Does Imam Ibn Abideen reject astronomical calculations?

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In the Name of Allah Most Merciful Most Kind

Short Answer

The Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations for moonsighting. There is no doubt regarding this being the sound opinion in the Madhab. The Prophetic Hadith is very clear regarding this matter. As for the attribution to Imam Ibn Abideen it is a misrepresentation.

Explanation

ابْنَ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، أَنَّهُ قَالَ: إِنَّا أُمَّةٌ أُمِّيَّةٌ، لاَ نَكْتُبُ وَلاَ نَحْسُبُ، الشَّهْرُ هَكَذَا وَهَكَذَا. يَعْنِي مَرَّةً تِسْعَةً وَعِشْرِينَ، وَمَرَّةً ثَلاَثِينَ

Ibn ‘Umar (May Allah Most High be pleased with them both) narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said, ‘We are an unlettered Ummah, we do not write or use (astronomical) calculations. A month is like this, and this.’ Meaning sometimes 29 and sometimes 30 days. (Sahih al-Bukhari, 1913).

The Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations due to the explicit Hadith above. In it the blessed Prophet ﷺ is negating calculations in the context of moonsighting. Therefore, the Hanafis cannot accept calculations as it would be tantamount to rejecting an authentic Hadith of the blessed Prophet ﷺ. Which is strictly Prohibited.

Authenticity

Due to the clarity of the hadith above, there is very little room for interpretation. Therefore, those who incline towards using calculation for moonsighting would have to seek to question the authenticity.

However, the authenticity is beyond question since it is a Musnad Hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari. The Ahl al-Sunnah have an agreement regarding the authenticity of such narrations in Bukhari and Muslim. Thus, the Hadith is authentic and clear. Which is why the Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations.

وأجمعت الأمة على صحة هذين الكتابين، ووجوب العمل بأحاديثهما. (تهذيب الأسماء واللغات)

The Ummah is unanimously agreed that these two books are Sahih, and that their Hadith narrations must be acted upon. (Imam al-Nawawi, Tadheeb al-Asmaa wa al-Lughaat).

The Hanafi position

As mentioned above, the Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations. That being due to the irrefutable evidence. I have provided many references from the Hanafi Madhab to prove this point in a separate answer. Therefore, I will focus on the position of Imam Ibn Abideen specifically in this answer.

Imam Ibn Abideen

It seems many Hanafis struggle to read the books of Imam Ibn Abideen. I previously found a prominent Hanafi here in the UK misquoting Imam Ibn Abideen regarding the Hadarah (Sufi dance). Now I have been made aware of someone misrepresenting him regarding astronomical calculations for moonsighting in Radd al-Muhtar.

This seems strange. Since senior Hanafi teachers should be proficient in the works of Imam Ibn Abideen. As his works as such a highly regarded source of Fatwah in the Madhab. I will provide the full text, from the same book, so people can see exactly what Imam Ibn Abidddeen said about the matter.

The full text

(قَوْلُهُ: وَلَا عِبْرَةَ بِقَوْلِ الْمُؤَقَّتَيْنِ) أَيْ فِي وُجُوبِ الصَّوْمِ عَلَى النَّاسِ بَلْ فِي الْمِعْرَاجِ لَا يُعْتَبَرُ قَوْلُهُمْ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ، وَلَا يَجُوزُ لِلْمُنَجِّمِ أَنْ يَعْمَلَ بِحِسَابِ نَفْسِهِ، وَفِي النَّهْرِ فَلَا يَلْزَمُ بِقَوْلِ الْمُؤَقِّتِينَ أَنَّهُ أَيْ الْهِلَالَ يَكُونُ فِي السَّمَاءِ لَيْلَةَ كَذَا وَإِنْ كَانُوا عُدُولًا فِي الصَّحِيحِ كَمَا فِي الْإِيضَاحِ وَلِلْإِمَامِ السُّبْكِيّ الشَّافِعِيِّ تَأْلِيفٌ مَالَ فِيهِ إلَى اعْتِمَادِ قَوْلِهِمْ؛ لِأَنَّ الْحِسَابَ قَطْعِيٌّ. اهـ. وَمِثْلُهُ فِي شَرْحِ الْوَهْبَانِيَّةِ

