29 July 2012

Seerah of Muhammed*
*: May the peace blessings and Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an

The Battle (Siege) of Ta'if: The March to Ta’if
Ta’if Campaign is in fact an extension of Hunain Ghazwah; that is because the majority of the defeated troops of Hawazin and Thaqif went into Ta’if with the general commander — Malik bin ‘Awf An-Nasri — and fortified themselves within it. So upon finishing with Hunain Invasion, he gathered the booty at Al-Ji‘ranah in the very month (i.e. Shawwal) and in the eighth year A.H.
A vanguard battalion of a thousand men led by Khalid bin Al-Waleed marched towards At-Ta’if. Whereas the Prophet* * proceeded passing through Nakhlah Al- Yamaniyah, Qarn Al-Manazil and through Laiyah. At Laiyah there was a castle that belonged to Malik bin ‘Awf, so the Prophet* * gave orders to have it destroyed.
Ta'if is one of the fertile country towns of the Hijaz. It is situated in the south-east of Makkah at a distance of twelve leagues from there. It is one thousand metres above sea level. On account of its fine weather, gardens, and palm groves, the town of Ta'if was the centre of a group of people who led very comfortable lives. This town was inhabited by the tribe of Thaqif who were one of the powerful and popular tribes of the Arabs. The Arabs of Thaqif tribe were amongst those people, who fought against Islam in the Battle of Hunayn. After suffering a signal defeat they took refuge in their own town which possessed strong and elevated forts. In order to complete the victory, the Prophet* ordered the fugitives of the Battle of Hunayn to be pursued. Abu 'Amar Ash'ari and Abu Musa Ash'ari were deputed along with a unit of the soldiers of Islam to pursue some of the fugitives who had taken refuge in Awtas. The first commander lost his life in the encounter, but the second one scored complete victory and dispersed the enemies. The Prophet* himself proceeded to Ta'if along with the remaining army and, while on his way, destroyed the fort of Malik, (who had sparked off the Battle of Hunayn). Of course, the demolition of the fort of Malik did not carry an aspect of revenge. What the Prophet* desired was that he should not leave a point which could serve as an asylum to the enemies.
The groups of the army of Islam moved one after the other and made the various sides of the town their camping places. The Fort of Ta'if was situated at a great height and had very strong walls, and its watch towers fully controlled the outside area. The army of Islam proceeded to besiege the fort, but it had not yet been completely encircled, when the enemies checked their advance with a shower of arrows and killed some of them on the spot in the very first moment. The Prophet* ordered the army to retreat and to transfer its encampment to a point which was beyond the reach of the arrows of the enemies. So the Prophet* moved further away and put up his tent on a higher ground; built a mosque there and sheltered his two wives, Umm Salamah and Zaynab bt. Jahsh in two red tents. He continued with the siege on the Ta’if fortresses, prayed in the newly constructed mosque and stayed in the two tents of his two wives.

The Destruction of the idol Yaghuth at Dhu al-Kaffyan by Tufayl ibn ‘Amr al-Dawsi
When the Prophet* sent Urwah b. Masud and Ghaylan b. Salamah to Jurash to learn the techniques of warfare with the use of catapult and Testudo, he also despatched al-Tufayl ibn ‘Amr al-Dawsi to destroy the idol of Yaghuth at Dhu al-Kaffyan. This idol was in the shape of a lion (or bull), signifying brute strength belonged to the people of Amr ibn Humamamh al-Dawasi (Tufayl’s own people). The Prophet*  instructed Tufayl to gather his (Tufayl’s) people in this demolition and, having finished this carnage, Tufayl was to join the Prophet* at Ta’if. With the assistance of four hundred (400) of his people, Tufayl destroyed the said idol by igniting its face and setting it on fire. Then Tufayl, along with the four hundred rioters marched ahead to join the Prophet* at Ta’if. They also brought with them the catapult and the Testudo (delivered to Tufayl by Urwah at Ta’if).

Trying to break the Siege
During the battles of those days a catapult served the same purpose as artillery serves in modern warfare. The Muslim officers erected a catapult under the guidance of Salman and stoned the towers and the interior of the fort for about twenty days. However, the enemies, too, continued to shoot arrows and thereby inflicted injuries on the soldiers of Islam.
In order to make the enemy surrender, it was necessary to attack it from all sides. It was, therefore, decided that, simultaneously with the installation of the catapult and throwing stones, the military vehicles should also be utilized to create a rent in the wall of the fort, so that the army of Islam might enter it. However, the battalions of the army of Islam were faced with a great difficulty in accomplishing this task, because arrows were showered on their heads from the towers and other spots of the fort and none could manage to approach the wall. The best means of achieving this purpose were the military vehicles which were available with the organized armies of those times in an imperfect shape. A military vehicle (Testudo or ‘Tank’) was made of wood and was covered with a thick hide. Strong soldiers took their places inside it and pushed it towards the fort and began making holes in the wall under its cover. By making use of this military device the soldiers of Islam busied themselves bravely in splitting the wall. However, the enemies threw melted iron and wires on the vehicle and burnt its covering; inflicted injuries on them. The Ta’if citizens were fully prepared for this type of attack. The newly arrived army used the catapult and attacked the wall of a fortress, creating a hole there. Then some Muslim soldiers were ported through this hole inside the new Testudo. When the Muslim soldiers came out of their Testudo, the Thaqif poured molten iron on them and showered them with arrows, killing some of them and wounding many. It is reported that Abu Bakr’s son, Abd Allah, was gravely injured in this fight. He never recovered from his wound and eventually succumbed to his injury. This military device, therefore, proved to be unsuccessful on account of the planning of the enemy and the Muslims failed to achieve victory. Hence, when a number of Muslims were wounded and killed, they abandoned their attempt."

