—that renders his fast invalid.

The reason for their disagreement lies in what is related from Abū Hurayrah, who used to say, “Whoever enters the morning in Ramadan in a state of major ritual impurity has broken his fast.” It is also reported from him that he later declared, “I did not say that—by the Lord of the Kaʿbah, it was Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) who said it.” Ibn al-Mājishūn, one of Mālik’s companions, further maintained that if a menstruating woman becomes pure before dawn yet delays the ritual bath, her day counts as a day of breaking the fast. Such opinions are anomalous and are rejected in light of the well-known, sound Sunnah.

The Second Section on the Obligatory Fast: Discussion of breaking the fast and its rulings

Under the Sharīʿah, those who break the fast fall into three categories:

1. A group for whom both fasting and breaking the fast are permissible, by unanimous agreement;
2. A group for whom breaking the fast is obligatory, although Muslims differ regarding the particulars; and
3. A group for whom breaking the fast is impermissible.

Each of these categories carries its own legal rulings.

Those to whom either course is allowed are: the sick person—by consensus; the traveler—though there is disagreement; the pregnant woman, the nursing mother, and the elderly. This classification as a whole is unanimously accepted.

Concerning the traveler, several issues require examination:
• If he fasts, does his fast fulfill the obligation or not?
• If it is valid, is it better for him to fast, to break the fast, or is he free to choose?
• Does the concession to break the fast apply only to a journey of a defined distance, or to any journey that the language calls “travel”?
• When exactly should he break the fast, and when must he begin abstaining?
• If part of the month has already passed, may he begin a journey or not? And once he has broken the fast, what ruling then applies to him?

With respect to the sick person, one must likewise determine both the degree of illness that permits him to break the fast and the ruling that follows such a break.

The first question is: If a sick person or a traveler does fast, does that fasting discharge the obligation or not?

Scholars disagreed. The majority held that if he fasts, his fast is valid and sufficient. The Ẓāhirīs maintained that it is not sufficient and that his obligation must be fulfilled on other days.

The cause of their divergence is the uncertainty surrounding the verse, “Whoever among you is ill or on a journey, then a number of other days” (Qurʾān 2:184). One may take the wording at face value, which assumes no ellipsis, or one may interpret it figuratively, with an implied clause: “—and therefore breaks his fast—then he must fast a number of other days.” This type of ellipsis is what specialists in rhetoric call laḥn al-khiṭāb.

Whoever takes the verse literally, without resorting to figurative interpretation, says that the traveler’s obligation is simply “a number of other days,” for the Most High says, “then a number of other days” (2:184). But whoever supplies the implied phrase “and breaks his fast” holds that the traveler is only obliged to make up “a number of other days” if he does in fact break the fast.