Questions For Macisaac And Nader Zaver

**Muhammed Ali** · August 30, 2011

Asalaamu alaikum brothers,

Sorry brother Nader the "i" in Zaveri is not in the title.

I just wanted to ask the both of you, which opinions you follow with regards to ascertaining the first of the month when thirty days have not passed. Do you follow a scholar on this issue or your own understanding/ijtihad?

If you use your own understanding then how did you derive conclusions on the following:

1, Can an optical aid be used to sight the moon?

2, Must the Moon be sighted locally (e.g. in the same horizon or night) or can it be seen anywhere in the world?

3, Can scientific calculations be used to determine the start of the month?

It would be interesting to see the ahadith and the opinions of the classical scholars on these issues.

Edited August 30, 2011 by Muhammed Ali

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

Asalaamu alaikum brothers,
 
Sorry brother Nader the "i" in Zaveri is not in the title.
 
I just wanted to ask the both of you, which opinions you follow with regards to ascertaining the first of the month when thirty days have not passed. Do you follow a scholar on this issue or your own understanding/ijtihad?
 
If you use your own understanding then how did you derive conclusions on the following:

wa `alaykum as-salaam wa rahmatullah,

Personally I follow the view of Sayyid al-Khoe'i (ar) as well as those scholars who agree with him on this (e.g. Shaykh Wahid Khorosani to name only one). I used to go by the local horizons view until I read the Sayyid's defense the shared night and found that even if some questions remain, out of the two approaches it seems the strongest. He says that the other has no actual proof (according to him) but uses a rather qiyasi argument about prayer times varying for different parts of the world. His defense of this position is stronger than I could do however, and for a while I've been thinking it would be a good thing to have translated, in sha Allah.

He mentions these sahih hadiths:

[ 13381 ] 13 ـ وبإسناده عن سعد بن عبدالله ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن الحسين بن سعيد ، عن محمد بن أبي عمير ، عن هشام بن الحكم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) أنه قال فيمن صام تسعة وعشرين قال : إن كانت له بينة عادلة على أهل مصر أنهم صاموا ثلاثين على رؤيته قضى يوما .

And by his isnad from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Muhammad b. Abi `Umayr from Hisham b. al-Hakam from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام that he said in regards to someone who fasted twenty night (days), he said: If he has the evidence of two just (witnesses) upon the people of a city that they had fasted thirty (days) (based) upon their sight, he does the qada of a day.

(Notice the mention of the people of a city, that is, any city without specifying further than that)

[ 13347 ] 9 ـ وعنه ، عن القاسم ، عن أبان ، عن عبدالرحمن بن أبي عبدالله قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن هلال شهر رمضان يغم علينا في تسع وعشرين من شعبان ؟ فقال : لا تصم إلا أن تراه ، فان شهد أهل بلد آخر فاقضه .

And from him from al-Qasim from Aban from `Abd ar-Rahman b. Abi `Abdillah. He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام about the hilal of the month of Ramadan being obscured from us in the twenty ninth of Sha`ban. So he said: Do not fast unless you see it, so if the people of another country saw it then do its qada.

[ 13412 ] 3 ـ وعنه ، عن فضالة ، عن أبان بن عثمان ، عن إسحاق بن عمار ، قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن هلال رمضان يغم علينا في تسع وعشرين من شعبان ؟ فقال : لا تصمه إلاّ أن تراه ، فإن شهد أهل بلد آخر أنهم رأوه فاقضه ، وإذا رأيته من وسط النهار فأتم صومه إلى الليل .

And from him from Faddala from Aban b. `Uthman from Ishaq b. `Ammar. He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام about the hilal of Ramadan that is obscured from us in the twenty ninth of Sha`ban. So he said: Do not fast it unless you see it. So if the people of another country testified that they had seen it then do its qada. And when you see it from the middle of the day then complete your fast until night.

(So here another “balad” is being mentioned without distinction of horizons)

[ 13447 ] 1 ـ محمد بن الحسن بإسناده عن الحسين بن سعيد ، عن حماد ، عن شعيب ، عن أبي بصير ، عن أبى عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) أنه سئل عن اليوم يقضى من شهر رمضان ؟ فقال : لا تقضه إلا أن يثبت شاهدان عدلان من جميع أهل الصلاة متى كان رأس الشهر ؟ ! وقال : لا تصم ذلك اليوم الذي يقضى إلا أن يقضي أهل الامصار ، فان فعلوا فصمه .

Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Hammad from Shu`ayb from Abu Basir from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام that he asked about the day that is carried out (or, whose qada is done) from the month of Ramadan. So he said: Do not do its carry it out (or, do its qada) unless two just witness from all/the entirety of the people of salat establish when the head of the month was. And he said: Do not fast that day which is carried out (or, that its qada is done, or which passes) until the people of the cities carry it out (or, do its qada). So if they do so, then fast it.

(As you can see, I'm not sure about how to translate some of that, however the point is the expression used here about the witnesses, that is from the entirety of the people of salat, again without specifying horizons)

He also mentions how in the du`a of the salat al-`eid it is said (quoting from Tusi’s Misbah)

«أسألك بحقّ هذا اليوم الذي جعلته للمسلمين عيداً»

I ask You by the right of this day which You have made an `Eid for the Muslims.

(Again, this day, one `eid, and Muslims in general are mentioned, not the Muslims of this horizon as opposed to those of another)

1, Can an optical aid be used to sight the moon?

That's a slippery slope since at what point do you go from viewing the moon to it being a device that is viewing it for you? Taken to the extreme, the moon could always be "sighted" in some fashion I'd think (e.g. by a space telescope), so it would seem the more precautionary approach would be warranted.

2, Must the Moon be sighted locally (e.g. in the same horizon or night) or can it be seen anywhere in the world?

See above.

3, Can scientific calculations be used to determine the start of the month?

No. The hadiths are very clear it must be sighted. To read into them as only meaning that you must have the certainty that eyesight affords, and that if you can achieve that otherwise is going well beyond their most apparent level.

