa” (He made it permissible). This is an indication that it is from the Prophet (ﷺ) and not the saying of Abu Sa’eed alone.

In addition, the word Rakhkhasa without the passive form would not even make sense because a Sahaabi cannot give the concession to anything by himself, so to say that Abu Sa’eed gave the concession is a mistake. This is why, Shaykh Albaani rahimahullah said:

((إسناده صحيح....وليس صريحا في الوقف بل هو إلى الرفع أقرب لأنه مثل قول الصحابي: أمرنا بكذا ونهينا عن كذا ونحو ذلك فهو مرفوع على الصحيح من أصول الحديث))

((Its chain is Sahee… and it is not clear in being Mawqoof, rather it is more closer to being Marfoo’ because it is similar to the saying of a Sahaabi: “We were commanded to do this” and “We were forbidden from that”, and similar words. Therefore, this is Marfoo’ according to the correct opinion from the Principles of Hadeeth)) ([64])

Therefore, the objection that it is not Marfoo’ is also wrong.

Evidence # 4: Hadeeth of Abdur Rahmaan bin Abi Layla that the Prophet (ﷺ) did not prohibit Hijaamah for the fasting person:

Abdur Rahmaan bin Abi Layla (rahimahullah) narrates:

((حدثني رجل، من أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، «أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم نهى عن الحجامة والمواصلة ولم يحرمهما إبقاء على أصحابه» فقيل له: يا رسول الله، إنك تواصل إلى السحر، فقال: «إني أواصل إلى السحر، وربي يطعمني ويسقيني»))

((A companion from the companions of the Prophet (ﷺ) narrated to me that the Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) prohibited cupping and perpetual fasting, but he had not made them unlawful showing mercy on his Companions. Thereupon he was asked: Messenger of Allaah, you observe perpetual fast till dawn. He replied: I observe perpetual fast till dawn (for) my Lord gives me food and drink.))

In another wording:

((«إنما نهى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عن الوصال في الصيام، والحجامة للصائم» إبقاء على أصحابه ولم يحرمهما))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) prohibited perpetual fasting and cupping for the fasting person as a mercy upon his companions, but he did not declare them unlawful (Haraam))) ([65])

From this hadeeth, we can deduce the following benefits:

1-   The Prophet (ﷺ) deemed it makrooh for his companions to do Hijaamah because of the fear of weakness while fasting, but he did not declare it Haraam.

2-   Cupping while fasting is merely permissible (mubaah) which does not invalidate the fast, as Abu Sa’eed also said in the previous hadeeth, “Its concession was given for the fasting person”, and it is not something that a fasting person is recommended to do.

3-   Both Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri and the Companion in this hadeeth are narrating the ruling to their students after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ), which means this is not something they considered to be abrogated, rather they are informing about the ruling of the Prophet (ﷺ) that he maintained as he left this world.

4-   The Prophet (ﷺ) was the most merciful to his companions, and he did not want any difficulties for his nation.

Evidence # 5: The Athaar of Sahaabah

What further strengthens the view that the permissibility of cupping was the final ruling of the Prophet (ﷺ) is the fact that his companions continued having hijaamah while fasting and giving verdicts in its permissibility even after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ).

1-   Athar of Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas (radiallah anhu):

Ibn Shihaab (rahimahullah) said:

((أن سعد بن أبي وقاص وعبد الله بن عمر كانا يحتجمان وهما صائمان))

((Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas and Abdullah bin Umar used to be cupped while fasting)) ([66])

2-   Athar of Zayd bin Arqam (radiallah anhu)

Yoonus bin Abdullah al-Jarmi narrates from Deenaar who said:

((حجمت زيد بن أرقم وهو صائم))

((I cupped Zayd bin Arqam while he was fasting)) ([67])

3-   Athar of Umm Salamah (radiallah anha)

It is narrated from the servant of Umma Salamah:

((أنه رأي أم سلمة تحتجم وهي صائمة))

((He saw Umm Salamah getting cupped while she was fasting)) ([68])

4-   Athar of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha)

Umm ‘Alqamah said:

((كنا نحتجم عند عائشة ونحن صيام وبنو أخي عائشة فلا تنهاهم))

((We used to be cupped near Aa’ishah while we were fasting, as well as the children or Aa’ishah’s brother, but she did not prohibit them)) ([69])

5-   Athar of Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu)

Maalik narrates from Naafi’ who narrates from Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) that:

((كان يحتجم وهو صائم قال ثم ترك ذلك بعد فكان إذا صام لم يحتجم حتى يفطر))

((He used to be cupped while he was fasting. Later on, he abandoned this practice, so he would not get cupping done until he broke his fast)) ([70])

Ibn Abdil Barr rahimahullah said: ((He only left cupping while fasting later on because of what got into him)) ([71]) meaning, weakness due to old age.

And al-Zarkaani rahimahullah said: ((This was due to the fear of weakness because of old age)) ([72])

6-   Athar of Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu)

Shu’bah and others narrated from Thaabit al-Bunaani who said, I asked Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu)

((أكنتم تكرهون الحجامة للصائم؟ قال: «لا، إلا من أجل الضعف»))

((Did you [i.e., the Companions of the Prophet] dislike cupping for a fasting person?’ He said, ‘No [not for a religious reason], except for fear of weakness.’)) ([73])

Note that Anas (radiallah anhu) has mentioned it as a general ruling of all of the Sahaabah without any exception. So this is like the Ijmaa of Sahaabah.

