عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

The Illness that Permits the Breaking of the Fast
Author : Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh
Date Added : 04-01-2026

The Illness that Permits the Breaking of the Fast 

All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and peace and blessings be upon the Trustworthy Guide, our Master Muhammad, and upon his family and all his companions. 

Allah the Almighty has prescribed fasting despite the hardship it entails, making it obligatory upon His servants as a mercy to them, a means for the forgiveness of their sins, a purification for their souls, and a cleansing of their hearts from their ailments. Allah says {what means}: "Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship" (Al-Baqarah/185). In addition, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "When any one of you is observing Saum (fasting) on a day, he should neither indulge in obscene language nor should he raise the voice; and if anyone reviles him or tries to quarrel with him he should say: 'I am observing fast.'" (Reported by Bukhari & Muslim).

However, a person may be afflicted by certain conditions that render fasting difficult or impossible, such as travel or illness. This may cause him severe harm and unbearable hardship, which the established principles and overarching objectives of Islamic law (Maqasid al-Shariah) do not accept, as they call for warding off harm, facilitating matters for Muslims, and removing unbearable hardship wherever it is found.

Hence, Allah the Almighty has granted a concession for the ill person to break the fast during the days of Ramadan. Allah says {what means}: "So whoever among you is ill or on a journey [during them] - then an equal number of days [are to be made up]" (Al-Baqarah/184).

Illness is defined as: what causes a change in the natural state towards corruption. However, illnesses vary greatly according to their type, severity, and effects on the human body. Therefore, illness, in terms of its permissibility for breaking the fast, can be divided into three categories:

Firstly: The illness that does not permit its bearer to break the fast:

This is a minor illness with which fasting is not difficult, such as some simple ailments that are unrelated to fasting.

Examples include: headache, fever, toothache, or a pain in a finger or foot. This also includes illnesses where the person can delay taking medication until after breaking the fast or at the pre-dawn meal (Suhoor). It also includes diabetic patients whose condition is stable and controlled solely by diet or by blood sugar-lowering medications. This is the position of the majority of scholars.

Imam Al-Nawawi said: "As for the minor illness that does not entail apparent hardship, it is not permissible to break the fast, without disagreement among our scholars." [Al-Majmu' Vol.6/P.363].

The Dhahiri school and Ibn Sirin held the view that any illness whatsoever permits breaking the fast.

Tarif ibn Shihab Al-'Atardi said: "I entered upon Muhammad ibn Sirin during Ramadan while he was eating. When he finished, he said: 'Indeed, this finger of mine hurt me.'"

Al-Bukhari said: "I fell slightly ill in Naysabur, and that was during the month of Ramadan. Ishaq ibn Rahawayh visited me with a group of his companions and said to me: 'Have you broken your fast, O Abu 'Abdillah?' I said: 'Yes.' He said: 'I feared you might be too weak to accept the concession.'" (Al-Jami' li Ahkam al-Qur'an by Al-Qurtubi Vol. 2/P.276).

This opinion is considered remote, and the fatwa follows the view of the majority of scholars: that a minor illness with which fasting is not difficult does not permit breaking the fast.

Secondly: The illness that permits its bearer to break the fast:

This is what scholars call 'the illness for which a concession is granted'; meaning, its bearer is permitted to break the fast, but it is not obligatory upon him.

With this illness, the person is capable of fasting, but it would cause harm and hardship, though not to the point of death, nor would it necessarily lead to the increase of a life-threatening illness or the aggravation and worsening of the illness in the person's body. Scholars differed regarding this type. The Hanafi and Shafi'i schools held that breaking the fast is permissible in such an illness. The Malikis held that breaking the fast is recommended and fasting is disliked.

Al-Qurtubi said: "The second type: when he is capable of fasting but with harm and hardship. For this person, breaking the fast is recommended, and none would fast [in this state] except an ignorant person." (Al-Jami' li Ahkam al-Qur'an Vol.2/P.276).

Imam Abu Hanifah said: "If a man fears for himself while fasting that if he does not break his fast, the pain in his eye or his fever will increase, then he should break his fast." (Al-Mabsut by Al-Sarakhsi Vol.4/P.230).

Al-Kasani said: "As for illness, the type for which a concession is granted is that which one fears will increase due to fasting. This is what was alluded to in Al-Jami' al-Saghir..." Then he said: "It is narrated from Abu Hanifah that if the person is in a state where it is permissible to pray sitting down, then there is no harm in breaking fast." (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' Vol.2/P.94).

Accordingly, the position of the majority of scholars is: if a person has an illness that causes him pain and suffering, or he fears its persistence, or he fears its increase, then breaking the fast is valid for him.

Moreover, any illness that, in the predominant medical opinion, increases due to fasting – such as diabetes, where the patient suffers from high blood sugar – then it is recommended for the bearers of such an illness to break the fast.

Thirdly: The illness that necessitates breaking the fast:

This is the illness with which fasting is impossible, or one fears death from the illness, or it would lead to severe weakness, or the exacerbation of a life-threatening illness. Examples include diabetic patients undergoing kidney dialysis.