<div>

وعن الحسين بن سعيد، عن صفوان، عن منصور بن حازم، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام أنه قال: صم لرؤية الهلال وأفطر لرؤيته، فإن شهد عندك شاهدان مرضيان بأنهما رأياه فاقضه .

And from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Safwan from Mansur b. Hazim from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام that he said: Fast with the sighting of the hilal and do iftar with its sighting. So if two satisfactory witnesses testify with you that they saw it, then do the qada of it. (sahih)

<div>

صحر: محمد بن يعقوب، عن عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن علي بن الحكم، عن سيف بن عميرة، عن الفضيل بن عثمان قال: قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: ليس على أهل القبلة إلا الرؤية، ليس على المسلمين إلا الرؤية .

Muahammad b. Ya`qub from a group of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Sayf b. `Umayra from al-Fudayl b. `Uthman. He said: Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام said: There is naught but sighting upon the people of Qibla. There is naught but sighting upon the Muslims. (sahih `ala ‘l-mashhur)

</div>

<div>

وبإسناده عن علي بن مهزيار، عن محمد بن أبي عمير، عن أيوب، وحماد، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إذا رأيتم الهلال فصوموا وإذا رأيتموه فأفطروا وليس بالرأي ولا بالتظني ولكن بالرؤية، والرؤية ليس أن يقوم عشرة فينظروا فيقول واحد: هو ذا هو، فينظر تسعة فلا يرونه، إذا رآه واحد رآه عشرة وألف، وإذا كانت علة فأتم شعبان ثلاثين .

And by his isnad from `Ali b. Mahzyar from Muhammad b. Abi `Umayr from Ayyub (the author states this to be an error for Abu Ayyub) and Hammad from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: When you have seen the hilal then fast, and when you have seen it then do iftar. And it is not by opinion (ra’y), and not by employing conjecture, rather (it is) by sighting. And sighting is not that ten should get up and look, so one says “It is that” and the nine do not see it. When one has seen it, ten and a thousand have seen it. And if there is an obstruction*, then complete Sha`ban (with) thirty (days). (sahih)

* `illa, more literally a reason, cause, or a malady or an accident that befalls an object and causes its state to become altered.

Note this last one has some close variants:

وعن سعد، عن العباس بن موسى، عن يونس بن عبد الرحمن، عن أبي أيوب إبراهيم بن عثمان الخزاز، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: قلت له: كم يجزي في رؤية الهلال ؟ فقال: إن شهر رمضان فريضة من فرائض الله فلا تؤدوا بالتظني، وليس رؤية الهلال أن يقوم عدة فيقول واحد: قد رأيته، ويقول الاخرون: لم نره. إذا رآه واحد رآه مائة، وإذا رآه مائة رآه ألف، ولايجوز في رؤية الهلال إذا لم يكن في السماء علة أقل من شهادة خمسين وإذا كانت في السماء علة قبلت شهادة رجلين يدخلان ويخرجان من مصر .

And from Sa`d from al-`Abbas b. Musa from Yunus b. `Abd ar-Rahman from Abu Ayyub Ibrahim b. `Uthman al-Khazzaz from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: I said to him: How many suffice for the sighting of the hilal? So he said: Verily the month of Ramadan is a farida (obligation) from the fara’id of Allah so it is not performed by employing conjecture. And sighting of the hilal is not that a number rise up and one says “I have seen it” and the others say “We did not see it.” When one saw it, a hundred saw it. And when a hundred saw it, a thousand saw it. And when there is no obstruction (`illa see note above) in the sky, less than the testimony of fifty is not allowed in the sighting of the hilal. And if there is an obstruction (`illa) in the sky, the testimony of two men who come in and go out from a city is accepted. (sahih)

<div>

وبهذا الاسناد، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم، عن أبي أيوب الخزاز، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إذا رأيتم الهلال فصوموا، وإذا رأيتموه فأفطروا وليس بالرأي، ولا بالتظني، وليس الرؤية أن يقوم عشرة نفر فيقول واحد: هوذا، وينظر تسعة فلا يرونه، ولكن إذا رآه واحد رآه ألف .

And by this isnad from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Abu Ayyub al-Khazzaz from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: When you have seen the hilal then fast, and when you have seen it then do iftar. And it is not by opinion and not by employing conjecture. And sighting is not that ten individuals rise and one says “It is that.” And nine look and they do not see it. Rather, when one has seen it, a thousand have seen it. (sahih `ala ‘l-mashhur)

http://www.*******.org/hadiths/muntaqa-l-jiman/sighting-the-hilal

Also this:

<div>

[ 13459 ] 1 ـ محمد بن الحسن بإسناده عن محمد بن الحسن الصفار ، عن محمد بن عيسى قال : كتب إليه أبوعمر : أخبرني يا مولاي ، إنه ربما أشكل علينا هلال شهر رمضان فلا نراه ونرى السماء ليست فيها علة ويفطر الناس ونفطر معهم ، ويقول قوم من الحساب قبلنا : إنه يرى في تلك الليلة بعينهابمصر ، وافريقية ، والاندلس ، هل يجوز ـ يا مولاي ـ ما قال الحساب في هذا الباب حتى يختلف الفرض على أهل الامصار فيكون صومهم خلاف صومنا ، وفطرهم خلاف فطرنا ؟ فوقع : لا تصومن الشك ، أفطر لرؤيته وصم لرؤيته .

1 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from Muhammad b. al-Hasan as-Saffar from Muhammad b. `Isa. He said: Abu `Umar wrote to him: Inform me O my master, sometimes the hilal of the month of Ramadan has become obscure to us so we do not see it and we see that there is no deficiency (?) in the sky. And the people break fast and we break fast with them. And a group from the calculators say before us: Verily it is seen in itself in this night in Egypt, and Ifriqiyya, and Andalusia. Is what the calculators say in this subject permissible – O my master – even that the obligation differs for the people of the cities and that their fast is different from our fast, and the breaking of the fast is different from our breaking of the fast? So he signed: Do not fast from (?) doubt. Break the fast due to its seeing and fast due to its seeing.

http://www.*******.org/hadiths/fasting/rules-of-the-month-of-ramadan/chapter-15

</div>

ImamAliLover · August 31, 2011

(bismillah)

(salam)

Brother Macisaac, do you mind posting the link of Sayyid al-Khu'i's discussion on this subject for our benefit?