7-   Athar of Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu)

Thawr bin ‘Afeer narrates that I asked Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) about the fasting person having hijaamah, he said:

((يقولون أفطر الحاجم والمحجوم ولو احتجمت ما باليت أبو هريرة القائل))

((They say that the one cupping and the one being cupped have broken their fast, but if I were to be cupped, I would not mind. (The narrator said) these are the words of Abu Hurayrah) ([74])

And Aasim bin Sulemaan narrates, I asked Abu Hurayrah about a man who is cupped while he is fasting. He said:

ارأيت إن غشي عليه ؟

((What do you think if he loses consciousness?)) ([75])

From the previous narration, we come to know that Abu Hurayrah did not consider Hijaamah to be an invalidator of fast, as for the second narration, then this only points to the fact that if one becomes weak because of hijaamah, it is something undesirable. This also corroborates with the saying of Anas mentioned above.

8-   Athar of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (radiallah anhu)

Humayd narrates from Abu al-Mutawakkil, he asked Abu Sa’eed about cupping for a fasting person, so he said:

((لا بأس بالحجامة للصائم))

((There is nothing wrong with cupping for a fasting person)) ([76])

9-   Athar of Ibn Mas’ood (radiallah anhu)

Muslim bin Sa’eed said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about cupping for a fasting person and he said:

((لا بأس بها))

((There is nothing wrong with it)) ([77])

10-   Athar of Al-Hasan bin Ali (radiallah anhuma)

Sha’bee rahimahullah narrates:

((الحسن بن علي احتجم وهو صائم))

((Al-Hasan bin Ali got cupped while he was fasting)) ([78])

11-   Athar of Al-Husayn bin Ali (radiallah anhuma)

Sha’bee (rahimahullah) said:

((احتجم حسين بن علي بن أبي طالب وهو صائم))

((Husayn bin Ali bin Abi Taalib got cupped while he was fasting)) ([79])

12-   Athar of Mu’aadh bin Jabl (radiallah anhu)

Jubayr bin Nufayr narrates:

((أن معاذاً احتجم وهو صائم))

((Mu’aadh was cupped while he was fasting)) ([80])

13-   Athar of Ibn ‘Abbaas (radiallah anhuma)

Ad-Dahhaak rahimahullah said:

((عن ابن عباس أنه لم يكن يرى بالحجامة للصائم بأسا))

((Ibn Abbaas did not see anything wrong with cupping for a fasting person)) ([81])

And at-Tabaraani narrates from Ibn Uyaynah from Husayn from Ikrimah from Ibn Abbaas that he said:

((لا بأس بالحجامة للصائم إنما كره من أجل الضعف))

((There is nothing wrong with cupping for a fasting person, it was only disliked due to fear of weakness)) ([82])

Second Opinion: Cupping invalidates the fast:

This is the opinion of Ahmad bin Hanbal, Ishaaq bin Raahuwayh, Abdur Rahmaan bin Mahdi, Al-Awzaa’ee, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Khuzaymah, Al-Haakim. And it is also narrated from Al-Hasan al-Basri, Masrooq bin al-Ajda’ & Ataa bin Abi Rabaah (according to one narration from him).

Their evidences are as follows:

Evidence # 1: Hadeeth: “The one cupping and the one being cupped have invalidated their fast”

Shaddaad bin Aws (radiallah anhu) narrates:

((أنه مر مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم زمن الفتح على رجل يحتجم بالبقيع لثمان عشرة خلت من رمضان وهو آخذ بيدي، فقال: "أفطر الحاجم والمحجوم"))

((During the days of the Conquest of Makkah, he passed with the Messenger of Allaah (ﷺ) by a man at al-Baqee’ on the 18^th of Ramadaan who was cupping; the Prophet (ﷺ) was holding my hand, and he said: “The one cupping and the one being cupped have broken their fast”)) ([83])

Some of the Scholars have considered this hadeeth to be mutawaatir including As-Suyooti in Al-Jaami’ and in al-Azhaar al-Mutanaathirah, as well as Az-Zubaydee and al-Kattaani. Ibn Katheer said: ((This hadeeth is narrated from a group of Sahaabah who are more than ten in number through various routes)) ([84])

This hadeeth is also narrated from Thawbaan ([85]), Raafi’ bin Khadeej ([86]), Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree ([87]), Usaamah bin Zayd ([88]), Ali bin Abi Taalib ([89]), Aa’ishah ([90]), Abu Hurayrah ([91]), Ibn Abbaas ([92]), Bilaal bin Rabaah ([93]), Ma’qil bin Sinaan ([94]), Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas ([95]), Ibn Umar ([96]), Sa’d bin Maalik, Anas bin Maalik, & Abu Zayd al-Ansaari and others – may Allaah be pleased with them all.

However, the Scholars of the first opinion have answered this hadeeth by saying that it is abrogated (Mansookh) due to the evidences mentioned above. The evidences of its abrogation (or the proofs that it was a ruling that preceded the Prophet’s ruling of its allowance) are as follows:

1-   Ibn ‘Abbaas’s saying that the Prophet (ﷺ) was cupped in the state of Ihraam and while he was fasting:

This hadeeth is mentioned previously under the proofs of the first opinion. Ibn ‘Abbaas was a child when he accompanied the Prophet (ﷺ) and he only accompanied the Prophet (ﷺ) for about 30 months or 2.5 years ([97]). And he did not see the Prophet (ﷺ) in the state of Ihraam except in the last Hajj near his death, so this is a proof that what he narrated from the Prophet (ﷺ) about having being cupped in the state of Ihraam and while fasting was after this hadeeth of Shaddaad.

2-   Anas bin Maalik’s testimony that this hadeeth was before the Prophet (ﷺ) got cupped while fasting

Abu Sufyaan narrates from Abu Qilaabah that Anas (radiallah anhu) said:

((«أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم احتجم» بعد ما قال: «أفطر الحاجم والمحجوم»))

((The Prophet (ﷺ) was cupped after he said: “The one cupping and the one being cupped have broken the fast”)) ([98])

This narration is also supported by the fact that Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu) himself did not see anything wrong with cupping after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) and he narrated it from all of the Sahaabah.

