Peace everyone,
I think that at this stage, it is best to summarize all the different viewpoints on the timing of the abstinence so that people can see the essence of each and not get distracted by all the noise. There are basically four points of view:
- The traditional timing:
We all know the traditional timing so I am not going to waste time on explaining it. Also, everyone who has read the great reading knows that the traditional point of view has zero support in the great reading and this is what has prompted many people here to search for a better one based on the great reading. Basically, the traditional timing has the following problems:
1. Assumption that ?ramadan" is meaningless:
It assumes that the word ?ramadan? in 2:185 is meaningless and thus that the god could have said ?bla bla bla?, as long as it came after the month named Shaaban, which brings us to the next point.
2. The traditional timing is 100% arbitrary:
In reality, the only thing that the sectarian Ramadan is based on is when Shaaban occurred and this in turns depends on when Rajab occurred and so on.
So if one follows this back, one can see that in fact Ramadan is dependent on when the new era was made to start. Many people mistakenly believe that Islamic Calendar starts with the alleged date of migration of the prophet. However, even this arbitrary start is false since Muharram was selected as the start of the era and not the supposed date of migration of the prophet.
It is an indisputable fact that had the new era been made to start according to a different marker such as the date of first revelation or the date of birth of the prophet or the date of the final victory of the prophet, etc. then people here who happily embrace the traditional timing would have been fasting in an entirely different month. So for example, had the beginning of the new era been set to 3 years earlier then they would be fasting in what was Shaaban a month earlier. In addition to the beginning of the era, the order of the months in this new era is completely arbitrary. So what sectarians are doing right now is essentially fasting a completely random month and this is a fact that only the most ignorant and dogmatic would dispute.
3. The traditional timing ignores the fact that the year is certainly solar in the great reading:
According to 17:12, daylight and night are used to determine the number of years. Since day and night are a function of the sun and not the moon, then the year is certainly solar or luni-solar.
4. The traditional timing violates 9:36:
By assuming that the word ?shahr? means a lunar month and given the fact that the year is solar as shown in (3), the traditionalists actually count 12.3 months in a year and not exactly twelve.
5. The traditional timing creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 97:1
On the one hand, traditionalists claim that according to 2:185 the great reading was descended in a month while 97:1 clearly says that it was descended in one night. This false understanding creates a contradiction in the great reading.
6. The traditional timing creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 2:184
Traditionalists claim that according to 2:185 the abstinence is for a month while 2:184 is clearly saying ?a few days?. Some try to make up excuses by making up a new meaning for ?ma3doodat? as ?any number?. So now they create another problem by implying that the god is giving superfluous useless information. This false understanding also creates another problem further down in 2:185 when the passage mentions ?completing the count?. If the count is already known as ?30 days? or ?29 days? then both ?any number? and ?completing the count? become useless and unnecessary information.
These are just 6 problems with the traditional understanding and I am sure that there are more but I already wasted enough time stating what should be obvious to everyone but unfortunately isn?t as evident by all the confusion. So let me move to the next point of view on timing:
- The timing according to Anwar (ProGod):
Basically, Anwar acknowledges the meaning of ?ramadan? so this way, at least initially, he avoids issues (1), (2) and (3) in the traditional timing. However, his theory still suffers from the following problems and he later reintroduces issues (1), (2) and (3) as we will see below:
1. Anwar?s timing violates 9:36:
He invents an imagined meaning for ?shahr? as a 30 day month when it is an indisputable reality that no lunar or even solar calendar has constant 30 day months. So he actually counts 12.17 of his imaginary months in a year and not exactly 12.
The closest calendar to what Anwar is proposing is the ancient Egyptian calendar, which had twelve 30 day months and a thirteenth month that lasted only 5 days. This 5 day month was a national holiday that they conducted festivals on.
Unlike ancient Egyptians, Anwar is completely silent on what he is doing with the extra five days. I am really surprised given how several here are jumping to make up non-existent issues to criticize the timing that I proposed that no one has pointed his attention to this glaring issue of the missing five days. It probably has to do with people unconsciously focusing on the point of view that has more merit and is thus more threatening to their status quo. At any rate, back to Anwar?s five vanishing days. If he ignores them as he seems to be doing then his calendar will very quickly be out of sync with the seasons and thus he has unknowingly reintroduced traditional problems (1), (2) and (3) into his theory.