(Arabic is fine insha'Allah)

EDIT: out of curiosity did you celebrate 'Eid today (Tuesday) or are you celebrating it tomorrow (Wednesday), and would 2 adil people seeing it in say California on Monday be good enough for you or should it be closer to your location (i don't really want to unnecessarily say where you are for you privacy)?

Edited August 31, 2011 by ImamAliLover

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

(wasalam)

You can find the relevant discussion of it here:

http://www.al-khoei....dex.php?id=3207

Well, first and foremost, my own actions here are hujja for nobody. Today was a difficult one. It was the 29th by the reckoning I follow, so it was possible to be today. And there was those witnesses in Chile apparently. If the latter would have been established that would have been sufficient going by the shared night view (though not the shared horizons view), so I was prepared to observe `eid today, though out of precaution I was thinking of traveling in the morning to assure I wasn't breaking fast on a day I should be fasting. However then word came from those other sources that cast some doubt on the sufficiency of the report for me, so I fasted instead. (I had been thinking of traveling anyway, so as to not be fasting on a day it was haram, but didn't end up doing so). What helped me to come to that decision was those hadiths I quoted above that go like this one:

وبهذا الاسناد، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم، عن أبي أيوب الخزاز، عن محمد بن مسلم، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: إذا رأيتم الهلال فصوموا، وإذا رأيتموه فأفطروا وليس بالرأي، ولا بالتظني، وليس الرؤية أن يقوم عشرة نفر فيقول واحد: هوذا، وينظر تسعة فلا يرونه، ولكن إذا رآه واحد رآه ألف .

And by this isnad from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Abu Ayyub al-Khazzaz from Muhammad b. Muslim from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: When you have seen the hilal then fast, and when you have seen it then do iftar. And it is not by opinion and not by employing conjecture. And sighting is not that ten individuals rise and one says “It is that.” And nine look and they do not see it. Rather, when one has seen it, a thousand have seen it. (sahih `ala ‘l-mashhur)

**Muhammed Ali** · August 31, 2011

Thank you very much :)

A few questions come to mind.

1, Those first few narrations do not exactly specify the sharing of the night since (from my understanding - and I do need to think about it in greater depth) it is entirely possible for a person to live in an area where the hilal was not seen and it was seen in a nearby town that did not share the night.

2, What is the proof for the opinion which only accepts the unity of horizons?

3, Does the use of the word "hilal" exclude the possibility of using an optical aid; perhaps because what may be seen with an aid might not be a hilal? In other words when does a hilal become a hilal? A very thin crescent could be seen with an aid but if it can't be seen with the naked eye then is it a hilal?

4, Some of the narrations say that the witnessing of one person is sufficient yet there is a requirement for two witnesses, how is this coherent?

Yasoob Al Deen · August 31, 2011

I used to go by the local horizons view until I read the Sayyid's defense the shared night and found that even if some questions remain, out of the two approaches it seems the strongest. He says that the other has no actual proof (according to him)

How about that it was a historical norm?

[ 13381 ] 13 ـ وبإسناده عن سعد بن عبدالله ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن الحسين بن سعيد ، عن محمد بن أبي عمير ، عن هشام بن الحكم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) أنه قال فيمنصام تسعة وعشرين قال : إن كانت له بينة عادلة على أهل مصر أنهم صاموا ثلاثين على رؤيته قضى يوما .
And by his isnad from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Muhammad b. Abi `Umayr from Hisham b. al-Hakam from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام that he said in regards to someone who fasted twenty night (days), he said: If he has the evidence of two just (witnesses) upon the people of a city that they had fasted thirty (days) (based) upon their sight, he does the qada of a day.
(Notice the mention of the people of a city, that is, any city without specifying further than that)
Yes, but this would only be applied in the sense that the furthest you could travel in a day was not halfway across the world.
[ 13347 ] 9 ـ وعنه ، عن القاسم ، عن أبان ، عن عبدالرحمن بن أبي عبدالله قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن هلال شهر رمضان يغم علينا في تسع وعشرين من شعبان ؟فقال : لا تصم إلا أن تراه ، فان شهد أهل بلد آخر فاقضه .
But how far could they travel? Only the country next door. And probably only that if a city was near enough to the border.
«أسألك بحقّ هذا اليوم الذي جعلته للمسلمين عيداً»
I ask You by the right of this day which You have made an `Eid for the Muslims.
(Again, this day, one `eid, and Muslims in general are mentioned, not the Muslims of this horizon as opposed to those of another)
This does not necessarily mean that Eid is one day.
Peace.

And from him from al-Qasim from Aban from `Abd ar-Rahman b. Abi `Abdillah. He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلامabout the hilal of the month of Ramadan being obscured from us in the twenty ninth of Sha`ban. So he said: Do not fast unless you see it, so if the people of another country saw it then do its qada.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Yasoob Al Deen

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

in a nearby town that did not share the night.

Take a moment and reflect on that statement ;-)

2, What is the proof for the opinion which only accepts the unity of horizons?

I'd like to see it myself. What Sayyid al-Khoe'i mentions is how they draw a connection between it and the timings of salat differing for different places in the world. Seems pretty weak though and sounds very much like qiyas.

3, Does the use of the word "hilal" exclude the possibility of using an optical aid; perhaps because what may be seen with an aid might not be a hilal? In other words when does a hilal become a hilal? A very thin crescent could be seen with an aid but if it can't be seen with the naked eye then is it a hilal?

I don't know.

4, Some of the narrations say that the witnessing of one person is sufficient yet there is a requirement for two witnesses, how is this coherent?

I'm not familiar with any that say one is sufficient (haven't really looked though), do you have any that say that?

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

The word 'balad' in today's terms is often used to mean 'country', but in classical terms it's used as 'town', and it is still used in such context. So when they say for example, to break your fast you travel to another 'balad', they mean, you leave the outskirts of the city. 'Madina' is often used to represent the epicenter of the 'balad', with the balad being the metro-area surrounding that city.