3-   The Act and Words of Sahaabah after the Death of the Prophet (ﷺ)

One of the strongest proofs of the abrogation of this hadeeth is the fact that all of the Sahaabah saw nothing wrong with cupping while fasting as we saw in their athaar above. Some of these Sahaabah who allowed cupping while fasting also include those very Sahaabah who also narrated this hadeeth, which clearly proves that they did not pay any attention to this hadeeth that they themselves had narrated. The Sahaabah who narrated this hadeeth and still allowed cupping while fasting are: Anas bin Maalik, Abu Hurayrah, Aa’ishah, Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas, & Ibn Abbaas (radiallah anhum), while Anas has mentioned it as a general practice of all of the Sahaabah.

This is why, the following Scholars have declared this hadeeth to be abrogated:

1-   Ash-Shaafi’ee ([99])

2-   Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi ([100])

3-   Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi ([101])

4-   Al-Khattaabi ([102])

5-   Ibn Abdil Barr al-Andalusi ([103])

6-   Ibn Daqeeq ul-‘Eed ([104])

7-   Abu Hafs Ibn Shaaheen ([105])

8-   Abu Bakr al-Haazimi ([106])

9-   Burhaan ud-Deen al-Ja’bari ([107])

10-   Al-Mundhiri ([108])

11-   Badr ud-Deen al-Aynee al-Hanafi ([109]).

Evidence # 2: Athaar of Sahaabah:

1-   Athar of Abu Moosa al-Ash’aree (radiallah anhu)

Abu Raafi’ narrates, I came to Abu Moosa and he was being cupped during the night, so I said: “Why didn’t you do this during the day?” He replied:

((«تأمرني أن أهريق دمي وأنا صائم؟»))

((Are you telling me to spill my blood while I am fasting?)) ([110])

This athar is not in contradiction with the athaar of other Sahaabah mentioned above. The most that this narration indicates is that Abu Moosa disliked being cupped while fasting, and so did many of the other Sahaabah due to the fear of weakness as we saw above in the saying of Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu), but there is nothing in this that supports the view that cupping or taking the blood out renders the fast invalid.

2-   Athar of Ali bin Abi Taalib

Al-Hasan al-Basri narrates that Ali (radiallah anhu) said:

((أفطر الحاجم والمحجوم))

((The one cupping and the one being cupped have broken their fast)) ([111])

However, this narration is weak as Al-Hasan al-Basri did not hear anything from Ali (radiallah anhu). Moreover, Al-Hasan al-Basri has contradicted himself a lot in the narration of this hadeeth. He sometimes narrates it as a saying of Abu Hurayrah, sometimes he narrates it as the saying of Thawbaan and so on. Moreover, he sometimes narrates it as Mawqoof and sometimes as Marfoo’, and sometimes he expresses his doubts himself. Whereas, we know from above that this is authentic originally as the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ) i.e. Marfoo and not as Mawqoof. Therefore, taking evidence from this is not correct, because this is the same hadeeth of the Prophet (ﷺ) represented wrongfully as the saying of Ali.

Conclusion:

Consequently, the scholars have disagreed on whether cupping is permissible for a fasting person or not. The majority of them are of the opinion that it is, and that the Hadeeths that run contrary to that are abrogated by those narrations that indicate its permissibility. This opinion was supported by almost all of the Sahaabah. And the majority of the kibaar Taabi’een also held this view. Likewise, this view is held by the three Imaams: Maalik, Abu Haneefah and Ash-Shaafi‘ee may Allaah have mercy upon them.

On the other hand, Imaam Ahmad opined that cupping invalidates the fast; this was the stance taken by Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah and his disciple Ibn Al-Qayyim (rahimahumullah). The Permanent Committee for Research and Iftaa’ (issuance of religious rulings) in Saudi Arabia and the majority of Saudi scholars also chose this opinion [as theirs].

The first opinion, as we saw above, appears to be the more correct of the two. Imaam Shawkaani rahimahullah said:

((حَدِيثُ ابْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى وَأَنَسٍ وَأَبِي سَعِيدٍ يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ الْحِجَامَةَ غَيْرُ مُحَرَّمَةٍ وَلَا مُوجِبَةٍ لِإِفْطَارِ الْحَاجِمِ وَلَا الْمَحْجُومِ؛ فَيُجْمَعُ بَيْنَ الْأَحَادِيثِ بِأَنَّ الْحِجَامَةَ مَكْرُوهَةٌ فِي حَقِّ مَنْ كَانَ يَضْعُفُ بِهَا، وَتَزْدَادُ الْكَرَاهَةُ إذَا كَانَ الضَّعْفُ يَبْلُغُ إلَى حَدٍّ يَكُونُ سَبَبًا لِلْإِفْطَارِ، وَلَا تُكْرَهُ فِي حَقِّ مَنْ كَانَ لَا يَضْعَفُ بِهَا، وَعَلَى كُلِّ حَالٍ تَجَنُّبُ الْحِجَامَةِ لِلصَّائِمِ أَوْلَى، فَيَتَعَيَّنُ حَمْلُ قَوْلِهِ: »أَفْطَرَ الْحَاجِمُ وَالْمَحْجُومُ« عَلَى الْمَجَازِ؛ لِهَذِهِ الْأَدِلَّةِ الصَّارِفَةِ لَهُ عَنْ مَعْنَاهُ الْحَقِيقِيِّ))

((The Hadeeth of Ibn Abi Layla, Anas and Abu Sa’eed prove that cupping is neither Haraam nor is it a reason for the invalidation of the fast of the one cupping and the one being cupped.

So all these ahadeeth can be reconciled by saying that Hijaamah/Cupping is Makrooh (disliked) for the one who will end up having weakness because of it, and this Karaahat (Dislikeness) would increase even more when the weakness caused by cupping reaches up to a level where it may become the cause of a person breaking his fast. But it is not disliked (Makrooh) for the one who will not be weakened by it.

