the majority who disapproved of fasting it likewise paid no heed to this argument, since the ruling remains in force until the crescent is actually sighted, not merely until sighting it becomes possible.

They differed over fasting that day without intending it as a Ramadan fast, when it does not coincide with one’s customary fasting practice. There are four opinions: it is permissible, disliked, prohibited, or recommended. Some permit or recommend it, understanding the prohibition to concern fasting it as part of Ramadan. Others regard it as disliked or prohibited because the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, forbade anticipating Ramadan by fasting, because of the fear of adding to the month, and for other reasons.

If someone fasts that day without intending it as a Ramadan fast, or with the disapproved intention of fasting it as part of Ramadan, does it suffice if the day is subsequently shown to have been part of Ramadan? Or does it not suffice, so that he must make it up? There are two opinions within the Muslim community. If it only becomes known during the day that the crescent had been sighted, is forming the intention during the day sufficient? On this too, there are two opinions within the Muslim community.

If it becomes clear that the crescent was sighted elsewhere, must the fast be made up, or is making it up not required at all? Or is it required if the distance is less than that which permits shortening the prayers? Or if the sighting occurred within the same region? Or if both places fall under the same administration? Is a sighting established by the testimony of one person, or are two required in all circumstances? Or, when the sky is clear, must there be a large number of witnesses?

These are matters over which Muslims have differed. These, then, are the disputed questions concerning the thirtieth day, from which further questions have arisen because of the universal need to address this