But how far could they travel? Only the country next door. And probably only that if a city was near enough to the border.
This does not necessarily mean that Eid is one day.

Exactly.

The 'horizon' is what you see when you stand on the beach and look at the 'horizon', but not the horizon across continents. As you rightly said, how far can one travel in a single night on horseback?

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

How about that it was a historical norm?
Yes, but this would only be applied in the sense that the furthest you could travel in a day was not halfway across the world.
But how far could they travel? Only the country next door. And probably only that if a city was near enough to the border.

Yes, back when I used to go with the shared horizon criteria that was pretty much my argument too. That is, back then they couldn't have known for instance if the moon would have been sighted in Mexico. But that argument is weak in that we can only go by what evidence is before us _today_. That is, we can't confine the application of the religion's criteria only to what people of a drastically more limited communications sphere would have known. After all, Islam is meant to be the final religion till yawm al-qiyama. So it's standard can't be handicapped by what people couldn't have known back then because of technological limitations. (This is nothing to do with the so-called keeping up with the times and other modernist liberal nonsense, I just mean in terms of applying the standards the religion itself sets.) If in fact though there was some criteria for horizons we would expect at least _some_ reference to it in the ahadith, but going by what Sayyid al-Khoe'i is saying, there is none.

This does not necessarily mean that Eid is one day.

The quote doesn't say this day (which is itself specific) "for some Muslims" it just says lil-muslimeen (i.e. general). Granted it's not the strongest of all the arguments, and he does bring some others, like for instance laylat al-qadr. (the argument being that laylat al-qadr is laylat al-qadr period, i.e. that it isn't going to be for example laylat al-qadr in the US but not in Canada on what is otherwise the very same night (e.g. right in EST it's 10:38PM regardless of where in EST we are, North or South, i.e. it is the same night)

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

(the argument being that laylat al-qadr is laylat al-qadr period, i.e. that it isn't going to be for example laylat al-qadr in the US but not in Canada on what is otherwise the very same night (e.g. right in EST it's 10:38PM regardless of where in EST we are, North or South, i.e. it is the same night)

Thought about this quite a bit over the years. Do we know for sure how long laylatul qadr is? It seems to be symbolic here. In summer in norway, the layl might be 3 hours, whilst in winter it's 21 hours. Whilst layl in australia it's day in the US, so one side of the world is having laylatul qadr whilst the other side isn't (matla'il fajr)? Does that mean the angels only descend on one side of the earth, and move around the earth as it turns, for a 24-hour period?

**Muhammed Ali** · August 31, 2011

Take a moment and reflect on that statement ;-)

Thinking about it now .... the whole world shares the night! Am I correct?

I'd like to see it myself.

Then why follow the opinion of Ayatullah Khoei [r] if you have not seen the justification for Ayatullah Seestani's [h] view?

I'm not familiar with any that say one is sufficient (haven't really looked though), do you have any that say that?

From the hadith you quoted: "And sighting is not that ten individuals rise and one says “It is that.” And nine look and they do not see it. Rather, when one has seen it, a thousand have seen it."

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

The word 'balad' in today's terms is often used to mean 'country', but in classical terms it's used as 'town', and it is still used in such context. So when they say for example, to break your fast you travel to another 'balad', they mean, you leave the outskirts of the city. 'Madina' is often used to represent the epicenter of the 'balad', with the balad being the metro-area surrounding that city.

Yes it can mean city (and in the above narrations the first one says "misr"), but that's still general. Interposing that it really means (close) city is adding interpretation to the text when it doesn't say that explicitly. But perhaps even clearer than those is the last narration that says من جميع أهل الصلاة .

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

Yes it can mean city (and in the above narrations the first one says "misr"), but that's still general. Interposing that it really means (close) city is adding interpretation to the text when it doesn't say that explicitly. But perhaps even clearer than those is the last narration that says من جميع أهل الصلاة .

Isn't this translation "so if the people of another country saw it " questionable though? Using 'country' as the translation for 'balad' isn't accurate in this context.

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

Thinking about it now .... the whole world shares the night! Am I correct?

I meant a city is not going to be both "near" and not share a night, it's impossible. (As to the whole Earth sharing a night, I'm not sure on that but don't think it's quite like that, but to be honest my astronomy is pretty fuzzy. Sayyid al-Khoe'i goes in depth on that aspect, but it's pretty over my head (and particularly my Arabic))

Then why follow the opinion of Ayatullah Khoei [r] if you have not seen the justification for Ayatullah Seestani's [h] view?

I've yet to see any published justifications for pretty much any of Sayyid Sistani's views, just fatwas. It's not just Sayyid al-Khoe'i that viewed this though, other scholars in the past have as well, and many of the maraji` today do as well. I've looked to find the arguments for the others side but all I remember coming across is the comparison with salat times that al-Khoe'i mentioned, but like I said that seems incredibly weak to me.

From the hadith you quoted: "And sighting is not that ten individuals rise and one says “It is that.” And nine look and they do not see it. Rather, when one has seen it, a thousand have seen it."

I think we've understand that one differently. How I understand is the opposite, that is, it's _not_ going to be that you'd for example have a group of ten, and one sees it but not the others. If that were the case it would not be credible. Rather if anyone had seen it, a thousand other people would also see it (or at least have been able to see it).

Isn't this translation "so if the people of another country saw it " questionable though? Using 'country' as the translation for 'balad' isn't accurate in this context.

It doesn't really matter, you could translate it as city as well (keep in mind two country can share a single horizon anyway so it's not a huge point either way). The point is that they state it generally without qualification, that is, they just say the people of another misr/balad, without restricting it to a nearby misr/balad that shares a horizon. And again, it's the expression in that last one that seems really quite wide and encompassing من جميع أهل الصلاة .

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

It doesn't really matter, you could translate it as city as well (keep in mind two country can share a single horizon anyway so it's not a huge point either way). The point is that they state it generally without qualification, that is, they just say the people of another misr/balad, without restricting it to a nearby misr/balad that shares a horizon.