Economic and Moral Strategy to Break the Siege
Achievement of victory does not depend on material military devices only. A skilful commander can diminish the power of the enemy by dealing economic and moral blows at him and can thus make him surrender. More often than not moral and economic blows prove to be more effective than corporal injuries which are occasionally sustained by the soldiers of the enemy. The Prophet* blocked the road that stopped the supply of food to the Thaqif. But the Thaqif were not alarmed. They had enough provisions to last for a very long siege. Ta'if was an area of date-palms and vine and was well-known throughout the Hijaz for its fertility. As its inhabitants had taken great pains in developing the palm-groves and the vineyards, they were keenly interested in their safety.
In order to threaten those, who had shut themselves within the fort, the Prophet* announced that, if they continued to resist, their gardens would be plundered. However, the enemies did not pay any heed to this threat, because they did not imagine that the kind and merciful Prophet* would resort to such an action. However, as they observed, all of a sudden that compliance with the orders to pull down the gardens and to cut the date-palms and the vines had already commenced, they began to wail and cry and requested the Prophet* to refrain from this action as a mark of respect for the proximity and relationship which existed between them.
The Prophet* , notwithstanding the fact that those who had now taken refuge in the fort were the very persons, who were responsible for the battles of Hunayn and Ta'if and these two battles had proved very costly, he showed his mercy and kindness once again in the battlefield, which is usually a theatre of wrath and vengeance. He ordered his companions to desist from cutting down the trees. Though he had lost many officers and men in these two battles (which had been occasioned by the conspiracy of the people of the Thaqif tribe who had conducted a night attack on the army of Islam and had now taken refuge in their burrow like a fox) and would have been justified in destroying their farms and gardens as a measure of revenge, his kindness and mercy subdued his anger and he asked his friends to refrain from taking punitive action. From the conduct of the Prophet* and the manner in which he always treated his enemies, it can be safely said that the orders given by him to cut down the trees were a mere threat and if this weapon had not proved effective, he would certainly have refrained from using it.

Another Tactic to Break the Siege
The people of Thaqif tribe were rich and affluent and possessed a large number of slaves and slave-girls. In order to obtain information about the state of affairs within the interior of the fort and to assess the strength of the enemy as well as to create differences amongst that organized group, the Prophet* got announced that those slaves of the enemy, who came out of the fort and took refuge with the army of Islam, would become free. When the caller of the Prophet* called out unto people saying “He whosoever descends and steps out of the castle is free.” Twenty-three men came out. One of them was Abu Bakrah who tied himself to a wall and let himself down by means of a small wheel, that would normally be used for drawing up water from a well. The way he let himself down made the Prophet* nickname him “Abu Bakrah”, i.e. the man with the wheel. The Prophet* * set them all free and entrusted each one of them to a Muslim to care about their living affairs, which was too hard for the castle folkspeople to bear.. On enquiries having been made from them it was known that those within the fort were not prepared to surrender at any cost, and even if the siege continued for one year they would not be faced with any shortage of provisions.

The Prophet* takes advice and lifts the Siege
Seeing that the siege lasted too long and that the castle was immune and could stand any siege (for they had already stored a supply that suffices for over a year) and that the Muslims were suffering — day by day — from arrow-shots and heated iron hooks, the Prophet* consulted Nawfal bin Mu‘awiyah Ad-Daili about that. He said: “They are like a fox hiding inside its burrow. If you stoodfast at it you would catch it, but if you parted with it, no harm would afflict you.” The Prophet* decided to lift the siege and depart. ‘Umer bin Al- Khattab, who was ordered by the Prophet* to notify people, said to them “If Allah will, we are leaving the castle and going back tomorrow.” As it was too hard for the Muslims to go back and leave the castle unconquered they complained saying, “Should we go away while the castle is still unopened?” His reply was: “Then, start fighting in the morning.” In the morning they fought and were wounded. So when he repeated this statement: “If Allah will, we are leaving the castle and going back tomorrow”, they were pleased and carried out the order submissively and started moving, which made the Prophet* laugh.
As soon as they mounted and started moving the Messenger* said: • “Say! Here we are returning, repenting, worshipping (Allah) and to our Lord we offer praise.” When the Messenger of Allah was asked to invoke Allah against Thaqif, he said: • “O Allah, guide Thaqif and bring them to us as Muslims.”
The month of Shawwal was terminating and the month of Zi Qa'id (during which warfare was forbidden amongst the Arabs) was fast approaching. In order to safeguard this tradition it was necessary that the siege should be raised as early as possible so that the Arab tribe of Thaqif might not be able to charge the Prophet* with the violation of the good tradition.
Moreover, the Hajj season was near and the supervision of Hajj ceremonies was the responsibility of the Muslims, because before this all the ceremonies of Hajj were performed under the supervision of the polytheists of Mecca. A very large number of the people came to Mecca from all parts of Arabia to participate in Hajj ceremonies and it was the best occasion to propagate Islam and to acquaint the people with the realities of the Divine faith. It was necessary that the Prophet* should take full advantage of this opportunity, which had become available to him for the first time and should think of much more important matters as compared with the conquest of an outlying fort. Keeping all these matters in view, the Prophet* raised the siege of Ta'if and proceeded, along with his soldiers, to Ji'ranah.