In any case, it is still better for a fasting person to avoid cupping. Moreover, the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ): “The one cupping and the one being cupped have broken their fast” will be understood as being metaphorical due to all these evidences that divert it from its original meaning)) ([112])

·        If the fasting person bleeds profusely, against his will, because of an accident or a wound, his fast remains sound, unless he subsequently feels the need to break it due to weakness. In such a case, he will be like the sick person, i.e., he should break his fast and make up for it later.

·        The ruling of cupping also applies to blood donation, which should be done at night. However, if there is a need for blood and giving it may save the life of another person, it is permissible in such a case. And the fast will remain valid, in-sha-Allaah.

And Allaah knows best.

---

[1] - [Al-Baqarah (2:187)]

[2] -  [Majmoo Fataawa Ibn Taymiyyah (25/220)]

[3] -  [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (1936), Muslim (1111). The full hadeeth is mentioned shortly afterwards]

[4] - [Al-Ijmaa by Ibn al-Mundhir (P. 59)]

[5] - [Maraatib ul-Ijmaa by Ibn Hazm (P. 70)]

[6] -  [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (1936, 1937, 2600, 5368, 6087, 6164, 6709, 710, 6826), Muslim (1111).]

[7] - [Sunan Abu Dawood (2393), Classed Saheeh by al-Albaani]

[8] - [See: Al-Furoo’ by Ibn Muflih (5/40-60), Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/372-386), Al-Muqni’ wash-Sharh al-Kabeer wal-Insaaf (7/442-472), Ash-Sharh al-Mumti’ by Ibn Uthaymeen (6/412-423), Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by him (P. 158-159), Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Taymiyyah (25/220), Sharh al-Umdah by Ibn Taymiyyah (1/284-340), Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (10/300-326), Zaad al-Ma’aad by Ibn al-Qayyim (2/59-60)]

[9] - [Following are the different cases about intercourse during the day in the month of Ramadaan:

Case # 1: The one who has intercourse during the day in Ramadaan through penetration of the vagina with the penis, his fast becomes invalid, no matter he ejaculates or not. He has to make up the day as well as offer the expiation, if that person is a resident and healthy and he does it knowingly and willingly. And if this is done in an obligatory fast in other than Ramadaan, then the fast becomes invalid and he just has to make it up.

Case # 2: If one has sexual relations without penetration and ejaculates while fasting in other than Ramadaan, then his fast is invalid and he has to make it up, if it is an obligatory fast such as: the fast to fulfill a vow, the fast of expiation, or making up the missed fast of Ramadaan.

Case # 3: If one has sexual relations without penetration which is accompanied by ejaculation during the day in Ramadaan, then according to one narration from Ahmad, he has to offer the expiation. And this is also the opinion of Maalik, ‘Ataa, Al-Hasan, Ibn Mubaarak, & Ishaaq. That is because he broke his fast through sexual relation, so it is obligatory to offer the expiation just like it is in case of sexual relation with penetration.

The more correct opinion in this regard is that his fast becomes invalid and he has to make it up and seek repentance for it, but he does not have to offer the expiation. This is the opinion of Ahmad according to one narration. And it is also the madhab of Shaafi’ee & Abu Haneefah. That is because he broke his fast without an actual penetration, and the basic rule is not to offer the expiation and there is no textual evidence for its obligation, not even from Ijmaa’ or Qiyaas. And it is not valid to use the analogy of the actual intercourse because that is more serious than this, based on the evidence that intercourse through penetration obligates the expiation without ejaculation, and it also obligates the execution of the Hadd punishment if it is from Haraam relationship.

Case # 4: If a person has intercourse forgetfully, then the apparent madhab of Ahmad is that he is like the one who does it deliberately. And this is the opinion of Ataa & Ibn al-Maajishoon. And Abu Dawood has narrated from Ahmad that he abstained from giving an answer. And it is narrated from Imaam Ahmad that he said: “Anything that overpowers a fasting person, there is neither qaza (making up) nor anything else” And in another wording he said: “Anything that overpowers a fasting person, there is neither qaza nor kaffaarah”. This indicates that that there is no qaza and kaffaarah for the one who is forced or forgets. This is chosen by Abu al-Khattaab. And this is the opinion of Al-Hasan, Mujaahid, Ath-Thawree, Ash-Shaafi’ee, and Ashaab ur-Raye, because this is like the one who eats and drinks forcefully or forgetfully and does not break his fast.

Maalik, Al-Awzaa’ee, and Al-Layth said that it is obligatory to make up the fast but there is no need to offer the kaffaarah.

Ibn Qudaamah has preferred the opinion based on the first narration of Ahmad in al-Mughni i.e. he has to make up the fast as well as offer the expiation

The more correct view is that he is neither obliged to make up the fast nor offer the expiation, and this is the second narration from Imaam Ahmad, due to the saying of the Prophet (ﷺ): “Indeed Allaah has pardoned my Ummah for mistakes, forgetfulness and what they are forced to do” Narrated Ibn Maajah (2044), Classed Saheeh by al-Albaani. Similarly, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: “The one who does something that invalidates his fast forgetfully, then he does not have to make it up or offer any expiation” Narrated Al-Haakim (1/430) He said, it is Saheeh upon the conditions of Muslim & Ibn Khuzaymah (1999), Classed Hasan by al-Albaani. And other similar texts from the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

Shaykh Ibn Baaz said in his footnotes on Buloogh al-Maraam (P. 411 H. 639): “And the wording of the hadeeth is general to anything that invalidates the fast including intercourse and anything else.”

Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (25/226): “The one who has intercourse forgetfully, there are three opinions about him in the madhab of Ahmad and others: First is that there is neither qazaa nor kaffaarah on him and this is the opinion of Shaafi’ee, Abu Haneefah and the majority of Scholars. Second is that he has to make it up but there is no kaffaarah on him, and this is the opinion of Maalik. And the third opinion is that he has to do both (i.e. qazaa and kaffaarah), and this is famous from Ahmad. The first opinion seems more clear (i.e. correct) that the one who does it by mistake or forgetfully, Allaah will not hold him accountable for that, and in that situation, he is like the one who did not do it. So there is no sin on him, and the one on whom there is no sin, is not a disobedient person and he did not do anything that he was forbidden from (i.e. knowingly)”.

Case # 5: A woman carries the same ruling as a man if she is doing it willingly and she is not forced by the husband or anyone else. It will invalidate her fast and she has to make it up, offer the expiation, seek repentance, and maintain abstinence for the rest of the day. This is one narration from Imaam Ahmad, and this is what was chosen by Abu Bakr (Al-Khallaal). And it is also the opinion of Ash-Shaafi’ee according to one narration, Maalik, Abu Haneefah, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir, because she compromised her fast of Ramadaan by having the intercourse, so it is obligatory for her to make it up and offer the expiation just like a man. And this is what’s correct of the two opinions.

The second narration from Imaam Ahmad is that she is not required to offer the expiation, and this is also the opinion of Al-Hasan, and Shaafi’ee – according to the second narration, because the Prophet (ﷺ) commanded the man who had intercourse during Ramadaan to free a slave, and he did not command the woman with anything, despite his knowledge that she is also the one involved in it. However, the correct opinion is the one that says her ruling is the same as that of the man in making up the fast and offering the expiation, if she is doing it knowingly and willingly.

Case # 6: If the woman did not have the intercourse willingly, then there is no expiation on her, according to the official madhab of Ahmad, and she has to make up the fast. This is the opinion of Al-Hasan. And a similar opinion is also narrated from Ath-Thawree, Al-Awzaa’ee, and the Ashaab ur-Raaye. And this is the opinion of Shaafi’ee, Abu Thawr and Ibn al-Mundhir, except that they said: If she is forced with a threat or it is done while she was sleeping, then her fast is still valid.

Imaam Maalik said: the one who does it unwillingly has to make up the fast as well as offer the expiation, but for the woman who was sleeping, she has to make up the fast but there is no expiation on her.

The correct view is that if the woman has intercourse because she was forced to do it, or she forgot, or she was ignorant of the prohibition on having intercourse during the day in Ramadaan. In that case her fast remains valid and she does not have to make it up or offer expiation. This was narrated in one report from Imam Ahmad, and was the view favored by Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyyah]. Among contemporary scholars it was favored by Shaykh Ibn Baaz and Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on them). This is based on the numerous evidences mentioned previously under the Case # 4 as well as the chapter heading: Those who are excused of fasting, under the category of those people who are forced to break their fast.

Case # 7: If the dawn broke while he is having intercourse, and he continues to have intercourse, then he has to make up the fast and offer the expiation. This is the opinion of Ahmad, Maalik, and Shaafi’ee. On the contrary Abu Haneefah said: He has to make up the fast, but there is no expiation on him, because the intercourse did not coincide with the true fast. The correct opinion is the first one, and Allaah knows best.

Case # 8: If a person has intercourse while thinking that the dawn has not yet broken, then he finds out that the dawn had broken while he was having intercourse, then according to one opinion, he has to make up the fast as well as offer the expiation, because the Prophet (ﷺ) commanded the man who had intercourse to offer the expiation without specifying any condition or details. This is the view favored by Shaykh Ibn Baaz in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (15/290)

The other opinion is that he does not have to make up the fast and there is no expiation on him and his fast is still valid, because one who does something unknowingly, incurs no sin, and he is like the one who eats, drinks and has intercourse forgetfully. This is the opinion favored by Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (19/280) and this is the more correct of the two Scholarly opinions.

Case # 9: If he has intercourse with his wife during the day in Ramadaan, one or more times on one day, then he must offer one expiation. If he had intercourse on several days then he must offer multiple expiations, the same number as the days on which he had intercourse. See: Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/385-386), Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (10/221)

Case # 10: The one who has intercourse in other than the month of Ramadaan in an obligatory fast such as the fast to make up the missed days of Ramadaan, or the fast to fulfill a vow, or the fast of expiation etc., then he must seek repentance and forgiveness from Allaah, and make up the day he invalidated his fast on, but there is no expiation on him.

Case # 11: The one who has intercourse in a voluntary fast, then he is not obliged to make it up or offer the expiation for it. If he makes the intention to make it up, then there is nothing wrong in it but it is not obligatory.

See all these cases in: Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/272-390), Al-Muqni’ wash-Sharh al-Kabeer wal-Insaaf (7/442-474), Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz (15/288-310), Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (10/301-330), & Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Taymiyyah (25/225-228)]

[10] - [The person who kisses has to be in one of the three states;

State # 1: If he does not ejaculate, then his fast does not become invalid without any disagreement among the Scholars, because Aa’ishah (radiallah anha) said: “The Prophet (ﷺ) would kiss and fondle while fasting, and he had the most control of all of you over his desires” Agreed Upon: Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1927) & Muslim (1106)

State # 2: If he ejaculates, then his fast becomes invalid without any disagreement among the Scholars due to evidences passed before, and also because ejaculation through fondling is similar to having sexual relation without penetration, which invalidates the fast.

State # 3: If he only ejects Madhi (i.e. emitted when feeling desire either when thinking or otherwise, but no pleasure is felt when it is emitted, and desire does not cease when it is emitted) which is different from Mani (semen: which is accompanied by pleasure when emitted, and desire ceases immediately after it is emitted), then the Scholars have differed whether that invalidates the fast or not, over two opinions:

Hence it is said that it invalidates the fast. This is the opinion of Ahmad and Maalik. Whereas Abu Haneefah and Shaafi’ee said that it does not invalidate the fast. And this is also narrated from Al-Hasan al-Basri, Ash-Sha’bee, & Al-Awzaa’ee, because its emittance does not necessitate ghusl, and it is resembled with urine

The correct view is the second one, i.e. the emittance of Madhi does not break the fast. And this is what was chosen by Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn Muflih. And it was also chosen by Al-Mardaawi in al-Insaaf, and this is what Shaykh Ibn Baaz has preferred.