Ok, that's your interpretation bro. But personally i feel saying 'country' has a far greater impression on geographical distance than if one said 'town'.

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

Ok, that's your interpretation bro. But personally i feel saying 'country' has a far greater impression on geographical distance than if one said 'town'.

Not mine akhi, Sayyid al-Khoe'i (meaning what he's pointing out about the generality of it, not whether it means country or city for which I don't know what his view was)

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

Not mine akhi, Sayyid al-Khoe'i (meaning what he's pointing out about the generality of it, not whether it means country or city for which I don't know what his view was)

Khoe'i never translated hadith 13347 into english lol

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

BTW, though we've been discussing al-Khoe'i's exposition of this, he does mention other past scholars who also held this view:

منهم العلاّمة في المنتهى وصاحب الوافي والحدائق والمستند والسيّد الخونساري(1) وغيرهم ، ومال إليه في الجواهر(2) ، واحتمله الشهيد في الدروس

So he's listing `Allama Hilli in al-Muntaha, Mullah Mushin Fayd Kashani in al-Wafi, Shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani in al-Hada'iq an-Nadira, Shaykh an-Naraqi (I think..) in al-Mustanad, and Sayyid Khonsari, and other than them. And says that Shaykh Muhammad Hasan Najafi leans to it in al-Jawahir and Shahid al-Awwal considers it possible/probable in ad-Durus. (that's if I'm understanding all his references here). It'd be interesting to see how they explain it, especially the two Akhbaris (Yusuf al-Bahrani and Fayd Kashani) :rolleyes:

**Muhammed Ali** · August 31, 2011

I meant a city is not going to be both "near" and not share a night, it's impossible.

:blush: How did I make that mistake? I was thinking that the moon may set before the the night reaches another place; but that of course does not mean that a night is not shared. Technically what I said earlier is possible because there are parts of the world (the poles at certain times of the year) where there are no nights and a few miles away there may be a night; but anyhow we have special rules for them.

(As to the whole Earth sharing a night, I'm not sure on that but don't think it's quite like that, but to be honest my astronomy is pretty fuzzy.

There are times of the year (during an equinox) when the whole world shares a night with any other particular place on Earth. Think about it.The night covers half of the world. So say it's just after sunset in London which means it's getting close to sunrise in Australia. Then when the night shifts westwards it will eventually be close to sunrise in London and early night in the pacific Islands. Thus since the night moves westwards and covers half of the globe, every point on earth will share a night with another point. When there is no equinox most of the world still shares the night and those places where the night will not reach will follow the nearest city. So what is the point of a fatwa on the sharing of the night if the whole world technically shares the night?

Edited August 31, 2011 by Muhammed Ali

**Ya Aba 3abdillah** · August 31, 2011

Kashani's Al-Waafi (you still have the file?)

باب 14 علامة دخول الشهر و أن الصوم للرؤية و الفطر للرؤية

[1]

10517 1 الكافي، 4/ 76/ 1/ 1 الخمسة و محمد عن أحمد عن ابن أبي عمير عن حماد عن الحلبي عن أبي عبد اللَّه ع أنه سئل عن الأهلة فقال هي أهلة الشهور فإذا رأيت الهلال فصم و إذا رأيته فأفطر

[2]

10518 2 الكافي، 4/ 77/ 6/ 1 أحمد عن علي بن الحكم عن الخراز التهذيب، 4/ 156/ 5/ 1 علي بن مهزيار عن ابن أبي عمير عن الخراز عن الفقيه، 2/ 123/ 1908 محمد عن أبي جعفر ع قال إذا رأيتم الهلال فصوموا و إذا رأيتم الهلال فأفطروا- و ليس بالرأي و لا بالتظني و ليس الرؤية أن يقوم عشرة نفر فينظروا فيقول واحد هو ذا و ينظر تسعة و لا يرونه و لكن إذا رآه واحد رآه ألف

باب 17 رؤية الهلال قبل الزوال

[1]

10581 1 الكافي، 4/ 78/ 10/ 1 الثلاثة عن حماد عن أبي عبد اللَّه ع قال إذا رأوا الهلال قبل الزوال فهو لليلته الماضية و إذا رأوه بعد الزوال فهو لليلته المستقبلة

[2]

10582 2 التهذيب، 4/ 176/ 61/ 1 سعد عن أبي جعفر عن عبد اللَّه بن الصلت عن ابن فضال عن عبيد بن زرارة و ابن بكير قالا قال أبو عبد اللَّه ع إذا رئي الهلال قبل الزوال فذلك اليوم من شوال- و إذا رئي بعد الزوال فذلك اليوم من شهر رمضان

[3]

10583 3 الفقيه، 2/ 169/ 2038 الحديث مرسلا مقطوعا

بيان

قد مضى في كتاب الصلاة في هذا خبر آخر

guest 34193 · August 31, 2011

Here's what Kashani says after listing a number of narrations like the above:

إنما قال ع فإن شهد أهل بلد آخر فاقضه لأنه إذا رآه واحد في البلد رآه ألف كما مر و الظاهر أنه لا فرق بين أن يكون ذلك البلد المشهود

برؤيته فيه من البلاد القريبة من هذا البلد أو البعيدة منه لأن بناء التكليف على الرؤية لا على جواز الرؤية و لعدم انضباط القرب و البعد لجمهور الناس و لإطلاق اللفظ فما اشتهر بين متأخري أصحابنا من الفرق ثم اختلافهم في تفسير القرب و البعد بالاجتهاد لا وجه له.

He عليه السلام only said “so if the people of another balad witnessed then do its qada” because when one has seen it in the balad, a thousand have seen it, as has passed (in the ahadith). And what is apparent (azh-zhahir) is that there is no difference between that balad that witnessed with its sight in it being from the bilad that are near to this balad or far from it as the construction of the responsibility is upon the sight (ar-ru’ya) not upon the possibility of sight and the lack of the determination (?) of proximity and distance for the mass of the people and due to the release of the expression (i.e. it is stated generally without qualification). So what is famous amongst the later ones (muta'akhkhireen) of our companions of the distinction (i.e. between near and far) and then their difference in the explanation of proximity and distance by ijtihad has no reason for it.

