The answer is that Ibn Abbas’s—may Allah be pleased with them both—inference from this verse is extremely profound. Allah says:

“And upon those who are able to fast is a ransom: feeding a needy person. Whoever volunteers goodness, it is better for him; but fasting is better for you.” [al-Baqarah 2:184]

Allah thus made the ransom an alternative to fasting. This was at the beginning, when people were given the choice between fasting and offering the ransom. Therefore, when one of the two alternatives becomes impossible, the other takes effect—that is, when fasting becomes impossible, the ransom becomes due. Otherwise, one who confines himself to the apparent wording of the verse would say that it does not indicate this ruling: the verse indicates that one who is able to fast may either offer the ransom or fast, though fasting is better; then this ruling was abrogated.

The answer is that, since Allah Most High made the ransom an alternative to fasting in the context of granting a choice, this indicates that it serves as its substitute when fasting is impossible. This is clear. Accordingly, whoever breaks his fast because of old age or an illness from which recovery is not expected must feed one needy person for each day.

But what food should be given, and in what amount?

The answer is: anything that is considered food, such as dates, wheat, rice, or otherwise.

As for the amount, no specific quantity of what is to be given has been stipulated here. Therefore, it is referred back to customary practice and to what constitutes feeding. When Anas ibn Malik—may Allah be pleased with him—grew old, he would gather thirty poor people and feed them bread and a condiment (1). Accordingly, if he gives the needy people lunch or dinner, that suffices in place of the ransom.