Main Topic: Fiqh of Ramadhan (part 1)

Summary:
Sawm linguistically means refraining, silence, suspension
Shariah terminology means refraining from those things that break the fast and they are: food, drink, sexual relations, excess water through mouth/nose and vomiting, with the intention of getting closer to Allah from Fajr of a day until its Maghrib.
It is necessary to make the intention every night as fasting every day is an independent act of Ibadah
Whoever intentionally breaks a day of fasting in Ramadhan without a rukhsah (shariah permission) commits a major sin
Fasting is not obliged on the young until they have become mature (buloogh). Parents can train them from any age.
It is recommended to make Iftar with fresh dates or dry dates or to take mouthfuls of water.
Maghrib Prayer is after the Iftar (breaking fast)
There is Qadaa (making up) of fasting for the Mareed (sick) and Musaafir (traveller)
Fasting is broken by:
•    Breaking of the Niyah of the fast
•    Eating and drinking intentionally
•    Vomiting intentionally
•    Menstruation and post Childbirth bleeding
•    Sexual relations
Eating & Drinking: the entering of something into the throat and its swallowing, i.e. its entering into the Gullet/Oesophagus breaks the fast without any stipulation that it reaches the stomach or lungs
•    Hence fast also broken by smoking or inhaling tobacco, purposely inhaling steam or smoke, taking inhalers or sniffing smelling salts, oral vaccines
•    Some medical applications are allowed, such as: scope or surgical wound (as long as it avoids intestines & lungs), EEG, ECG, CT scan, X-rays, external examinations, skin vaccines, needles for blood, dialysis, bleeding, carefully using miswak or toothpaste

Meaning of Fasting
Sawm linguistically means refraining, silence, suspension and what is included in its meanings. Sawm has been mentioned with this meaning in Allah’s (swt) noble book. Allah (swt) says: “So eat and drink and be glad. And if you see any human being, say: ‘Verily, I have vowed a fast unto the Most Gracious so I shall not speak to any human being this day” (Surah Maryam Ayah 26)
As for As Sawm in the shariah terminology, it is refraining from those things that break the fast and they are: food, drink, sexual relations, excess water through mouth/nose and vomiting, with the intention of getting closer to Allah (swt) from Fajr of a day until its Maghrib. This Shariah meaning of fasting has been mentioned in numerous noble ayaat and there is no need to bring them up here as they are well known amongst people who are knowledgeable of them.

The Intention of the Fast
It is necessary to make the intention every night as fasting every day is an independent act of Ibadah from what was before or after it. The Iftar separates every fast from the other at night and as long as every day is an independent act of Ibadah then it is necessary to have an intention for each act to make it legitimate. This understanding is by way of understanding the reality (min baab tahqeeq al manaat).

The sin of the one that breaks his fast in Ramadhan without an excuse:
Fasting in Ramadhan is a pillar from the five pillars of Islam, so it is one of the five great pillars. As such the one who neglects this pillar or falls short in its performance is worthy of a painful punishment in the hereafter in addition to the punishment that he should receive in this life from the punishments imposed by the Khilafah state. Here is a collection of ahadith and reports (aathaar) that warn against breaking fast in Ramadhan:
•    Abi Umaamah said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) saying: “Whilst I was asleep two men came with me and took me by my arm... He said: Then we saw a people hanging by their tendons, the corners of their mouths were cracked and blooded was flowing from them. I asked: Who are these people? They said: Those are the people who broke their fasts before its time...”
•    Ibn Mas’ood said: “Whoever breaks a day of fasting in Ramadhan without a rukhsah (shariah permission) he will meet Allah with it and even if he fasts the entire time after that, if Allah wills he will be forgiven and if he wills he will be punished”.
•    Abu Hurairah: “A man broke his fast in the day of Ramadhan so Abu Hurairah said: The fast of a year will not be accepted from him”. Ibn Hazm: “Whoever (unlawfully) breaks a fast of Ramadhan then no day from the days of the dunya can make up for it”.
Therefore the hadith provide a clear indication and meaning of the great sin attributed to the one who breaks just one fast in the month of Ramadhan.

The Fasting of the young:
The majority hold the view that the fasting of those who have not yet reached the age of maturity (baaligh) to be not obligatory. The takaaleef Ash-Shariah (i.e. the responsibility and obligation to abide by the shariah and accountability) is established on the shart (condition) of buloogh (maturity). If he is mature then he is Mukallaf (responsible and accountable) and if he is not mature then he is not legally responsible. Therefore when the Shar’a has ordered someone below the age of Buloogh to perform an action or has ordered the Wali al-Amr (guardian) of the child to order him to fulfil an action, then in this case it is for the purpose of training and preparing only. It is not obligatory at all for the young to perform it even if he and his Wali al-Amr are rewarded for undertaking the actions and this therefore applies to the case of fasting. The Wali al-Amr orders his child to fast and encourages him but to the point where this encouragement does not lead to Ikraah and Ijbaar (compulsion and forcing). If the boy/girl acts in accordance to this then there is a blessing in it and if he/she refuses then there is no sin on them or the Wali al-Amr. As for when the child should be asked to fast the Shar’a has not specified a specific age like it did in the case of As-Salaah. It is not correct to make qiyaas (analogy) in Ibadah so the Siyaam cannot be analogised with Salaah. The age therefore remains general and not specified and absolute and not restricted. The matter rests with the view of the Awliya-Al- Amr (guardian) in relation to the strength, health and physical ability of their children to undertake the fast.

What is recommended for the Saa’im to break his fast with?
It is Mustahabb (recommended) for the Saa’im to make Iftar with Rutub (fresh, moist, ripe dates) and if he cannot find that then the recommendation moves towards Tamr (dry dates). If he does not have this then it is recommended to take mouthfuls of water and after that he can eat what he wishes. The texts do not come with a ta’leel (legal reasoning) for this order except for what came in the first Hadith that we will shortly mention that says that water is pure. As such it is not correct for people to delve into the reasons for choosing Rutub (wet dates) firstly, Tamr (dry dates) secondly and Maa (water) thirdly. We follow this in worship and obedience and it is incorrect to reason that Tamr should come first because they contain a plentiful quantity of sugar and that is what the Saa’im loses most of and a text has mentioned that the body should be compensated for what it has lost. Or the reasoning that the date is digested quickly, and it gives the nutrients that the fasting person needs and other reasons of the like that researches have suggested. None of these attempts bring anything in terms of advancement or decline in relation to this issue and if the upright Shar’a wanted to give a reason it would have done so and if it was silent on providing a reason then we must also be silent.
•    Salmaan ibn ‘Aamir said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If one of you is fasting then he should make Iftar with tamr and if he can’t find any then water, because water is pure”.
•    Anas said: “I never once saw the Messenger of Allah pray before breaking his fast and even if it was just a drink of water”.
These three Hadith indicate that it is the Sunnah of Iftar to hasten it and that it comes before the Salaah of Maghrib so the Saa’im does not pray until after he has taken his Iftar.

The Qadaa of Fasting: 
The Qadaa of the obligatory fast:
This relates to and includes the sick, traveller, menstruating and child birth bleeding woman, the one who vomits intentionally, the one who breaks his fast early thinking wrongly that the time had arrived, the one who lost his mind, consciousness but awoke from the state in the day time of Ramadhan, the pregnant and breast feeding woman if they fear for themselves or child, the boy and the disbeliever if they become Mukallif (legally responsible) in the day of Ramadhan. 
The Qadaa of fasting for the Mareed (sick) and Musaafir (traveller):
It is obligatory upon the sick person and traveller to make Qadaa for what he has missed of the obligatory fasting. This is a Hukm (ruling) that is agreed upon and no Faqeeh has opposed it. Its evidence is the speech of Allah (swt):
“O you who believe! Observing As-Saum (the fasting) is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you, that you may become Al-Muttaqoon”  [Observing Saum (fasts)] for a fixed number of days, but if any of you is ill or on a journey, the same number (should be made up) from other days. And as for those who can fast with difficulty they have (a choice either to fast or) to feed a Miskîn (poor person) (for every day). But whoever does good of his own accord, it is better for him. And that you fast, is better for you if only you know. (2:183-184) His (swt) statement: “...if any of you is ill or on a journey, the same number (should be made up) from other days...” means that the sick or travelling person must make up for fasts that are missed in other days (i.e. after Ramadhan).