<div>Ok, the gist I'm getting from that rather technical phrasing is that he's saying that the hadiths are only mentioning it's necessity of being seen and do not state any additional qualifications about whether the persons who saw it were from somewhere close to you or far away. Adding in extra qualifications of responsibility to that has no basis in the texts themselves, so is not valid.</div>

So what is the point of a fatwa on the sharing of the night if the whole world technically shares the night?

Would that still work with the Americas included? So say for example the moon was sighted somewhere in South America (let's say Peru). So a country like Brazil will be sharing the night with Peru (as would even Africa much further away), so it will inherit from that. But then as the night progresses through the globe there's going to come to a point where it stopped sharing it with Peru, though it might have shared it with Brazil that is further East than Peru. Brazil even though it didn't see the hilal itself is inheriting it from Peru, but country X to the far East doesn't share a night with Peru, only Brazil, which wouldn't count for this.

At least that's how I understand what he's saying. (I stand to be corrected though) Regardless though, it certainly is a pretty wide breadth of coverage, a lot more than restricting it by horizons.

**Muhammed Ali** · August 31, 2011

Would that still work with the Americas included? So say for example the moon was sighted somewhere in South America (let's say Peru). So a country like Brazil will be sharing the night with Peru (as would even Africa much further away), so it will inherit from that. But then as the night progresses through the globe there's going to come to a point where it stopped sharing it with Peru, though it might have shared it with Brazil that is further East than Peru. Brazil even though it didn't see the hilal itself is inheriting it from Peru, but country X to the far East doesn't share a night with Peru, only Brazil, which wouldn't count for this.
At least that's how I understand what he's saying. (I stand to be corrected though) Regardless though, it certainly is a pretty wide breadth of coverage, a lot more than restricting it by horizons.

Are you moving the night in the wrong direction. Are you taking it Eastwards? A country in the Far-East may share a night with Peru. Look at a globe from above or below, you will see that China shares its eastern part with Peru via the Pacific and its western part via the rest of the world. I am of course assuming that the Night covers exactly half of the globe, and it probably cover less than that.

Anyway you make a good point since the hilal will set and it doesn't stay in the sky for the duration of the night, so maybe it doesn't matter if the whole world shares a night with Peru because there will be times when the night is being shared but the moon has not risen or has already set. So now my question is: Is the criteria the sharing of the night when the hilal has not set?

Edited August 31, 2011 by Muhammed Ali

Gypsy · August 31, 2011

You may find some of your answers here

http://www.islamic-laws.com/questiononhilal.htm

**rotten_coconut** · August 31, 2011

It doesn't really matter, you could translate it as city as well (keep in mind two country can share a single horizon anyway so it's not a huge point either way). The point is that they state it generally without qualification, that is, they just say the people of another misr/balad, without restricting it to a nearby misr/balad that shares a horizon. And again, it's the expression in that last one that seems really quite wide and encompassing من جميع أهل الصلاة .

Salam,

Let's take an example: this year's 1st of Shawwal.

From http://www.moonsighting.com/1432shw.html

On the 29 August 2011, a hilal could be easily seen in Chile. So, the 1st of Shawwal there would definitely be 30 August 2011.

Without setting the validity limit of a sighting (i.e. a sighting will be applied worldwide), please correct me if I'm wrong, did you say that this sighting would also be applied to Jakarta (Indonesia) which had no possibility whatsoever to sight a hilal on the 29 August 2011? (FYI, based on the the absence of valid hilal sighting, Indonesian government ruled that the 1st of Shawwal would be on the 31 August 2011)

kadhim · August 31, 2011

How did I make that mistake? I was thinking that the moon may set before the the night reaches another place; but that of course does not mean that a night is not shared. Technically what I said earlier is possible because there are parts of the world (the poles at certain times of the year) where there are no nights and a few miles away there may be a night; but anyhow we have special rules for them.
There are times of the year (during an equinox) when the whole world shares a night with any other particular place on Earth. Think about it.The night covers half of the world. So say it's just after sunset in London which means it's getting close to sunrise in Australia. Then when the night shifts westwards it will eventually be close to sunrise in London and early night in the pacific Islands. Thus since the night moves westwards and covers half of the globe, every point on earth will share a night with another point. When there is no equinox most of the world still shares the night and those places where the night will not reach will follow the nearest city. So what is the point of a fatwa on the sharing of the night if the whole world technically shares the night?

No, it would only be essentially half the earth that would share a night in the sense I understand the term as used in the context of helping to establish a hilal sighting. Actually very slightly less than half the world, but since the earth sun distance is very large compared to the earth radius, about 25 000 times more, for all intents and purposes, half the globe has some illumination at any one time.

Now the idea as I understand it is this. Some point in the world sees the moon. Now for a person in another part of the world to be able to take action on that and take the next day as the 1st day of the new month, they need to be in night at that moment and still have the day to come. If they're in day at the moment already, the news catches them too late to take action on it. But, assuming a perfectly efficient system of verifying reported sightings and disseminating the news nearly instantaneously, anyone in that shared hemisphere of darkness extending about 12 hours to the east of this location would at least in theory have the time to hear this report and make the intention to take eid in the coming day before the coming of fajr and the need to make an intention to fast for the day.

kadhim · August 31, 2011

Anyhow, this has been a very instructive thread. I had always been of the impression that the unity of horizons view was much more "traditional" and "conservative" than the unity of night view, which I had understood as more rationally based.

Somewhat ironically, I've stuck to the more local approach to sightings myself, being more cautious and conservative when it comes to central acts of worship than for say, social matters. Interesting to see that there is some arguable textual support for the unity of night view, though I'm still somewhat questioning whether such a broad sense of "people of the cities" or "the people of salat" was truly intended by the statements. Food for thought as I weigh the matter next year.