See: Al-Mughni (4/360-364), Al-Muqni’ wash-Sharh al-Kabeer wal-Insaaf (7/416-419), Al-Furoo’ by Ibn Muflih (5/10), Al-Mukhtaaraat ul-Fiqhiyyah Lishaykh il-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah (P. 160)]

[11] - [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (1894, 7538, 7492, 5927, 1904), Muslim (1151)]

[12] - [Agreed Upon: Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1927) & Muslim (1106)]

[13] - [Sunan Abu Dawood (2385), Classed Saheeh by al-Albaani]

[14] - [Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by Ibn Uthaymeen (P. 160)]

[15] - [Sunan Abu Dawood (2387), al-Albaani classed it: “Hasan Saheeh”]

[16] - [See: Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by Ibn Uthaymeen (P. 160), al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/364)]

[17] - [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (6664), Muslim (127)]

[18] - [Al-Baqarah (2:187)]

[19] - [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (1864), Muslim (1151)]

[20] - [Al-Mughni (4/349-350)]

[21] - [Ahmad (16380, 16384, 17846, Al-Arnaa’oot), Abu Dawood (2366), Tirmidhi (788), Nasaa’ee (87), Ibn Maajah (407), Al-Haakim (1/147), Classed Saheeh by Al-Haakim and Al-Albaani]

[22] - [Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz (15/261) & Majmmo’ Fataawa Ibn Taymiyyah (25/220)]

[23] - [Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by Ibn Uthaymeen (P. 160)]

[24] - [The scholars  may  Allaah  have  mercy  upon  them differed in opinion in regard to a fasting person who inhales incense whether or not his fast is invalidated. There are two opinions in this regard. One opinion is that inhaling incense does not break the fast because it is neither food nor drink nor something similar to it. This is the view of the Shaafi’ee Madhab and this is the opinion chosen by Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah).

The other view is that inhaling it breaks the fast, and this is the madhab of Maalik, Ahmad, and Abu Haneefah. However, even according to the view that it invalidates the fast, smelling the smell of smoke whether it is from incense or cigarettes, does not break the fast; rather, what breaks the fast is inhaling it and not only smelling it.

Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) said: “I hear too much about people asking about incense for a fasting person and they believe that smoke breaks the fast, and this is not correct, because it does not break his fast unless he inhales it and it enters his stomach.” He also said: “…because smoke does not enter the nasopharynx unless one inhales it.”

However, if he smells it and it enters his nose without doing so deliberately, his fasting does not become void.

If someone does one of the things that invalidate fasting out of ignorance or out of forgetfulness, then his fasting does not become void.

Taken from islamweb.net]

[25] - [Ibn Qudaamah rahimahullah said in al-Mughni: “The Scholars have unanimously agreed upon the fast being invalidated by eating and drinking that which is consumed as food and drink, as for the things that are not taken as food and drink, then the majority of the Scholars consider it to be an invalidator of fast as well. Al-Hasan bin Saalih was of the view that anything that is neither food nor drink, does not break the fast. And it is narrated from Abu Talhah al-Ansaari that he ate hailstones while fasting and he said: “This is neither food nor drink”. So perhaps those who went with that view took evidence from saying that the Qur’aan and Sunnah have only prohibited food and drink, so whatever is not food and drink, remains in its default ruling of permissibility”. End Quote.

Ibn Qudaamah further said: “And for us (as evidence) is the evidence of the Book and the Sunnah on the prohibition of eating and drinking in general. So this includes that which is differed over, and what is narrated from Abu Talhah is not proven according to us, so it is not counted as a disagreement” Al-Mughni (4/350).

Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said in Sharh al-Umdah (1/384): “Equal, in this regard, are all the eatable and drinkable things including the Aghziya (food) and the Adwiya (medicines) and everything else such as: snow and hail. And equal, in that, are the food and drink which give nourishment and those that do not. Even if a person swallowed mud or pebbles, it will invalidate his fast.”

Allaamah Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah said: “Things that enter the stomach can be comprised of: things that are beneficial, things that are harmful, and things that are neither beneficial nor harmful such as: food, drink, drugs, alcohol, bead, blood, smoke, or anything else.”

He said: “Some of the people of knowledge said that the things that are not food or nourishment do not invalidate the fast if eaten. Based on this, swallowing beads, pebbles or anything that resembles them does not invalidate the fast. However, the correct opinion is that the ruling is general [i.e. eating and drinking invalidates the fast], and that everything a human consumes whether it is beneficial, harmful, or neither of the two, it will invalidate his fast due to the application of the verse” Ash-Sharh al-Mumti’ (6/378-379); See: Al-Mughni (4/350) & Ash-Sharh al-Kabeer wal-Muqni’ wal-Insaaf (7/410)]

[26] - [See: Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan (P. 161=162), Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz (5/257-258), Fataawa wa Rasaa’il Muhammad bin Ibraaheem (4/189), Tuhfat ul-Ikhwaan by Ibn Baaz (P. 175), Fataawa Ramadaan by Ashraf Abdul Maqsood (2/485, 2/486, 2/489)]

[27] - [Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (10/19)]

[28] - [Majmoo‘ Fataawa wa Rasaa’il al-‘Uthaymeen (19/199)]

[29] - [Taken from islamqa.info, Fatwa # 250660]

[30] - [Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (15/260, 261)]

[31] - [Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (15/263)]

[32] - [From Islamqa.info, Fatwa # 802808]

[33] - [Also see: islamqa.info, Fatwa # 124204 for detailed answer on why it does not break the fast]

[34] - [Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Uthaymeen (19/question no. 159)]

[35] - [Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Uthaymeen (19/question no. 163)]

[36] - [Taken from Islamqa.info, Fatwa # 78459]

[37] - [Taken from islamqa.info, Fatwa # 250660]

[38] - [Abu Dawood (2380), Tirmidhi (720) and this is his wording, Ibn Maajah (1676), Ahmad (2/498), Al-Haakim (1/427), and Haakim said: “It is authentic on the condition of Shaykhayn”, and it is also authenticated by al-Albaani.]

