'' Our Lord ! grant us good in this world and good in the hereafter and save us from the torment of the Fire '' [Ameen]
-
{in Arab} :->
Rabbanaa aatinaa fid-dunyaa hasanatan wafil aakhirati hasanatan waqinaa 'athaaban-naar/-
(Surah Al-Baqarah ,verse 201)
Share 
in Ramadan aswell as expiation obligatory? I have searched about the
answer and found that there are two opinions:
1- Only intercourse requires making up missed day of fasting as well
as expiating. The evidence for this is known from the Sunnah.
2- Intercourse and also taking anything that reaches the stomach
intentionally, makes making up missed days and expiating obligatory. I
did not findan evidence for this from Quraan or Sunnah.
Please provide us with a detailed answer clarifying the evidence from
Quraan and Sunnah.
Praise be to Allaah.
The Prophet )peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him( stated that a
Bedouin was obliged to offer expiation because he had intercourse with
his wife deliberately during the day in Ramadaan whilst fasting. Thus
he )peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him( explained the basis for
the ruling and stated the reason for it. The fuqaha' are unanimously
agreed that his being a Bedouinwas merely a descriptionand does not
affect the ruling. So it is also obligatory for a Turk or Persian to
offer expiation if they have intercourse with their wives. They are
also agreed that the fact that the woman with whom he had intercourse
was his wife was also merely a description and does not affect the
ruling, so expiation must also be offered for intercourse with a slave
woman or zina. They are also agreed that the fact that the man
regretted it hadnothing to do with making expiation obligatory, so it
has nothing to do with the basis of the ruling. But they differed as
to whether intercourse wasthe only reason why expiation was required
because the fast was invalidated only by that, or is the issue that
the sanctity of Ramadaan was violated, even if it was done by breaking
the fast deliberately by eating or drinking? Al-Shaafa'i and Ahmad
held the former view, and Abu Haneefah, Maalik and those who agreed
with them held the latter view. The difference between the two groups
stems from their understanding of the basis of the ruling: is the
ruling based on the violation of the sanctity of the Ramadaan fast
violated by intercourse only or the violation of the sanctity of the
Ramadaan fast by the spoiling of the fast in all cases, even if it is
by eating or drinking? The correct view is the former, based on the
apparent meaning of the text, and because the basic principle is
thatthere is no expiation unless there is a clear text to prove that
it is required.
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa'imah li'l-Buhooth al-'Ilmiyyah wa'l-Ifta )10/300, 301(.
No comments:
Post a Comment