because, if we adopt a precautionary approach and declare it obligatory, we thereby fall into the opposite of precaution, in that we deem people sinful for omitting it. Precaution means that people should not be deemed sinful except on the basis of evidence that constitutes a proof before Allah, Most High.
As for the report from Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, it likewise provides no evidence that it is obligatory, because Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, did it by way of recommendation. Had he regarded it as obligatory, he would have instructed the people to do it, or at least his own family.
The second view: Fasting it is prohibited. (1) Those who hold this view cite the following evidence:
-
The saying of the Messenger ﷺ: “Do not precede Ramadan by fasting one or two days before it, except for a man who habitually fasts; let him fast.” (2) Thus, if someone who did not have a habitual fast observes this day, concerning which there is doubt, he has preceded Ramadan by one day.
-
The hadith of Ammar ibn Yasir, may Allah be pleased with him, which al-Bukhari related in suspended form and the compilers of the Sunan collections related with a connected chain: “Whoever fasts on the day concerning which there is doubt has disobeyed Abu al-Qasim ﷺ.” (3) There is no doubt that this is a day concerning which there is doubt, due to the presence of clouds and haze.