Depending Upon Astronomical Calculations For The Beginning and End Of Ramadaan is an Innovation Of The Raafidah Shee`ah

بسم الله ال رحمن ال رحيم

Depending Upon Astronomical Calculations For The Beginning & End Of Ramadaan Is An Innovation Of The Raafidah Shee`ah – Contrary To The Ijmaa` Of The Salaf

AL-BUKHAAREE reports in his ‘Saheeh’ : BOOK OF FASTING : CHAPTER : THE SAYING OF THE PROPHET (Peace be upon him) : << WE DO NOT WRITE, NOR DO WE RECKON. >> :-

“Aadam narrated to us: Shu`bah narrated to us: al-Aswad ibn Qays narrated to us: Sa`eed ibn `Amr narrated to us: that he heard Ibn `Umar – radiyallaahu `anhumaa – report from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that he said: <We are an unlettered nation, we do not write, nor do we reckon. The month is like this – and like this> – meaning once twenty-nine, and once thirty.”

al-Haafiz ibn Hajr said in “Fathul-Baaree‟ (4/137):

“…This is not rebutted by the fact that there were people amongst them who could write and count – since the ability to write was rare amongst them, and what is meant by reckoning here is reckoning the stars and their movements. They had not used to know that either, except for a tiny few of them. So the ruling for Fasting and other than it is connected to sighting the moon, to remove any difficulty from them – so they do not have to go to pains to calculate astronomical movements, and this ruling for Fasting continues even if there appears after them people who know that. Indeed what is apparent from the context indicates a denial that the ruling is to be connected to astronomical calculations at all. This is also made clear by his saying in the previous hadeeth: So if it is cloudy for you then complete thirty days> – and he did not say: Ask the people of calculations. The wisdom in this is that the number (of days) when it is cloudy will be something which the people are the same about, so disagreement and dispute will be avoided.

Some people hold that the astronomers are to be referred to in this – and they are the Raafidah. It is related from some of the fuqahaa· (jurists) that they agreed with them. al-Baajee said: “But the ijmaa` of the Salafus-Saalih (pious predecessors) is a proof against them”,

and Ibn Bazeezah said:

It is a false and futile (baatil) stance, since the Legislation has forbidden us from delving into knowledge of the stars, since it is surmise and estimations, not based upon certainty and predominant consideration – along with the fact that if the affair were connected to it, then it would cause difficulty since it is known only by a few… .”

[Translated by Aboo Talhah Daawood ibn Ronald Burbank -rahimahullaah- ]


%d bloggers like this: