Revisiting the Premise of FCNA’s Fatwa on Calculations versus Moonsighting

Background

In 2006, the Fiqh Council of North America (“FCNA”) adopted its fatwa concluding that calculations should replace the traditional practice of moonsighting to determine the Islamic lunar months. Though this position represented a stark break from tradition, it immediately gained widespread acceptance. At the same time, this fatwa was met with significant opposition from ‘ulama (traditional scholars) and those communities that deferred to their authority. However, it appears that the communities and masajid that are holding on to moonsighting have been decreasing over time. Even the initial forceful opposition from the traditional ‘ulama appears to be waning. If this trend continues, the traditional method of moonsighting may be lost on the Muslims of North America. 

It seems that there were two main reasons why FCNA’s fatwa gained such immediate traction. First, the general public was simply unaware of FCNA’s argument, as articulated by Dr. Zulfiqar Shah. As far as they were concerned, a reputable body of scholars adopted a fatwa that confirmed their own preconceived notions of the purpose of moonsighting. The actual arguments and refutations put forward were irrelevant. In their view, two groups of ‘ulama were differing on a fiqhi position. Differences among the ummah are a mercy.¹ Therefore, according to them, these differences should be accommodated for the greater good of attaining unity. Second, this fatwa would indeed facilitate ease with regards to planning holidays and scheduling. 

Another reason why the FCNA’s position seems to be gaining traction, even in traditional circles, is because many of the traditional ‘ulama have backed away from their once forceful opposition. Apparently, there is significant overlap between Dr. Zulfiqar’s argument and a position held by a minority but authoritative group of ‘ulama from among the Shafii’s forwarded by the great early modern jurist Imam Ramli (d. 1004 AH/ 1596 CE). Their rationale seems to be that though this is a minority position, it is a position found within our tradition. Therefore, in the interest of preserving unity and facilitating ease we should be willing to accommodate it.

The problem here is that both Dr. Zulfiqar’s and Imam Ramli’s positions are predicated on inaccurate premises. Scholars like Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Shaykh Dr. Mokhtar Maghraoui, as well as others, have done a masterful job in critiquing Dr. Zulfiqar’s argument. However, what gets lost in their thorough and compelling rebuttals is that even assuming Dr. Zulfiqar’s reasoning is correct; his argument still fails because his initial premise is false. The purpose of this brief essay is to succinctly explain Dr. Zulfiqar’s argument and to highlight the fallacy of its main premise—and also to highlight that Imam Ramli’s position seems to share the same flaw. 

Analysis of FCNA’s Premise

The main evidence that the FCNA had to contend with to draw its conclusion are the ahadith where Rasulullah ﷺ emphatically stated:

“Fast with sighting it [moon] and break the fast with sighting it. Complete thirty days of Sha’ban if it is cloudy.”²

Though the apparent meaning of this hadith opposes FCNA’s conclusion, in their interpretation, when Rasulullah ﷺ says: “Fast with sighting it and break the fast with sighting it”, what He ﷺ really means is to fast when the elongation of the crescent is at least 8 degrees and it is at least 5 degrees above the horizon and break the fast when the elongation of the crescent is at least 8 degrees and it is at least 5 degrees above the horizon.³

There is a glaring disconnect between the words of Rasulullah ﷺ and the FCNA’s interpretation of them. With this being the case, the purpose of Dr. Zulfiqar’s main argument is to reconcile the two. 

Initially, Dr. Zulfiqar asserts the principle articulated by the authoritative legal theorist Imam Shatibi (d. 790 AH/1388 CE) which states: 

“The established [legal] cause always remains the cause and never changes.”⁴

From this principle he argues that the actual trigger for starting and ending the Islamic months must be the same for both the 29^th and the 30^th nights.⁵ Since sighting the moon is not required on the 30^th night, its sighting cannot be the actual trigger for starting/ending the month on the 29^th night. The actual trigger, according to Dr. Zulfiqar, is attaining certainty with regards to the moon’s presence.⁶ As such, his argument reconciling FCNA’s position with the apparent words of Rasulullah ﷺ can be summed up as follows: Rasulullah ﷺ commanded us to sight the moon solely to ascertain its presence. Modern science allows us to precisely calculate the moon’s presence.⁷ Therefore, calculations can and should replace moonsighting as the method to determine the lunar months.

Based on this argument, the FCNA has taken the position that the visibility of the new moon’s crescent is irrelevant so long as we have certainty with regards to the moon’s presence. For this reason, since the FCNA introduced its pre-calculated lunar calendar, we have had months where the FCNA’s start/end dates were not corroborated by a single global sighting.⁸

The problem is that Dr. Zulfiqar’s initial premise is inaccurate and, naturally, the conclusion that flows from it is false. There is no direct evidence from the Quran or Sunnah that states the purpose for the Prophetic directive to sight the new moon’s crescent. Rather, Dr. Zulfiqar infers his premise from the fact that moonsighting is not required on the 30^th night of the lunar month. He argues that moonsighting is not required on the 30^th night because at this point there is certainty with regards to the moon’s presence. Therefore, attaining certainty with regards to the moon’s positionality, that it is sufficiently present on the horizon after sunset, is the trigger to start and end the Islamic months. However, he fails to consider that it is not just the moon’s presence that becomes certain on the 30^th night but also that there is certainty with regards to the presence of a visible crescent, even if there are clouds obstructing its sight. Though the moon’s presence can be calculated with certainty on the 29^th night, as it can be for any other night, the presence of a visible crescent cannot.⁹ What this means is that on the 29^th night, even if the moon is sufficiently present on the horizon after sunset, where it potentially can be seen, it is possible for it to remain invisible in an unobstructed sky. In short, on the 29^th night, certainty can be obtained with regards to positionality only, not with regards to visibility. By the 30^th night, certainty is attained with regards to both positionality and visibility. Dr. Zulfiqar does not provide any basis to conclude that the Lawgiver intended for the months to start/end based solely on the moon’s positionality without regard for its visibility.

Accordingly, a more accurate premise based on current scientific knowledge is: Rasulullah ﷺ commanded us to sight the moon to ascertain the moon’s presence and visibility. If this, more factually accurate premise is plugged into Dr. Zulfiqar’s argument, his conclusion would not follow as it completely ignores the visibility factor. In fact, if we start with the corrected premise the argument that would flow from it is: Rasulullah ﷺ commanded us to sight the crescent of the new moon to ascertain its presence and visibility. Modern science is thus far unable to calculate the visibility of the new moon’s crescent on the 29^th night. Therefore, calculations cannot be relied upon to determine the new month on the 29^th night of the lunar month.

The textual evidence presented directly lends itself to the conclusion that the Lawgiver intended for the lunar months to start/end with a visible crescent. Therefore, without more definitive evidence that positionality is to be the sole determining factor, Dr. Zulfiqar’s premise and overall argument are severely flawed.

Analysis of the Pro-Calculations Shafi’i Premise

Shaykh Hamza Karamali paraphrases the premise of the Shafi’i scholars permitting calculations, stating:¹⁰

“The purpose of seeing something is to discover that it exists, that it’s over there. That’s the purpose.”¹¹

He further reiterates this premise stating:

“Sight is a means to determine the existence…and today we have means that are more accurate than sight.”¹²

The premise stated above is problematic because the explicit Prophetic command is to sight a phenomenon that may be invisible despite “existing”, i.e., being present. Therefore, aside from verifying its “existence” or presence, sighting the moon also serves the purpose of verifying that it is, in fact, visible.

Perhaps the early modern scholars mistakenly assumed that, with the exception of cloudy skies, the visibility of the new moon’s crescent on the 29th night of the lunar month is entirely contingent on its positionality. However, we now know that this is not the case and most current information modern science offers informs us that calculating the visibility of the new moon’s crescent, as far as the 29^th night is concerned, is not possible.

Thus, without more direct evidence, it is incorrect to assume that the purpose of sighting the new moon’s crescent is solely to ascertain the moon’s positionality. Like Dr. Zulfiqar, Imam Ramli too, disregards the visibility factor, thus leading to a demonstrably inaccurate premise leading to a bad conclusion. 

Conclusion

Dr. Zulfiqar’s and Imam Ramli’s positions (as articulated by Shaykh Karamali) suffer from the same critical flaw. They both start from premises that are demonstrably inaccurate in light of the most current information modern science has to offer. As such, the conclusions that flow from the inaccurate premises are false. In the interest of truly and sincerely obeying the Lawgiver’s command, it is imperative that the Muslim communities who have adopted the FCNA’s position to reconsider their stance. Furthermore, those traditional scholars who have made concessions for the calculations position should reassess whether Imam Ramli’s and Dr. Zulfiqar’s positions are really valid differences of opinion given that both positions originate from false premises. 

Allah ﷻ knows best.¹³

---

Photo by Mahdi Soheili on Unsplash

Disclaimer: Material published by Traversing Tradition is meant to foster scholarly inquiry and rich discussion. The views, opinions, beliefs, or strategies represented in published articles and subsequent comments do not necessarily represent the views of Traversing Tradition or any employee thereof.

Works Cited:

1. Hadith related by Imam Bayhaqi. https://shorturl.at/YvAjC. [↩]
2. There are numerous variations of this hadith. The reference for the hadith cited is: Sahih Muslim 1081b [↩]
3. This standard of 8 degrees elongation and 5 degrees above the horizon was devised by the European Council of Fatwa and Research (“ECFR”) and adopted by the FCNA. It represents the moon’s positionality where the ECFR and FCNA have determined that the moon’s positionality above the horizon is sufficient enough to be deemed as being present. https://shorturl.at/yLs8E. [↩]
4. Shah Ali, Zulfiqar. The Astronomical Calculations and Ramadan: A Fiqhi Discourse. The International Institute of Islamic Thought. 2009, p. 62. [↩]
5. Shaykh Dr. Mokhtar Maghraoui refutes this point in his rebuttal entitled: “An Islamic Legal Analysis of the Astronomical Determination for the Beginning of Ramadan”. He argues that such clear, definitive, and explicit commands from the Lawgiver cannot be subject to this type of legal reasoning. Though in my opinion he presents the more compelling argument, for purposes of this essay I will assume that Dr. Zulfiqar correctly applies the principle. [↩]
6. Shah, The Astronomical Calculations and Ramadan: A Fiqhi Discourse, p. 63. [↩]
7. Wherever the words “presence” and “existence” appear in relation to the position of the moon, it is specifically referring to the moon being present above the horizon after sunset. [↩]
8. Most recently, this was the case for the start of Dhul Hijjah of 1446 AH/2024 CE. [↩]
9. Crescent Moon Visibility (navy.mil) [↩]
10. Since there is a dearth of information in the English language about Imam Ramli and the Shafii position on moonsighting, this analysis is solely based on the explanation provided by Shaykh Hamza Karamali. See online lecture entitled: Ramadan is here again. Or is it? Moonsighting or calculations? – YouTube, uploaded by Basaira Education, 19 March 2023. [↩]
11. Ibid, 35:50 – 36:06 [↩]
12. Ibid, 37:26 – 37:37 [↩]
13. For more information, see Shaykh Amin Kholwadia’s position here: https://shorturl.at/He9g7 [↩]