Abu Abdullaah · August 31, 2011

(bismillah)

(salam)

I urge inshaa' Allaah everyone that still has the chance to the moon to go out and see if it is going to be the second or third night. According to SaHeeH hadeeth:

بِإِسْنَادِهِ عَنْ سَعْدٍ عَنْ يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ يَزِيدَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مُرَازِمٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ إِذَا تَطَوَّقَ الْهِلَالُ فَهُوَ لِلَيْلَتَيْنِ وَ إِذَا رَأَيْتَ ظِلَّ رَأْسِكَ فِيهِ فَهُوَ لِثَلَاثٍ

Translation: When the moon encloses, then it is the second night, and when you see a shadow of your head from it, then it is the third (night).

Source: Tahdheeb al-aHkaam, vol 4, pg. 178, h. 67; Wasaa'il al-Shee'ah, vol 10, pg. 281, h. 13419

Grading: SaHeeH

This is a good quality control check to gain some yaqeen on the day of your 'Eed. If it is the second night, then last night was the first of RamaDaan and the moon should be having some sort of enclosure (circle). If it is the third night, then you should see a shadow of your head from the moon. Inshaa' Allaah.

Wallaahu 'Alam

(salam)

Edited September 1, 2011 by Abu Abdullaah

The Persian Shah · September 1, 2011

I don't understand how any textual argument could favour either side.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but isn't 'sharing the night' (ta'adud al-afaq?) when the moon is the same for everyone within a longitudinal range (i.e. night passes westwards as MA showed), whereas 'sharing the horizon' (wahdat al-afaq) is when the moon is the same for everybody with a circular range (i.e. you can stand at one point and you will see a horizon if you turn around 360).

If so, then in each case the moon can be established by a viewing not in the city itself. So it is a matter of SCOPE in BOTH cases. None of the nass (textual injunctions) favour any one scope more than the other as far as I can see.

Surely what determines which one is more valid, would be to refer to the current scientific theory?

Btw, is there any other moon theory than these two? I thought there were three theories..

kadhim · September 1, 2011

Here's what Kashani says after listing a number of narrations like the above:
 
 
إنما قال ع فإن شهد أهل بلد آخر فاقضه لأنه إذا رآه واحد في البلد رآه ألف كما مر و الظاهر أنه لا فرق بين أن يكون ذلك البلد المشهود
برؤيته فيه من البلاد القريبة من هذا البلد أو البعيدة منه لأن بناء التكليف على الرؤية لا على جواز الرؤية و لعدم انضباط القرب و البعد لجمهور الناس و لإطلاق اللفظ فما اشتهر بين متأخري أصحابنا من الفرق ثم اختلافهم في تفسير القرب و البعد بالاجتهاد لا وجه له. 
 
He عليه السلام only said “so if the people of another balad witnessed then do its qada” because when one has seen it in the balad, a thousand have seen it, as has passed (in the ahadith). And what is apparent (azh-zhahir) is that there is no difference between that balad that witnessed with its sight in it being from the bilad that are near to this balad or far from it as the construction of the responsibility is upon the sight (ar-ru’ya) not upon the possibility of sight and the lack of the determination (?) of proximity and distance for the mass of the people and due to the release of the expression (i.e. it is stated generally without qualification). So what is famous amongst the later ones (muta'akhkhireen) of our companions of the distinction (i.e. between near and far) and then their difference in the explanation of proximity and distance by ijtihad has no reason for it.
<div> </div>
<div>Ok, the gist I'm getting from that rather technical phrasing is that he's saying that the hadiths are only mentioning it's necessity of being seen and do not state any additional qualifications about whether the persons who saw it were from somewhere close to you or far away. Adding in extra qualifications of responsibility to that has no basis in the texts themselves, so is not valid.</div>
Would that still work with the Americas included? So say for example the moon was sighted somewhere in South America (let's say Peru). So a country like Brazil will be sharing the night with Peru (as would even Africa much further away), so it will inherit from that. But then as the night progresses through the globe there's going to come to a point where it stopped sharing it with Peru, though it might have shared it with Brazil that is further East than Peru. Brazil even though it didn't see the hilal itself is inheriting it from Peru, but country X to the far East doesn't share a night with Peru, only Brazil, which wouldn't count for this.
At least that's how I understand what he's saying. (I stand to be corrected though) Regardless though, it certainly is a pretty wide breadth of coverage, a lot more than restricting it by horizons.

I think this is incorrect as a reading. This is really a concept that needs to be understood visually rather than verbally. You kind of have to picture the spinning ball of the earth, with one half of it always in darkness, the particular part in darkness always changing. Then think of it as that half of the earth camping out underneath one big night/evening sky. If you can say that at your location, there was at least some period during your night where you were under the same canopy of darkness with some other point in the world where the hilal was seen, at the same time the hilal was seen at that other place, then you win, because you were under a shared canopy of darkness when there was a hilal in it somewhere.

Yeah. You know, I think I like this. I think I'm sold for next year.

guest 34193 · September 1, 2011

Then think of it as that half of the earth camping out underneath one big night/evening sky. If you can say that at your location, there was at least some period during your night where you were under the same canopy of darkness with some other point in the world where the hilal was seen, at the same time the hilal was seen at that other place, then you win, because you were under a shared canopy of darkness when there was a hilal in it somewhere.

Ah, that does make good sense. After all it's not that the moon is hopping around different places on the Earth, it's only that some places may have better conditions for seeing it in than others. What would be important would be that had been seen somewhere in that night (so instead of focusing on the location of the site, it's the fact of seeing at that time period that is important). Where the somewhere on Earth is isn't really relevant (and as mentioned above, it's not specified as relevant in the source texts), it's just that it had to be seen during that night.

kadhim · September 1, 2011

Ah, that does make good sense. After all it's not that the moon is hopping around different places on the Earth, it's only that some places may have better conditions for seeing it in than others. What would be important would be that had been seen somewhere in that night (so instead of focusing on the location of the site, it's the fact of seeing at that time period that is important). Where the somewhere on Earth is isn't really relevant (and as mentioned above, it's not specified as relevant in the source texts), it's just that it had to be seen during that night.

Yes, in a sense it's about the time intervals, once you standardize to UMT. Another way of coming at it.

Let H be the set of UMT times in which the hilal was seen somewhere in the earth after local sunset.