Anwar?s view is one that I am particularly familiar with because at one point perhaps five years ago or so I used to have the same exact view about the timing and the ?30 day? fixed month. Fortunately, I was able to progress with the god?s guidance beyond that understanding.
2. Anwar?s timing creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 97:1
Anwar claims that according to 2:185 the great reading was descended in ?30 days? while 97:1 clearly says that it was descended in one night. So like traditionalists, this false understanding creates a contradiction in the great reading.
3. Anwar?s timing creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 2:184
This is the same exact traditional problem (6) discussed above in the Traditional Timing section.
- The timing according to Layth:
At one point Layth was embracing the same understanding that I had except that he had the scorching full-moon ending the restricted full-moons instead of beginning them. Now, in his latest article about the so-called Night of the Decree, he has presented a new understanding. The underlying premise of Layth?s understanding is his interpretation of 19:25.
He bases his entire thesis on when the palm trees mature. However, even if we assume that this is the correct interpretation then the harvest season when the palm trees mature varies greatly. There are hundreds of varieties of palm trees (there is over 100 varieties in Iraq alone). They mature at different times and are harvested at different times ranging from June through end of October. So the timing is uncertain. Add this to the fact that the time of the pregnancy is also somewhat variable and we have the interaction of two uncertain variables.
There is also another major problem. When one sees a palm tree with fully ripened dates, you can often see some ripened dates which had fell by themselves to the ground. However, if you have seen a mature palm tree up close and you actually tried to shake it, you would very quickly realize that this is not an easy matter like shaking a twig. Their trunks are not easy to shake even for a fully able strong man, let alone a woman in labor! Why do you think we see people climbing up palm trees to get the fully ripened dates during the harvest season instead of seeing everyone simply hugging a palm tree and shaking it? So how things happened in 19:25 could be very different from what is normal and would more likely involve some divine intervention to cause it to happen. So the entire episode of pregnancy, labor and dates falling down from the palm tree could very well involve some divine intervention and thus be different from what would normally happen.
In addition, Lyth?s timing suffers from the following problems:
1. Assumption that ?ramadan" is meaningless:
Like traditionalists, Layth assumes that the key word ?ramadan? in 2:185 is meaningless and thus its meaning has nothing to do with his timing.
2. Layth?s timing creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 97:1
Layth goes back to the meaning of ?shahr? as ?month? so this again creates a contradiction between 2:185 and 97:1
As for any other issues, I am not really sure since Layth ends the article with the following statement:
?This night is not only a blessed night in itself, but it also would bless the period around it explaining why the fast has been commanded to occur in the month of Ramadhan in which the Night of Decree is contained?
He doesn?t tell us when this supposed ?month of Ramadhan? starts or ends. So the reader is left with no information whatsoever on when it starts or ends or how long the abstinence is for. Given this deliberate vagueness then Layth is probably aware of those issues and couldn?t address them at that time. I am hopeful that he can address them in the future.
- The timing according to Ayman, Marie, Zenje, and many others who contributed to this present understanding:
First of all I would like to say that all good comes from the god and I don?t deserve any credit except for mistakes. In fact, one of the ideas that led to this understanding came at a time over four years ago when I was holding the same view as Anwar and I was debating with a Sunni on another forum that the month is 30 days. The Sunni fellow kindly pointed to me that one of the meanings of ?shahr? is moon and the moon cycle is not 30 days. I checked Lisan Al-Arab and indeed the meaning of ?full-moon? was right there. This led to shifting my mindset from thinking about ?shahr? in terms of the vague term ?month? and manmade calendars to god-given natural cosmic phenomenon.
Of course, this timing mechanism doesn?t suffer from any of the above problems. It naturally solves the problem of when the night of measure is without making any extra effort or speculating about uncertain factors. It is the only understanding that doesn?t violate 9:36 and in fact based on 9:36 simply and elegantly maintains the timing of the restriction in sync with the seasons.
I hope this helps everyone.
Peace,
Ayman