مَطْلَبٌ مَا قَالَهُ السُّبْكِيُّ مِنْ الِاعْتِمَادِ عَلَى قَوْلِ الْحِسَابِ مَرْدُودٌ قُلْت مَا قَالَهُ السُّبْكِيُّ رَدَّهُ مُتَأَخِّرُو أَهْلِ مَذْهَبِهِ مِنْهُمْ ابْنُ حَجَرٍ وَالرَّمْلِيُّ فِي شَرْحَيْ الْمِنْهَاجِ، وَفِي فَتَاوَى الشِّهَابِ الرَّمْلِيِّ الْكَبِيرِ الشَّافِعِيِّ: سُئِلَ عَنْ قَوْلِ السُّبْكِيّ لَوْ شَهِدَتْ بَيِّنَةٌ بِرُؤْيَةِ الْهِلَالِ لَيْلَةَ الثَّلَاثِينَ مِنْ الشَّهْرِ وَقَالَ الْحِسَابُ بِعَدَمِ إمْكَانِ الرُّؤْيَةِ تِلْكَ اللَّيْلَةَ عُمِلَ بِقَوْلِ أَهْلِ الْحِسَابِ؛ لِأَنَّ الْحِسَابَ قَطْعِيٌّ وَالشَّهَادَةُ ظَنِّيَّةٌ، وَأَطَالَ فِي ذَلِكَ فَهَلْ يُعْمَلُ بِمَا قَالَهُ أَمْ لَا وَفِيمَا إذَا رُئِيَ الْهِلَالُ نَهَارًا قَبْلَ طُلُوعِ الشَّمْسِ يَوْمَ التَّاسِعِ وَالْعِشْرِينَ مِنْ الشَّهْرِ، وَشَهِدَتْ بَيِّنَةٌ بِرُؤْيَةِ هِلَالِ رَمَضَانَ لَيْلَةَ الثَّلَاثِينَ مِنْ شَعْبَانَ، فَهَلْ تُقْبَلُ الشَّهَادَةُ أَمْ لَا؛ لِأَنَّ الْهِلَالَ إذَا كَانَ الشَّهْرُ كَامِلًا يَغِيبُ لَيْلَتَيْنِ أَوْ نَاقِصًا يَغِيبُ لَيْلَةً أَوْ غَابَ الْهِلَالُ اللَّيْلَةَ الثَّالِثَةَ قَبْلَ دُخُولِ وَقْتِ الْعِشَاءِ «؛ لِأَنَّهُ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – كَانَ يُصَلِّي الْعِشَاءَ لِسُقُوطِ الْقَمَرِ الثَّالِثَةَ» هَلْ يُعْمَلُ بِالشَّهَادَةِ أَمْ لَا؟