What causes the Fast to be broken?
1 – Breaking of the Niyah of the fast:
Fasting is ‘Ibadah (act of worship) and therefore requires an intention from beginning to end. If the Niyah is broken then the fast is also (by default) broken.
2 – Eating and drinking intentionally:
This reason does not require going into as it is well known to the knowledgeable and the one who has no knowledge alike.
3 – Menstruation and post Childbirth bleeding (Hayd and Nifaas):
This is also well known and its study was examined in the chapter:
4 – Intentional vomiting:
Ibn ‘Umar said: “Whoever is overcome by vomiting there is no Qadaa for him, and the one who makes himself sick must make Qadaa”. Ibn ‘Abbaas said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “There are three which do not break the fast of the one fasting: Vomiting, cupping and wet dreams”.
Hence, the intentional vomiting is of the actions that breaks the fast.
5 – Sexual relations:
Intercourse breaks the fast, and this is known from the Deen by necessity (Daroorah).
6 – As-Su’oot: Snuffing/inhaling through the nose
This is also called and known as Nushooq and Nushoogh and it means to put a substance in your nose and inhale it. The medicine that is inhaled/snuffed is called As-Sa’oot with a Fat’hah over the letter Seen.
As-Su’oot has been quoted in many Ahadith as medicine but none of them have mentioned it within the context of fasting. Because of this we do not find the Muhaddithoon of the Prophetic Ahadith mentioning it under this chapter (of Siyaam) with the exception of what was narrated by Luqayt Bin Sabrah who said: “ I said: O Messenger of Allah (saw) tell me about the Wudoo’? He (saw) said: Perform the Wudoo’ properly/completely and exaggerate in Al-Istinshaaq (inhaling/snuffing of water) except if you are fasting”.
The ‘Ulamaa (scholars) have differed in respect to As-Su’oot, is it lawful for the fasting person and does not break his fast or is it of the actions that break the fast? Al-Bukhaari (1934) said: [Al-Hasan said: There is no problem in relation to fasting and As-Su’oot as long as it does not reach the throat and Yaktahil]. Ibn Abi Shaibah mentioned it connected (Mawsoolan) with a close wording. Ibn Abi Shaibah reported (462/2) from Al-Qa’Qaa’ who said: [I asked Ibraheem – An-Nakhi’ – about As-Su’oot with Aloe for the fasting person and he did not regard anything (a problem) in it]. In another report [He said: There is no problem with As-Su’oot for the Saa’im]. The majority (however) have said that snuffing (something) breaks the fast.
They (the ‘Ulamaa) have differed in relation to the Istinshaaq (snorting) of water in Wudoo’ whilst fasting and it reaches the throat without intention: The Hanafiyah, Maalikiyah and Shaafi’yah in one of two opinions that it makes the fast Faasid (corrupts/spoils it). Ahmad, Ishaq Bin Raahuuwiyah, Al- Awzaa’i and the people of Ash-Shaafi’ that it makes the fast Faasid if the fast is not obligatory. In light of this I say the following:
The Hadith reported by Ibn Maajah on the authority of Ibn Sabrah is not correct to be used in the issue of As-Su’oot and this is because As-Su’oot is the entering of a substance into the nose and with its sniffing a part or all of it enters into the lungs, so this is the reality of As-Su’oot. As for the entering of water or medicine in the nose as a treatment for a inflamed nose condition for example without the medicine or water reaching the lungs then this is not As-Su’oot. Therefore Istinshaaq of water in Wudoo’ is not rightly considered in the area of As-Su’oot. The prohibition has come in the exaggerating in its performance whilst fasting as a barrier or prevention for the water to reach the throat and then into the gullet and stomach. This is what Al-Hasan meant and what Al-Bukhaari mentioned. So in conclusion I say that in this Mas’ala there are no prophetic Ahadith that mention it.
As for what was reported from ‘Aa’isha that she said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) entered and said: O ‘Aa’isha is there a Kisrah, so I gave it to him with a Qirs and then he placed it on his mouth and said: O ‘Aa’isha did any of it enter my stomach? It is like the kiss of a fasting person, the fast is only broken with what enters and not with what exits (comes out)”. Recorded by Abu Ya’la (4954/8). Al-Haithami said: It was narrated by Abu Ya’laa and it includes someone I don’t know. In the chain of narrators is Majhool (unknown, so he is Da’eef and it indicates that the narrator of the Hadith is alleged to be Salmaa from the tribe of Bakr Bin Waa’il and she is unknown and unheard of so this hadith is left (rejected).
After this only the Aathaar (reports) of the Sahaabah (rah) remain to be discussed. We have found that Abdur Razzaaq (7518) reported from ‘Abdullah Ibn Mas’ood that he said: [Fasting only (relates) to what enters and not what exits and the Wudoo’ with what exits and not what enters] and we find that Ibn Abi Shaibah (467/2) and Al-Bayhaqi have narrated from ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbaas that he said: [In relation to cupping (Al-Hujaamah) and the fasting person: Breaking fast is related to what enters and not to what exits]. Al-Bukhaari commented on this and these two reports are Saheeh. In relation to them I say:
The wording in these two reports is general (‘Aam) without explaining whether what enters goes to the chest, stomach or even the skull (meaning the brain) and it is far off to presume that these great Sahaabah’s had meant the skull or brain as this meaning is far from expectation. The one who desired or was driving towards this meaning then it is obligatory to make plain this meaning or if not to go to what the mind would logically understand which is that it is referring to what enters the chest and stomach and not want enters the brain. Due to this view of Fuqahaa who have said that what reaches the mind breaks the fast based on and deduced from these two reports is incorrect. It is strange that Fuqahaa believed that As-Su’oot reaches to the brain and as a result of this have said that what reaches the brain breaks the fast.
What is eating and drinking?
The truth – which is knowledge which arrives in a definite and decisive way – is that As-Su’oot is what a person inhales which enters the lungs, passes through the gullet i.e. into the chest and not the brain. The study must therefore be approached on this basis and with that I say: It has been agreed upon by the Muslims in past and recent times that the entering of something into the throat and its swallowing, i.e. its entering into the Gullet/Oesophagus breaks the fast without any stipulation that it reaches the stomach or lungs. So the descent of anything into the Gullet breaks the fast and this is obliged by the language because language dictates that whoever swallows a solid entity has eaten or if it is liquid has had something to drink. So the descending of anything into the Gullet is considered eating or drinking and eating and drinking are breakers of the fast, so if anything is swallowed the fast is broken. It is also agreed amongst the Muslims in the past and present except for what is considered a far off and strange opinion, that the entering of any item into the gullet breaks the fast whether it is nutritious or not like a pebble or handful of dirt. It remains for us to know the description of this vessel, so I say if this vessel enters as a whole in one go then there is no difference in that it breaks the fast like a morsel (of meat), chick pea, sip of water or medicine and this has been agreed upon by the Muslims from the earlier times to the recent. So if someone came to try and get around the fast through deceit and crushes a chick pea or medicinal tablet into powder, and then gradually enters it into him either by swallowing it with saliva or breathing it in with air then in these cases he has broken the fast. His tricks at trying to get around will not benefit him because the result is the same in both cases which is that something has descended into the gullet and then the lungs in the chest or to the stomach. It does not make any difference if the vessel enters in its normal state, enters through being crushed into powder and swallowed with saliva so that it reaches the stomach or if it is breathed in with the air so that it reaches the lungs.
Therefore anything that enters into the path of the Gullet breaks the fast without consideration of the way that it entered, because the reality of all these methods is that it is still one and the same action. As for what can enter the Gullet but does not have a material sensed form such as perfume and other smells whether they are pure or dislikeable they do not break the fast and enter through the sense of smell without intention or purpose. At-Tabaraani in Al-Mu’jam Al-Awsat (4449) and in Al-Mu’jam As- Sagheer (614) related from Anas Bin Maalik that he said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) was asked: Can the fasting person kiss? He replied: And what is wrong with that, (Its like) the smelling of a flower”. Its chain is Hasan. Here the Messenger of Allah (saw) compared in like the kiss with smelling a flower and this indicates that the smelling of a flower does not break the fast like a kiss doesn’t. So what enters into the chest or stomach through the throat and Gullet breaks the fast with no difference to whether it enters as a solid unit or as powder ingested with saliva or in a form of material that is in the air and turns into a sensed (congealed) form once inside. The first two situations contain nothing hidden and therefore do not require from us to provide examples of them however in relation to the third situation it does require examples to be brought forward to show its reality:
•    As-Su’oot, It is a type of Tobacco that is crushed, sniffed and it enters into the lungs.
•    The smoking of Tobacco and the smoke of incense
•    Steam from water or medicine
•    Inhaler
These four types enter through the throat, gullet into the lungs and chest and then congeal into masses and forms. With As-Su’oot it enters completely into the lungs passing through the Gullet like a crushed chick pea or tablet would and enters with the saliva into the stomach. The smoking of tobacco with cigarettes, pipes and hookah’s forms masses in the chest of tar and nicotine amongst other substances which has been clearly identified and can even be clearly witnessed with clothes or material that have come in contact a lot with the fumes. As for the steam of water and medicine then its reality is that it is water and medicine and therefore can never be breathed in under any situation. In relation to the inhaler then its reality is that it is medicine, it is like a spray that enters the mouth and then goes into the Gullet, a part of it mixes with the saliva and goes to the stomach and another part goes with the air into the lungs. The principle here is that any body/form that enters into the gullet breaks the fast irrespective of how it enters, be it through smoke, spray or steam and then shapes into or congeals into a form once inside the body.
All of this concerns the willing actions of man, if he has done As-Su’oot, smoked, intentionally inhaled fumes, left water or medicine boiling so as to breathe in the steam for treatment or otherwise, or sprayed an inhaler into his mouth. The reality of all of these is that they enter a body or entity (substance) into Gullet/Oesophagus and the fast is broken by any of these means.
However if any of this happened against the will of the person then it does not break the fast because Allah (swt) does not bring to account the action of the man which was against his will so whoever sits next to a smoker or burning incense sticks and something entered into his chest unintentionally and not wilfully then he remains fasting and has not broken it. Also if the weather situation and humidity meant that there were water particles in the air or in a bathroom dues to steam from hot water and the one fasting breathes this in without any desire to do so, intention or wish, then he has not broken his fast. Similar to this is the dust/sand in the air which occurs in cyclones and storms so if any of this is breathed in it does not break the fast and nothing breaks the fast except for what enters with somebody’s own will and intention.
What is clear from the above is that the opinion of the majority who said that As-Su’oot breaks the fast and obliges Qadaa is correct and any other view is mistaken. Also that the reports of Ibn Mas’ood and Ibn Abbaas where it was mentioned: (The fast is related to what enters) and (Breaking of fast is related to what enters), the first means that the person fasts or stops anything from going into his stomach and the second means that anything that enters the stomach breaks the fast. Therefore the entering of anything into the Gullet which includes As-Su’oot causes the fast to be broken.

Medical applications/realities:
Building upon what we have already discussed I would like to mention a selection of Medical applications or realities that are linked to our subject area, so as to bring the Hukm Shar’i for them and explain which cause the fast to be broken and which do not:
•    The entering of a cable or scope into the body of a patient by a doctor or surgeon, either for treatment related to the unblocking or treating of arteries or for examination only. In this case it needs to be seen where the scope enters: If it goes in through the nose or mouth then it breaks the fast as it does if it enters through the skin and reaches the lungs, stomach or intestines. However if it enters through the skin and goes to the heart for example, or liver or bladder and does not reach the lungs or digestive system (organs) then it does not break the fast of the fasting person.
•    EEG (electrical testing of the brain) and ECG (electrical testing of the heart) procedures which include the putting of cables onto the kin do not break the fast.
•    X-Ray or Radiotherapy which is sometimes used for lithotripsy operations in the kidneys, or in the ureter and bladder or for the treatment of cancer does not lead to the breaking of the fast. Similar to this is the use of the MRI procedure as the rays which are omitted in the MRI do not form bodies or entities so their entering into the body does not break the fast in any situation.
•    Percolation in the man’s penis or urethra as the Fuqahaa have named it and they mean by this the insertion of a fluid into the penis. This does not break the fast as the fluid does not reach the lungs or organs of the digestive system. This is similar to the insertion of a cable or scope into the penis to examine the bladder of kidneys as well as a similar procedure to examine the woman’s womb and all of this does not break the fast.
•    Enemas and medical suppositories that lower the temperature do break the fast because they reach the rectum and large intestine which are parts of the digestive system as is well known..
•    Vaccines of the skin to do not break the fast but those through the mouth do.
•    Internal examination procedures of a woman and what is related in terms of the insertion of instruments and substances does not break the fast because the womb is not part of the digestive or respiratory system.
•    What is excreted from a woman’s genitalia is examined: If it is menstruation or Childbirth blood then we have already stated that this breaks the fast. If however it is blood that has come from a cut vein then it does not break the fast. The excretion of any blood from any part of the body does not break the fast. As for fluids other than blood like natural secretions or secretions resulting from an infected genital tract, all of these do not break the fast.
•    The wound or surgery that reaches the body’s cavity and that which reaches the thin skin that surrounds the brain. The latter does not break the fast as inserting anything into the skull does not have any effect on fasting as for the wound that goes into the body’s cavity then it needs to be further examined: If it enters into the inside of the lungs or digestive system organs then it breaks the fast and if it does not reach then it does not cause the fast to be broken in a situation for example where it reaches, the heart, liver or bladder.
•    The sniffing of any drug like Ammonia (smelling salts) breaks the fast. It and As-Su’oot are the same action in reality and share the same Hukm (ruling).
•    The opening up or splitting of the chest or stomach for the entering of instruments for surgery then in this case if the opening reaches the insides of the lungs or digestive system then the fast is broken. If it does not reach these parts then it does not break the fast like a hernia operation, or kidney transplant or implanting a battery (pacemaker) in the rib cage to regulate the heart beat. All of this not break the fast at all. It would only be broken in these cases if the procedures were accompanied by the entering of materials/substances into the lungs or digestive system.
•    The X-Raying of any part of the body, or by CT and MRI scans which are accompanied by an intravenous injecting of substances does not break the fast. If however the materials (coloured substances) are entered through the mouth or anus then it in that case it does break the fast.
•    Knee and hip operations that may include the inserting of medical screw to strengthen the limbs do not break the fast.
•    The needle of a doctor does not at all break the fast whether it is for medical treatment, to give nutrients/supplements, blood or anaesthesia and whether it is in the veins. This is all as long as no substances or medicines enter directly into the respiratory and digestives systems and their organs.
In summary I say: The insertion of any solid or liquid material/substance or tool or it’s like into the body, and then if it enters into the respiratory or digestive systems then it breaks the fast and anything other than this does not. Here doubt may arise, this is because the fasting is abstaining from food and drink which is the abstention of taking in nutrients, then in this case why is it permitted to insert nutrients into the body through a doctors needle and it is not considered to invalidate the fast? Is one not like the other? The response to this doubt is that the one fasting prohibits for himself food and drink in as far as food and drink are understood to be referring to and this is what has come in the texts. The texts have not come once ordering the faster to abstain from nutrients and due to this if he swallows a handful of sand or small pebbles/pills then his fast has broken irrespective if they were nutritious or not. The key element here is related to the process of eating and drinking and not with the intake of nutrients. There is no question that the taking of nutrients or blood through the skin is definitely not eating or drinking and therefore do not break the fast. In conclusion I say that the fast can take nutrients and it does not break his fast if it done without eating and drinking or without the entering of any substance into the digestive system and organs. It can be done by entering the substance or blood into the skin by a medical needle.