In this case, it is obligatory upon the ill person to break the fast, provided he is certain of the occurrence of death, severe harm, or that it is most likely to occur, based on the assessment of trustworthy, specialized physicians. Physicians must explain to their patients the extent of fasting's impact on their health and the potential complications that may pose a danger to their lives or exacerbate their illnesses, which would make fasting impermissible for them.

In this situation, the ill person would be sinning by fasting, because it involves casting oneself into destruction. Allah says {what means}: "And do not kill yourselves [or one another]. Indeed, Allah is to you ever Merciful" (An-Nisa'/29), and His saying: "And do not throw [yourselves] with your [own] hands into destruction" (Al-Baqarah/195).

Al-Kasani said: "And the absolute, rather obligatory, permitting factor is that from which death is feared; because it involves casting oneself into destruction, and this is not for establishing the right of Allah, which is obligation. The obligation does not remain in this condition; rather, it is forbidden. Therefore, breaking the fast becomes permissible, rather obligatory." (Bada'i' al-Sana'i' 2/94).

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

A woman made a wig for herself from her own [previously shed] hair, which she wears on her head after having lost her hair [due to hair loss]. Is this permissible?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Since the hair belongs to the woman herself, the wig can be removed during the obligatory ghusl (ritual bathing), and part of the head can still be wiped during wuḍū' (ablution), there is no sharī‘ah objection to making this wig — provided she does not appear wearing it in front of non-maḥram men (Any males outside a woman's immediate family whom she is permitted to marry under Islamic law), since it is not permissible for them to look at a woman's detached hair.
It is stated in Rawḍat aṭ-Ṭālibīn wa ‘Umdat al-Muftīn: "Whatever it is not permissible to look at while still attached [to the body] — such as the male genitalia, a free woman's forearm, the hair of her head, and a man's pubic hair, and similar matters — it remains unlawful to look at even after it has been detached [from the body], according to the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ)." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

If a person enters a mosque and finds the congregation in the final tashahhud, which is more virtuous — joining them or waiting for a second congregation to catch the opening takbīr (takbīrat al-iḥrām)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a worshipper finds a congregation that is about to finish its prayer, and he hopes to catch the entire prayer from the beginning with another congregation, it is more virtuous for him to pray with this first congregation and then repeat the prayer with the second one — provided he does not intend to confine himself to a single prayer. If, however, he intends to perform only one prayer, then it is more virtuous for him to wait for the second congregation rather than joining the first, so that he may attain the reward of congregational prayer for every single rakʿah.
Al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "If members of a congregation enter the mosque while the imam is in the final tashahhud, al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn held that it is recommended for them to join him in prayer, and that they should not delay in order to form a second congregation. Al-Mutawallī, however, affirmed the opposite view, and al-Qāḍī's own statement elsewhere supports this latter position, which is the relied-upon view. In fact, it is more virtuous for a person who has missed part of the prayer with one congregation, and who hopes to catch another congregation with whom he can attain the entire prayer within its proper time, to delay so that he may catch it in full with them. This applies when he intends to confine himself to a single prayer; otherwise, it is more virtuous for him to pray with the first group and then repeat the prayer with the others." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol. 3/P.186] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on selling gold or silver in installments or for a differed price?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is prohibited (haram) to sell gold or silver in installments or for a deferred price; rather, immediate hand-to-hand exchange (Taqabud) is mandatory, otherwise, it is considered usury (Riba). The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: 'Gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, dates for dates, and salt for salt—like for like, hand to hand. Whoever increases or asks for an increase has engaged in Riba; the receiver and the giver are the same in this regard.' (Narrated by Muslim). Furthermore, when exchanging new gold for used gold, they must be of equal weight, or it falls into Riba.
 
The permissible solution (al-makhraj) is for the merchant to purchase the used gold for cash first, and then sell the new gold for cash in a separate transaction. However, the price must be paid during the sitting of the contract (Majlis al-Aqd) for both deals. Alternatively, the jeweler may take the used gold with the intent of remodeling or repairing it, and then charge a fee for the craftsmanship or repair work. And Allah the Exalted knows best."

What are the legal and religious consequences for a charitable organization in the event that a sacrificial animal is damaged or spoiled after slaughter?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Charitable organizations entrusted with slaughtering sacrificial animals (uḍḥiyyah) and distributing their meat on behalf of their owners are obligated to safeguard the meat from spoilage, damage, theft, and any other harm. This is because such organizations act as agents (wukalā') on behalf of those offering the sacrifice, and an agent holds what is entrusted to them in trust (amānah) — whether they receive a wage for their work or act on a voluntary basis.
If the sacrificial animal is damaged after slaughter during the processes of packaging, transportation, or storage due to negligence or oversight — whether on the part of the organization's own staff overseeing the operation, or on the part of third parties contracted by the organization such as transport or shipping companies — then liability falls upon the negligent party, who is required to compensate for the value of the sacrifice. It is not permissible to cover such compensation from the organization's other donor funds.
However, if the damage to the sacrificial animal occurs without any negligence in its preservation and storage on the part of any party involved in the transportation, shipping, or storage process, and is instead attributable to force majeure circumstances beyond their control, then no financial liability is borne by any party in such a case. And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More