فَأَجَابَ: بِأَنَّ الْمَعْمُولَ بِهِ فِي الْمَسَائِلِ الثَّلَاثِ مَا شَهِدَتْ بِهِ الْبَيِّنَةُ؛ لِأَنَّ الشَّهَادَةَ نَزَّلَهَا الشَّارِعُ مَنْزِلَةَ الْيَقِينِ وَمَا قَالَهُ السُّبْكِيُّ مَرْدُودٌ رَدَّهُ عَلَيْهِ جَمَاعَةٌ مِنْ الْمُتَأَخِّرِينَ، وَلَيْسَ فِي الْعَمَلِ بِالْبَيِّنَةِ مُخَالَفَةٌ لِصَلَاتِهِ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – وَوَجْهُ مَا قُلْنَاهُ أَنَّ الشَّارِعَ لَمْ يَعْتَمِدْ الْحِسَابَ، بَلْ أَلْغَاهُ بِالْكُلِّيَّةِ بِقَوْلِهِ «نَحْنُ أُمَّةٌ أُمِّيَّةٌ لَا نَكْتُبُ وَلَا نَحْسِبُ الشَّهْرُ هَكَذَا وَهَكَذَا» وَقَالَ ابْنُ دَقِيقِ الْعِيدِ: الْحِسَابُ لَا يَجُوزُ الِاعْتِمَادُ عَلَيْهِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ انْتَهَى. وَالِاحْتِمَالَاتُ الَّتِي ذَكَرَهَا السُّبْكِيُّ بِقَوْلِهِ وَلِأَنَّ الشَّاهِدَ قَدْ يَشْتَبِهُ عَلَيْهِ إلَخْ لَا أَثَرَ لَهَا شَرْعًا لِإِمْكَانِ وُجُودِهَا فِي غَيْرِهَا مِنْ الشَّهَادَاتِ اهـ

(قَوْلُهُ: وَقِيلَ نَعَمْ إلَخْ) يُوهِمُ أَنَّهُ قِيلَ بِأَنَّهُ مُوجِبٌ لِلْعَمَلِ، وَلَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ بَلْ الْخِلَافُ فِي جَوَازِ الِاعْتِمَادِ عَلَيْهِمْ، وَقَدْ حَكَى فِي الْقُنْيَةِ الْأَقْوَالَ الثَّلَاثَةَ فَنَقَلَ أَوَّلًا عَنْ الْقَاضِي عَبْدِ الْجَبَّارِ، وَصَاحِبِ جَمْعِ الْعُلُومِ أَنَّهُ لَا بَأْسَ بِالِاعْتِمَادِ عَلَى قَوْلِهِمْ، وَنَقَلَ عَنْ ابْنِ مُقَاتِلٍ أَنَّهُ كَانَ يَسْأَلُهُمْ وَيَعْتَمِدُ عَلَى قَوْلِهِمْ إذَا اتَّفَقَ عَلَيْهِ جَمَاعَةٌ مِنْهُمْ، ثُمَّ نَقَلَ عَنْ شَرْحِ السَّرَخْسِيِّ أَنَّهُ يُعِيدُ وَعَنْ شَمْسِ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْحَلْوَانِيِّ: أَنَّ الشَّرْطَ فِي وُجُوبِ الصَّوْمِ وَالْإِفْطَارِ الرُّؤْيَةُ، وَلَا يُؤْخَذُ فِيهِ بِقَوْلِهِمْ، ثُمَّ نُقِلَ عَنْ مَجْدِ الْأَئِمَّةِ التَّرْجُمَانِيِّ أَنَّهُ اتَّفَقَ أَصْحَابُ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ إلَّا النَّادِرُ وَالشَّافِعِيُّ أَنَّهُ لَا اعْتِمَادَ عَلَى قَوْلِهِمْ. (رد المحتار على الدر المختار)

His (Imam al-Haskafi’s) saying: No consideration is given to the opinion of astronomers. Meaning with regards to obliging fasting upon the people. Rather in al-Miraaj (the author said) there is consensus (Ijma) that their (astronomers) opinions are not considered and it is not permitted for a starwatcher to act according to his own calculations. In al-Nahr (the author stated) it is not binding to act upon the opinions of astronomers when they say the crescent will be (visible) in the sky on such a night, even if they (the astronomers) are upright, according to the sound opinion. As mentioned in al-Idah. Imam al-Subki al-Shafi’i has a book in which he inclined towards relying on their opinion, because calculation is definitive. End quote. The same is found in the commentary on al-Wahbaniyah.

Section on what al-Subki said about relying on the statement of the astronomers is rejected. I say: What al-Subki said was rejected by the later followers of his Madhab. Including Ibn Hajar and al-Ramli in the two commentaries on al-Minhaj. And in the Fatwas of al-Shihab al-Ramli al-Kabir al-Shafi’i: He was asked about al-Subki’s statement: “If a testimony confirms the sighting of the crescent moon on the night of the thirtieth of the month, but astronomy dictates that it is not possible to see it that night, then the statement of the astronomers is to be acted upon. Since astronomy is definitive and testimony is conjectural.” He elaborated on this at length.

So, should what he said be acted upon or not? And if the crescent moon is seen during the day before sunrise on the twenty-ninth of the month, and a witness testifies to the sighting of the crescent moon of Ramadan on the night of the thirtieth night of Sha’ban, should the testimony be accepted or not? Because the crescent moon, when the month is complete, disappears for two nights, or if it is incomplete, it disappears for one night, or the crescent moon sets on the third night before the time for Isha begins. Since he ﷺ used to pray Isha when the moon had set on the third. Should the testimony be acted upon or not?

He replied: What is acted upon in the three issues is what is established by the witnesses. As the Lawgiver has given testimony the status of certainty. What al-Subki said is rejected. It was rejected by a group of later scholars.

Acting on the basis of witness testimony does not contradict the Prophet’s ﷺ prayer. The reason for what we have said is that the Lawgiver did not make calculations the relied upon means. Rather he nullified them entirely. By his saying, ‘We are an unlettered Ummah, we do not write or use (astronomical) calculations. A month is like this, and this.’ Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid said: It is not permissible to rely on calculations in prayer. End quote.

The possibilities mentioned by Al-Subki, when he said: Because the witness may be confused, etc., have no effect in Shariah. As they may exist in other types of testimonies. End quote.

His saying: And it was said, yes, etc., gives the impression that it was said that it necessitates action, but that is not the case. Rather, the disagreement is over the permissibility of relying on them. He has mentioned the three opinions in al-Qunyah. He first mentioned from al-Qadi Abd al-Jabbar and the author of Jami al-Uloom that there is no harm in relying on their opinion.

He narrated from Ibn Muqatil that he used to ask them and rely on their opinion if a group of them agreed upon it. Then he narrated from Sharh al-Sarakhsi that he would repeat. And from Shams al-A’immah al-Halwani: The condition for the obligation of fasting and ending the fast is the sighting. Their opinions are not to be taken into account. And it was reported from Majd al-A’immah al-Tarjumani that the companions of Abu Hanifah, except for an inconsequential minority, and al-Shafi’i, agreed that there is no reliance on their (astronomer’s) statements. (Imam Ibn Abideen 1252H, Radd al-Muhtaar ala al-Durr al-Muhtar).  

You can see from the Nass (text) above, that the Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations and Imam Ibn Abideen agrees with this view. As for the brother who has been posting a portion of this text, giving the impression that Imam Ibn Abideen agrees with calculations, he must clarify his mistake as he has misled many people.

Refuting Imam al-Subki

Imam Ibn Abideen was refuting Imam al-Subki who was a proponent of using calculations for moonsighting. Misleadingly, the brother has been taking the statements of Imam al-Subki and referencing them to Imam Ibn Abideen’s book Radd al-Muhtar. Thus, causing great confusion.

There is an abundance of such misguidance taking place on-line. They get away with this because they are unknown ‘keyboard warriors.’ Therefore, we should insist that such people make clear videos identifying themselves. The lack of anonymity and greater public accountability will force them to be more accurate with their assertions.

Conclusion

Imam Ibn Abideen is in complete agreement with the Madhab. Since the Hanafi Madhab rejects astronomical calculations. And that is the position promoted in the Imam’s books. This should come as no surprise, since the Hadith narration addressing this matter is explicit and authentic.

As for people misrepresenting Imam Ibn Abideen or others, they must repent and correct themselves. Since, misleading people regarding the Deen of Allah (Most High) is a grave matter.

And Allah Most High Knows Best.

–Answered by Shaykh Noorud-deen Rashid (02.04.25)