His statement, “and the ruling on making up [the missed fast]”: its ruling will come, Allah willing. Making it up is obligatory, but not immediately; rather, it may be delayed. Thus, you may postpone making up the fasts of Ramadan, even without an excuse, until only enough time remains before the next Ramadan to make up the number of fasts you owe. At that point, you must make them up.
“It is disliked for him to gather his saliva and then swallow it. It is forbidden to swallow phlegm, and it invalidates the fast only if it reaches his mouth.” .........
His statement, “to gather his saliva and then swallow it”: “swallow” is a present-tense verb in the accusative case by virtue of an optionally implied an, because it is coordinated with a clear, pure noun. Ibn Malik says:
When a verb is joined to a pure noun,
An puts it in the accusative, whether expressed or omitted.
Here, “swallow” is coordinated with “gathering,” and “gathering” is a pure noun—that is, a verbal noun. An example is the poet’s words:
To wear a cloak, and for my eye to be comforted,
Is dearer to me than wearing transparent garments.
“Be comforted” is in the accusative case, coordinated with “wearing.” Likewise here, “swallow” is in the accusative case, coordinated with “gathering.” In other words, it is disliked for him to gather his saliva and then swallow it, whether he does so idly, to relieve thirst, or for any other reason.
In al-Rawd, the reason given for this is: “to avoid the scholarly disagreement”—that is, the disagreement of those who hold that doing so invalidates the fast. Some scholars maintain that if a fasting person gathers his saliva and swallows it, his fast is invalidated.
However, citing disagreement is not a sound basis upon which to establish legal rulings. Therefore, whenever you find a ruling justified by “avoiding disagreement,” this is not a sound justification. Rather, we say: if the disagreement has some basis for consideration, in that the textual evidence could support it, then the opposing view is taken into account here—not merely because someone has differed, but because