[39] - [Al-Ijmaa by Ibn al-Mundhir (P. 59)]

[40] - [Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/368)]

[41] - [Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by Ibn Uthaymeen (P. 163)]

[42] - [Fataawa as-Siyaam (P. 231)]

[43] - [See: Kitaab as-Siyaam from Sharh al-Umdah by Ibn Taymiyyah (1/477)]

[44] - [Al-Bukhaari (304), Muslim (132)]

[45] - [Majaalis Shahr Ramadaan by Ibn Uthaymeen (P. 164), & Fataawa Ibn Baaz (15/192)]

[46] - [Al-Fath, 4/148]

[47] - [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (321), Muslim (335)]

[48] - [Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 10/151]

[49] - [Agreed Upon: Al-Bukhaari (1, 2529, 54, 5070, 3898, 6689, 6953), Muslim (1907)]

[50] - [See: Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/370), Al-Majmoo’ by Nawawi (3/284), Al-Kaafi fi Fiqh Ahl il-Madeenah by Ibn Abdil Barr (P. 125), Al-Muhalla bil Athaar by Ibn Hazm (4/302)]

[51] - [Al-Insaaf (7/401)]

[52] - [Liqaa’at al-Baab al-Maftooh (29/20), & Ash-Sharh al-Mumti’ (6/373-374), Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Uthaymeen (19/182)]

[53] - [See: Al-Majmoo’ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab by an-Nawawi ash-Shaafi’ee (3/284), Radd ul-Muhtaar Ala ad-Durr il-Mukhtaar by Ibn Abideen al-Hanafi (2/428) & At-Taaj wal-Ikleel by Al-Mawwaaq al-Maaliki (3/361)]

[54] - [Al-Insaaf by al-Mardaawi]

[55] - [Az-Zumar (39:65)]

[56] - [Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudaamah (4/369-370)]

[57] - [Narrated by Al-Bukhaari (1939), Abu Dawood (2372), Ahmad (1/292), and others.]

[58] - [Narrated by Al-Bukhaari (1938), Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (2/233) and others]

[59] - [Ahmad (1/215), Abu Dawood (2373), Tirmidhi (775), Ibn Maajah (1682) and others]

[60] - [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9337), Ma’rifat us-Sahaabah by Abu Nu’aym (T. 3295 H. 6882) from Wakee’ & Al-Haytham bin Jameel both from Shareek from Layth from Abdul Waahhaab, in the narration of Abu Nu’aym, it is changed with Abdul Waarith, from Anas. Layth bin Abi Sulaym is weak due to his memory but this narration has another chain whose narrators are all Thiqah. It is narrated by At-Tahaawi in Sharh Ma’aani ul-Athaar (6041) with a Saheeh chain through Aasim al-Ahwal from Anas]

[61] - [Narrated by Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (2/237), Ibn Khuzaymah in his Saheeh (3/231-232), Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Kubra (4/264), At-Tabaraani in al-Awsat (3/138), Ibn Shaaheen in Naasikh al-Hadeeth (P. 335), with a Saheeh chain.]

[62] - [Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah (1969), Sunan Ad-Daaraqutni (2263), as-Sunan al-Kubra lil Bayhaqi (8271)]

[63] - [Sunan Daaraqutni (2268), Chain Saheeh]

[64] - [Tahqeeq Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah (3/231)]

[65] - [Musnad Ahmad (18822, 18823, 18836, 23071, 23084), Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (7535), Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9328, 99590), Sunan Abu Dawood (2374), & As-Sunan al-Kubra lil Bayhaqi (8266), Classed Saheeh by al-Albaani. Ibn Hajar said in al-Fath (4/178, 203): “Its chain is Saheeh and it does not harm (the authenticity) if the companion is unknown”. An-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’ (6/349): “Its chain is Saheeh upon the conditions of Bukhaari and Muslim”]

[66] - [Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/298) & Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (4/213 # 7540). Ibn Abdil Barr and Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajar said: Its chain is disconnected from Sa’d. However Ibn Abdil Barr has mentioned another route in al-Istizkaar (3/322) and Al-Haafiz in Taghleeq at-Ta’leeq (2/35) from Affaan from Abdul Waahid bin Ziyaad from Uthmaan bin Hakeem from Aamir bin Sa’d who said: “My father (Sa’d bin Abi Waqqaas) used to be cupped while fasting.” This chain is Saheeh.]

[67] - [Narrated by al-Bukhaari in Ta’leeq form (2/42), and it is mentioned with its chain by Abdur Razzaaq in his Musannaf (7543) & Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/308) from Thawree, from Yoonus bin Abdullah al-Jarmi]

[68] - [Narrated by al-Bukhaari in Ta’leeq form (2/42) and it is mentioned with its chain by Ibn Abi Shaybah (9335) through the route of Thawree, from Furaat from Mawla Umm Salamah. Furaat is Thiqah, and the name of the Mawla of Umm Salamah is Mikhwad, and he was given this name by Umm Salamah herself. Shu’bah has narrated through Furaat from him, and there is nothing wrong in him, in-sha-Allaah in a non-Marfoo’ narration]

[69] - [Narrated by al-Bukhaari in Ta’leeq form (2/42), and its chain is mentioned by him in his Taareekh al-Kabeer (2/180), all of its narrators are reliable. Umm Alqamah’s name is Marjaanah and she was the servant of Aa’ishah. Ibn Sa’d said in Tabaqaat al-Kubra (8/356): “Her son Alqamah has narrated good narrations from her”]