Some Actions that do not break the fast
Al-Qublah and Al-Mubaasharah (The kiss and fondling)
‘Aa’isha said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) would kiss me whilst we were both fasting”. And also from ‘Aa’isha that she said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) use to kiss some of his wives whilst he was fasting and then she laughed”.
These hadith show the permissibility of kissing whilst fasting
Al-Hujaamah:
Al-hujaamah is the splitting/opening of the skin in the head with a tool called a Mihjam or Mihjamah followed by the Haajim (one performing al-Hujaamah) extracting the blood from the opening when there is an abundance of blood in the body. Hadith have allowed this action and so building on what has preceded, meaning the permissibility of Al-Hujaamah for the Saa’im which is the extraction of blood from the body we say the following:
•    The process of donating blood in our present time is in reality the extraction of blood from the body and where the extraction of blood is permissible and does not break the fast we therefore can say that donating blood also does not break the fast.
•    That the wound and what accompanies it ordinarily of external bleeding whether this has resulted from fighting in the way of Allah, from a car accident, or a shooting at a wedding or argument, or falling from a high place or any other situation or circumstance all of this does not break the fast.
•    That the process of dialysis which is the extraction of the blood from the body in a purifying process and then the returning of this purified blood into the body, does not break the fast. This is because the extraction of blood in this process is like its extraction in Al-Hujaamah and they are the same action so what is applicable to one in judgment is wholly applicable to the other.
•    The extraction of blood with a needle in order for it to be examined in a laboratory is permitted and does not break the fast.
•    The sucking of blood by leeches (used as treatment) does not break the fast. So the exiting of blood from the body does not break the fast whatever the reasons and causes might me for this extraction.