Let N(theta,phi) be the set of UMT times during which a location at theta degrees north latitude (-90<theta<90) and phi east longitude (-180<phi<180) experienced night.

If the intersection of sets H and N(theta,phi) is non-empty, then the location at (theta,phi) can consider the new month to be established under the principle of shared night.

Sorry, I'm still paying for my math and physics degree from the late 90's through my student loans. I need to use it once in awhile to make sure I'm getting my money's worth ;)

Edited September 1, 2011 by kadhim

Gypsy · September 1, 2011

(bismillah)
(salam)
I urge inshaa' Allaah everyone that still has the chance to the moon to go out and see if it is going to be the second or third night. According to SaHeeH hadeeth:
بِإِسْنَادِهِ عَنْ سَعْدٍ عَنْ يَعْقُوبَ بْنِ يَزِيدَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مُرَازِمٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ إِذَا تَطَوَّقَ الْهِلَالُ فَهُوَ لِلَيْلَتَيْنِ وَ إِذَا رَأَيْتَ ظِلَّ رَأْسِكَ فِيهِ فَهُوَ لِثَلَاثٍ
Translation: When the moon encloses, then it is the second night, and when you see a shadow of your head from it, then it is the third (night).
Source: Tahdheeb al-aHkaam, vol 4, pg. 178, h. 67; Wasaa'il al-Shee'ah, vol 10, pg. 281, h. 13419
Grading: SaHeeH
This is a good quality control check to gain some yaqeen on the day of your 'Eed. If it is the second night, then last night was the first of RamaDaan and the moon should be having some sort of enclosure (circle). If it is the third night, then you should see a shadow of your head from the moon. Inshaa' Allaah.
Wallaahu 'Alam
(salam)

(wasalam)

I have been doing this on my own without knowing that there is a hadith that support such practice. I did this last year and it left me confused. Btw, I went to see the moon on the third day, 2 days after the Eid.

I prefer to just go by the moon sighting based on the astronomical data. Once you have information about the sightings/visibility of the new moon then you go look for the crescent/hilal.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Zareen

**rotten_coconut** · September 1, 2011

I think this is incorrect as a reading. This is really a concept that needs to be understood visually rather than verbally. You kind of have to picture the spinning ball of the earth, with one half of it always in darkness, the particular part in darkness always changing. Then think of it as that half of the earth camping out underneath one big night/evening sky. If you can say that at your location, there was at least some period during your night where you were under the same canopy of darkness with some other point in the world where the hilal was seen, at the same time the hilal was seen at that other place, then you win, because you were under a shared canopy of darkness when there was a hilal in it somewhere.
Yeah. You know, I think I like this. I think I'm sold for next year.

Yes, in a sense it's about the time intervals, once you standardize to UMT. Another way of coming at it.
Let H be the set of UMT times in which the hilal was seen somewhere in the earth after local sunset.
Let N(theta,phi) be the set of UMT times during which a location at theta degrees north latitude (-90<theta<90) and phi east longitude (-180<phi<180) experienced night.
If the intersection of sets H and N(theta,phi) is non-empty, then the location at (theta,phi) can consider the new month to be established under the principle of shared night.
Sorry, I'm still paying for my math and physics degree from the late 90's through my student loans. I need to use it once in awhile to make sure I'm getting my money's worth ;)

Salam,

Correct me if I'm wrong: For example if a hilal was sighted in Lima (Chile) in 29-Aug-2011, then under the principle of shared night, Montreal (Canada) would also be having 1 Shawwal on 30-Aug-2011 just like Lima, right?

So, could you please explain the possible visibility curve in http://moonsighting.com/1432shw.html which seems contradict the principle of shared night?

Edited September 1, 2011 by rotten_coconut

kadhim · September 1, 2011

The visibility curves are about local visibility potential.

Shared night is not shared potential for local visibility. Shared night just means that at the moment of sighting in the primary location, it is also night in the secondary location. If at the time when a hypothetical sighting was made a bit after sunset in Lima Peru, it was already night in Montreal, the rule would apply. I'm not sure if this would have been true a few days ago. While for the most part, if it's night in one place, it's night farther east, for places within a time zone or two yet far apart latitudinally, it can depend due to the 23 degree tilt of the earth.

For example, Montreal is one timezone to the east of Lima Peru, but this evening, for example, the sun sets at 7:33 PM EST in Montreal but actually sets earlier - at 7:04 PM EST in Lima, Peru. I.e. it can be dark in Lima for about 20 minutes but still light in Montreal.

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/city.html?n=131

http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/astronomy.html?n=165

It's shared horizons where there is a shared potential for local visibility.

Edited September 1, 2011 by kadhim

**rotten_coconut** · September 1, 2011

The visibility curves are about local visibility potential.
Shared night is not shared potential for local visibility. Shared night just means that at the moment of sighting in the primary location, it is also night in the secondary location. If at the time when a hypothetical sighting was made a bit after sunset in Lima Peru, it was already night in Montreal, the rule would apply. I'm not sure if this would have been true a few days ago. While for the most part, if it's night in one place, it's night farther east, for places within a time zone or two yet far apart latitudinally, it can depend due to the 23 degree tilt of the earth.
For example, Montreal is one timezone to the east of Lima Peru, but this evening, for example, the sun sets at 7:33 PM EST in Montreal but actually sets earlier - at 7:04 PM EST in Lima, Peru. I.e. it can be dark in Lima for about 20 minutes but still light in Montreal.
http://www.timeandda...city.html?n=131
http://www.timeandda...nomy.html?n=165
It's shared horizons where there is a shared potential for local visibility.

Salam,

Arrgghh, how could I make that stupid mistake on Lima & Chile :( Thanks for letting me get away with that, though :)

What I meant was Santiago (Chile) or other cities in South Chile where according to the map, it was possible to observe the hilal there on the 29 August 2011. And looks like comparing it to Montreal, it's not a good idea. Let's try Bermuda, since they both in UTC-4.

But if as you said, shared night is not shared potential for local visibility, then how we can ascertain that this methodology is the best since visibility potential doesn't support this?

Sign In

Questions For Macisaac And Nader Zaver

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation

Recently Browsing 0 members

Topics