[70] - [Muwatta Imaam Maalik (1/298) and from him narrated Shaafi’ee in his Musnad (471); moreover Abdur Razzaaq (7531) has narrated it from Ma’mar from Zuhri from Saalim from Ibn Umar and in the following narration (7532), from Ma’mar from Ayyoob from Naafi’ from Ibn Umar. Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/308) has also narrated it through the route of Naafi’. And it is also narrated by al-Bayhaqi in as-Sunan al-Kubra (4/269)]

[71] - [Al-Istizkaar (3/322)]

[72] - [Sharh az-Zarkaani lil Muwatta (2/234)]

[73] - [Saheeh al-Bukhaari (1940), Sunan Abu Dawood (2375), Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9318), Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah (2658), Sharh Ma’aani ul-Athaar (3430, 3432), As-Sunan al-Kubra lil Bayhaqi (8265) and others]

[74] - [Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (7527), Isnaaduhu Hasan]

[75] - [Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (7526)]

[76] - [as-Sunan al-Kubra lin’Nasaa’ee (2/237), Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah (3/235), Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/308), Chain Saheeh]

[77] - [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9317)]

[78] - [Sharh Ma’aani ul-Athaar (2/101), Chain Saheeh]

[79] - [Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (7544), Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/308), Chain Saheeh]

[80] - [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9330)]

[81] - [As-Sunan al-Kubra by Nasaa’ee (2/230)]

[82] - [Al-Mu’jam al-Kabeer (11/269), Chain Hasan]

[83] - [Ahmad (17112), Abu Dawood (2369), Ad-Daarimi (1730), Ibn Maajah (1681) and others. This hadeeth is Saheeh. Imaam Tirmidhi said in al-Ilal al-Kabeer (P. 121-122), that Imaam Al-Bukhaari said: “There is no other hadeeth in this issue more authentic than the hadeeth of Thawbaan and Shaddaad.” At-Tirmidhi further quotes from Imaam Ali bin al-Madeeni that he said: “The hadeeth of Thawbaan and Shaddaad are Saheeh.”]

[84] - [Irshaad ul-Faqeeh (1/286)]

[85] - [Narrated by Ahmad (280, 282, 283), Abu Dawood (2367), Ibn Maajah (1680), Ad-Daarimi (1738) and others]

[86] - [Narrated by Ahmad (3/465), Tirmidhi (774), Ibn Khuzaymah (3/277), Ibn Hibbaan (902) and others]

[87] - [Narrated by Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (2/231), Al-Haakim (1/594), Al-Bayhaqi (4/266) and others]

[88] - [Narrated by Ahmad (21826), Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3165) and others]

[89] - [Narrated by Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3149), Abdur Razzaaq (7524), Ibn Abi Shaybah (9305)]

[90] - [Narrated by Ahmad (25242), Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3178), Ibn Abi Shaybah (9310)]

[91] - [Narrated by Ahmad (8768), Ibn Maajah (1679)]

[92] - [Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3182), Tabaraani in al-Kabeer (11286), Ibn Shaaheen in Naasikh al-Hadeeth (410)]

[93] - [Narrated by Ahmad (23888), Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3144), Ibn Abi Shaybah (9302), At-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer (1122)]

[94] - [Narrated by Ahmad (15901), Nasaa’ee in al-Kubra (3155), Ibn Abi Shaybah (748), Tahaawi in Sharh Ma’aani al-Athaar (3418), etc]

[95] - [Narrated by Abu Ya’la in al-Mu’jam (175), Ash-Shaashi in his Musnad (136), Ibn Shaaheen in Naasikh ul-Hadeeth (409)]

[96] - [Al-Mu’jam al-Awsat (6139), Chain Weak]

[97] - [Siyar A’laam an-Nubala (3/332)]

[98] - [Al-Mu’jam al-Awsat by at-Tabaraani (7890), its chain is Saheeh except that Abu Sufyaan as-Sa’dee is Da’eef due to weakness in memory, but it has several other mutaabi’aat from Anas as well.

Abu Nu’aym has narrated it in Musnad Abu Haneefah (P. 133) from Abu Haneefah from Talha bin Naafi’ Abu Sufyaan from Anas.

Ad-Daaraqutni (2260) has narrated it from Uthmaan bin Abi Shaybah from Khaalid bin Makhlad from Abdullah bin al-Muthanna, from Thaabit al-Bunaani from Anas. And after this, he said: “Its narrators are Thiqaat”

Ad-Daaraqutni (2267) has also narrated it from Wakee’ from Yaaseen az-Zayyaat from an unknown person from Anas]

[99] - [Ikhtilaat al-Hadeeth by Shaafi’ee (P. 530), Sunan Tirmidhi (3/487), Al-Majmoo’ by Nawawi (6/319), Fath ul-Baari (4/178)]

[100] - [Al-Muhalla bil Athaar (6/204-205)]

[101] - [As-Sunan al-Kubra (4/266)]

[102] - [Ma’aalim us-Sunan (2/770)]

[103] - [Al-Istizkaar (4/324)]

[104] - [Fath ul-Baari by Ibn Hajar (4/178)]

[105] - [Naasikh ul-Hadeeth wa Mansookhihi (P. 339)]

[106] - [Al-I’tibaar fin-Naasikh wal-Mansookh fil Athaar (179)]

[107] - [Rusookh ul-Akhbaar fi Mansookh il-Akhbaar (P. 358)]

[108] - [Umdat ul-Qaari (11/40)]

[109] - [Umdat ul-Qaari (11/40)]

[110] - [As-Sunan al-Kubra by Nasaa’ee (3200), Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (9307) etc]

[111] - [Musannaf Abdur Razzaaq (7524), As-Sunan al-Kubra lin-Nasaa’ee (2/222-223)]

[112] - [Nayl al-Awtaar (4:241)]