Ibn Mas‘ūd also said: “If it is obscured from you, count thirty days” (1).

If these reports are taken to contradict those reported (2) from them concerning fasting, these deserve preference because they agree, in both wording and meaning, with the texts traced back to the Prophet. If, however, they are taken not to contradict one another, there are two approaches to (3) reconciling them:

The first is to interpret them as applying to circumstances other than the crescent being obscured, or to its being obscured at the end of the month, as those who consider fasting obligatory have done.

The second is to interpret their reported fasting as a recommended—not obligatory—measure of careful determination and precaution. These reports explicitly rule out any obligation. This approach accords more closely with the texts and the principles of Islamic law. It avoids distinguishing between two days that are equally doubtful, treating one as a day of doubt and the other as a day of certainty, despite the unquestionable presence of doubt concerning it; and requiring (4) a person to believe with certainty that it is part of Ramadan while doubting whether it is or not. Nor (5) does it entail imposing an impossible obligation or distinguishing between two equivalent cases.

Section

The Prophet’s practice was to instruct people to begin fasting on the testimony of a single Muslim man, and to end it on the testimony of two witnesses.