food—such as dates, bread, or broth—without a need. But if there is a need, there is no harm in it. The reason for this is that some of the food may perhaps pass down into his stomach without his noticing, so tasting such food exposes the fast to invalidation. Moreover, he may have a strong appetite for the food and then taste it merely in order to enjoy it; perhaps he may even suck it strongly, causing it to pass down into his stomach.

A need would be, for example, if he is a cook who needs to taste the food to check its saltiness or sweetness; or if he is buying something in the market that he needs to taste; or if a woman chews a date for her child, and similar cases.

His statement, “or to chew strong gum,” means that it is disliked for a fasting person to chew firm gum. Firm gum is gum that is hard and does not disintegrate, because some of its taste may perhaps seep into his stomach, if it has a taste.

If it has no taste, then there is no basis for deeming it disliked. Nevertheless, he should not chew it in front of people, because they may think poorly of him if he does so. How are they to know whether it is firm gum or otherwise, or whether it is tasteless or has a taste? Some people may also imitate him and chew gum without taking its taste into consideration. In al-Rawḍ, this was explained on the grounds that it brings on phlegm, increases saliva, and causes thirst (1). These, then, are three reasons.

His statement, “If he finds the taste of either in his throat, his fast is invalidated,” means that if he finds in his throat the taste of food that he tasted—even out of need—or the taste of firm gum, his fast is invalidated; that is, his fast is spoiled. This applies to both obligatory and voluntary fasting.