As-Siwaak:
Abu Haneefah, Maalik, Ash-Shaafi’ said that performing Siwaak was permitted for the fasting person the beginning of the day and end of it or before Zhohr and after it. Ahmad and Ishaq have permitted it in the first part of the day and have said it is Makrooh after Zawaal (Sun at Zenith) i.e. after Zhohr. It is also well known that The Shaafi’iyah have disputed in relation to what has been reported from Ash- Shaafi’ in this issue. There has also been dispute concerning Siwaak, the use of (specific) damp/wet stick and a toothbrush with toothpaste on it. Karaahah (dislike) of using this has been reported from Ahmad, Qataadah, ‘Aamir Ash-Sha’bi, Al-Hakam, Ishaq and Maalik in one report attributed to him. It has been permitted however by Imaam Maalik in another report, Mujaahid, Ath-Thawri, Al-Awzaa’I, Abu Haneefah and ‘Urwah. This has also been reported to be the view of ‘Ali Bin Abi Taalib and ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar may Allah be pleased with them both. Those who have permitted it use have used the following evidences to arrive at their view:
•    Aamir Bin Rabee’a said: “I saw the Messenger of Allah (saw) performing Siwaak whilst he was fasting, (so many times that it could not be counted)”. Recorded by Abu Daawood (2364) and At-Tirmidhi verified it as Hasan. Ahmad, Ibn Khuzaimah, Al-Bayhaqi, Abu Daawood At-Tayaalisi, Ad-Daaraqutni and Al-Bazzaar also narrated it. Al-Bukhaari said: [It has been mentioned that the Prophet (saw) performed Siwaak whilst fasting and Ibn ‘Umar said: He performed it at the beginning of the day and the end of it and he would not swallow his saliva….].
•    Mujaalid narrated from Ash-Sha’bi from Masrooq from ‘Aa’isha that she said that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “As-Siwaak is of the best qualities attached to fasting” Narrated by Ibn Maajah (1677), Ad-Daaraqutni and At-Tabaraani in Al-Mu’jam Al-Awsat.
•    There are also Ahadith that have come concerning Siwaak in an restricted way like the hadith reported by Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If I had not wanted hardship to be upon my Ummah (or people) I would have ordered the Siwaak with every prayer”. Narrated by Al-Bukhaari (887), Muslim, Abu Daawood, An-Nasaa’i, At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Hibbaan and Ahmad.
The first Hadith has been classified as weak by some but At-Tirmidhi classified it as Hasan and Al- Bukhaari mentioned it and commented upon it and it is well known how strict he is with the classification of Hadith which he narrates and speaks about. It is therefore correct to use this Hadith for Istidlaal (as a Shariah evidence). As for the second Hadith it is Da’eef due to the weakness of Mujaalid. Al-Bukhaari said: Yahyah Bin Sa’eed classified him as Da’eef and Ibn Mahdi did not narrate from him and Ahmad did not see any value in him. Ibn Mo’een said: His hadith are not used as a legal proof and Abu Haatim said something similar so this Hadith is left and cannot be used. As the third Hadith which is Saheeh it is sufficient in itself to be used as an evidence that the fasting person performs Siwaak because the command of performing Siwaak at the time of every Salaah includes Ramadhan as it includes other than it. The Hadith is general and is not specified and absolute and not restricted and is therefore suitable to be used as an evidence in this issue. Al- Bukhaari said: [Abu Hurairah said from the Prophet (saw): If I did not want hardship on my Ummah I would have ordered them with the performance of Siwaak at every Wudoo’. Similar to this has also been reported from Jaabir and Zaid Bin Khaalid from the Prophet (saw) and the fasting person has not been specified from anyone else…]. So Siwaak is recommended and a Sunnah for the fasting person and at any time, whether it is before Zawaal or after it. The one who has specified it for before Zawaal or disliked it in general, then they need to bring forth a Shariah Daleel for this and there isn’t one. As for the claim of Al-Khuloof (the changing of the smell of the mouth due to fasting) and that it should not be removed with Siwaak until the end of the day due to the Ahadith that have mentioned that this smell is better to Allah than the smell of Misk (sweet perfume/Atar smell). So it is said that it is preferable to keep this smell and that is disliked to remove it, then this cannot be considered an evidence for the dislike of performing Siwaak whilst fasting. As for what is related to the wetness or dryness and the view that it is dislikable to use a wet Miswak then firstly there is no Daleel for this and also the reality cannot make allow such a conclusion. This is because if a dry Miswak is placed in the mouth it then becomes wet with saliva and has the same effect as a wet Miswak, the case is one and the same and the Hukm is therefore also the same. However the using of Siwaak in two cases obliges that attention be paid to what can gather in the mouth from using it and that it does not get swallowed, and what may (unintentionally) get past this precaution is pardoned. The entering of any material into the mouth whether it is edible or not is permitted for the fasting person with the condition that it is not swallowed or anything that comes from it as degradable/disolvable is swallowed. This is similar to when we make Wudoo’ whilst fasting and make efforts to prevent any of the water to enter into the throat and Gullet.
Mas’alah (Further linked issue):
What applies to what can be absorbed from the material of Siwaak also applies to what can be absorbed from chewing gum. It is allowed for the fasting person to chew gum on the condition that he notices and pays regard to what can build up of the material in his mouth. This is if the gum is degradable however if it is not then there is no harm for the faster in chewing it. And of those who have reported the permission of chewing gum is ‘Aa’isha the mother of believers, Ibraheem An- Nakh’I, ‘Aamir Ash-Sha’bi and ‘Ataa Ibn Abi Shaibah mentioned this.
Most of the Ulamaa have permitted the chewing of gum if it is not degradable (i.e. something comes out from it that can be ingested). If it is degradable and swallowed then the majority have said that this breaks the fast and this is the correct view. In contrast the people of Ra’I and Ash-Shaafi’ have said that the chewing of gum is disliked (Karaahah). Al-Bayhaqi (269/4) reported from Umm Habeebah the wife of the Prophet (saw) that she said: ‘The fasting person does not chew gum’. Ibn Abi Shaibah (454/2) and Abdur Razzaaq reported that a number of the Taabi’oon viewed the chewing of gum with Karaahah (dislike). Ibn Abu Shaibah said there were some who viewed it as permissible and I have not seen anyone who has said that chewing gum is Haraam and that it breaks the fast. As for the opinion of Karaahah (dislike), this has come from them due to the possibility of swallowing something from material or substance that has come from the gum. We respond to this by saying that even if possibility was suitable to be used as an evidence or a basis to form the opinion of Karaahah (dislike) we would then have to say the same thing in relation to the use of Siwaak or the putting of water in the mouth in Wudoo’ because all of these reflect the same reality.
Mas’alah (related issue):
As we have said that the entering of anything in the mouth does not break the fast and that the use of Siwaak and Madmadah in Wudoo’ which are both permitted support this view. The general principle (Al-Qaa’idah Al-‘Aamah) therefore is: The entering of any material in the mouth does not break the fast except if a material or substance that is emitted or comes off it is swallowed and it was possible to guard from it. However if it was not possible to guard from it, like a very small insignificant amount then there is no problem with this (i.e. it does not break the fast). So established on this principle it is permissible to taste food and the placing of a thermometer in the mouth is also allowed. Also that dentistry work is allowed and does not break the fast as long as nothing reaches the throat of substances or materials and is swallowed.
As for the remnants of food which may be stuck in between the teeth, then if they remain where they are then there is no difference in that it does not break the fast and there is no harm if a little of it was digested as the Shar’a has pardoned a little of what cannot be prevented or guarded from occurring. If however this food forms some kind of solid body and is swallowed i.e. it has to actually be swallowed and does not go down in the saliva without sensation. If this is in the mouth it has to be noticed and removed and if it is swallowed then it breaks the fast just as if a lentil (or chick pea) was swallowed. Muhammad Ibn Al-Mundhir said: They have reached a consensus – The Ulamaa of the Muslims – that the swallowing of anything from what was in the teeth and could not be removed in the saliva does not have any effect on the fasting person’s fast. Abu Haneefah used to say: If he had between his teeth meat and he eats it intentionally then there is no Qadaa upon him. In this view he has gone against the majority because this is counted as eating. The correct view is the opinion of the majority, that the intentional eating of meat that is caught between the teeth and it is possible to remove it, breaks the fast.
As for what a person with a heart illness or has suffered a stroke places under his tongue of pills which melt gradually as a remedy when the condition is intensified, then this breaks the fast. This is because there is no difference between swallowing a pill in one go and swallowing it gradually. This is similar to medicinal drops in the mouth and inoculation drops against paralysis as they all break the fast. So what enters into the mouth does not break the fast except for what enters into the gullet meaning what has been swallowed. The fasting person must take care and guard his fast and beware of breaking his fast if he did not intend it.

No children's feedback

Homework:

Seerah: Why were the Ansar unhappy with the Prophet* after the Battle of Hunain? How did the Prophet respond to this

Main Topic: bring examples of how the instincts of personal survival and worship may have changed (or are the same) over the ages