Iftekhar Ahmed, Ahmadiyya Archive and Research Centre
The date for the beginning of Ramadan often sparks disagreement among Muslims, stemming from differing interpretations of Quranic verses and Prophetic traditions regarding moon sighting. The central question is whether a confirmed sighting in one location obligates all Muslims, or if each community is bound by its own visible horizon. Classical Islamic legal discourse frames this moon sighting paradox as a “unity of horizons” (ittihad al-matali‘) vs. “difference of horizons” (ikhtilaf al-matali‘) – essentially, whether a single sighting zone applies to all or if each region relies on its own observation. Matla‘ (plural: matali‘) refers to the area where the new crescent moon is likely to be seen.
This article demonstrates that the Ahmadi Muslim position – prioritising local moon sightings (ikhtilaf al-matali‘) – is firmly grounded in the practice of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his Companionsra, Islamic jurisprudence and textual and astronomical evidence. It clarifies that when Ahmadi Muslims begin Ramadan on a different day than some non-Ahmadi Muslims in the same area, this difference reflects a valid application of the principle of ikhtilaf al-matali‘ within Islamic jurisprudence, not a deviation from established tradition.
The article also addresses calls for a unified Islamic calendar based on a global sighting (tawhid al-ahilla wa-l-a‘yad), showing its lack of foundation in classical Islamic legal tradition. It clarifies that astronomical calculations aid, but do not replace, actual crescent moon sighting. A distinction exists between calculations based on established facts (hisab qat‘i) and predictive models (hisab zanni). The former can invalidate impossible sighting claims, while the latter can only assist them.
The lunar foundation of Islamic timekeeping
The Islamic calendar is lunar, with months beginning at the sighting of the new crescent moon (hilal). This is divinely ordained. The Quran states:
إِنَّ عِدَّةَ ٱلشُّهُورِ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ ٱثۡنَا عَشَرَ شَهۡرٗا فِي كِتَٰبِ ٱللَّهِ يَوۡمَ خَلَقَ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضَ
“The reckoning of months with Allah has been twelve months by Allah’s ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth.” (Surah at-Taubah, Ch.9: V.36)
And:
يَسۡـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلۡأَهِلَّةِ ۖ قُلۡ هِيَ مَوَٰقِيتُ لِلنَّاسِ وَٱلۡحَجِّ
“They ask thee about the new moons. Say, ‘They are means for measuring time for [the general good of] mankind and for the Pilgrimage.’” (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.190)
These mawaqit mark time for general use and religious observances. Knowledge of this calendar is a religious obligation – a shared responsibility (fard kifaya) for the community and a personal one (fard ‘ayn) for travellers.
The Quran establishes the principle that the month of fasting is determined by witnessing the month:
فَمَن شَهِدَ مِنكُمُ ٱلشَّهۡرَ فَلۡيَصُمۡهُ
“Therefore, whosoever of you is present [at home] in this month, let him fast therein.” (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch.2: V.186)
Two central questions arise from this verse: what constitutes “witnessing” (shahida) in this context? And, importantly, how did the Prophet Muhammadsa himself understand and apply this principle in practice? These questions are at the heart of the moon sighting debate.
Prophetic traditions: The basis for moon sighting
The Holy Prophetsa provided practical guidance through his sunnah on implementing the Quranic verses on moon sighting. His ahadith are a primary source. A mass-transmitted (mutawatir) hadith states:
صُومُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ وَأَفْطِرُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ
“Begin your fast at the sighting of it [the new crescent moon] and end it when you see it [again after a lunar month].” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1909; Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1081c)
Sahih Muslim reiterates this emphasis on sighting (ru’ya):
إِذَا رَأَيْتُمُ الْهِلَالَ فَصُومُوا، وَإِذَا رَأَيْتُمُوهُ فَأَفْطِرُوا، فَإِنْ غُمَّ عَلَيْكُمْ فَصُومُوا ثَلَاثِينَ يَوْمًا
“Whenever you sight the new moon (of the month of Ramadan) observe fast and when you sight it (the new moon of Shawwal) break it and if the sky is cloudy for you, then observe fast for thirty days.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1081a)
Acknowledging his community’s limited literacy, the Prophetsa said:
إِنَّا أُمَّةٌ أُمِّيَّةٌ، لَا نَكْتُبُ وَلَا نَحْسُبُ، الشَّهْرُ هَكَذَا وَهَكَذَا
“We are an illiterate people, we can neither write nor calculate. The month is so-and-so [i.e. sometimes twenty-nine and sometimes thirty days].” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1913)
This underscores the accessibility of the method. When the moon is obscured, the Prophetsa instructed:
فَإِنْ غُبِّيَ عَلَيْكُمْ فَأَكْمِلُوا عِدَّةَ شَعْبَانَ ثَلاَثِينَ
“[…] however, if the sky is overcast [and you cannot see the new crescent moon], then complete thirty days of Sha’ban.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1909)
A variant, fa-qudru lahu (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1906), “then act by estimation,” means the action is to be determined based on evidence. While it primarily means completing thirty days when the crescent is not visible, many scholars understand it to allow for the use of calculation. This is not to replace the sighting but to act as a supporting tool to inform the decision-making process, particularly in assessing the likelihood of a sighting or evaluating potentially erroneous reports. The core principle remains ru’ya, but fa-qudru lahu provides some flexibility.
The hadith of Kurayb: A cornerstone of the ikhtilaf al-matali‘ position
A man called Kurayb, while in Syria, saw the Ramadan crescent on Friday evening. This sighting was confirmed by the community and the governor, Mu‘awiyara. Later, when he returned to Medina, Kurayb reported this to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbasra. Ibn ‘Abbasra, however, stated that they had seen the moon in Medina on Saturday night and would continue fasting until they completed thirty days or sighted the new crescent moon. When Kurayb pointedly asked if Mu‘awiya’sra sighting and the fast of the people (of Syria) were not sufficient, Ibn ‘Abbasra replied, “No, this is how the Messengersa of Allah has commanded us.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1087)
This narration is central to the debate, providing a historical example of dealing with sightings from different locations. It is the primary textual basis for the difference of horizons (ikhtilaf al-matali‘). It demonstrates a clear preference for local sightings.
Despite the confirmed Syrian sighting, Ibn ‘Abbasra prioritised the observation in Medina. Now, does this command refer to the general instruction to fast upon sighting or a more specific, perhaps unrecorded, instruction about locality? This ambiguity is central to the legal debate. It directly challenges the concept of universal validity (ittihad al-matali‘), as a companion of the Prophetsa clearly did not consider a confirmed sighting in another location to be binding.
This reliance on local observation shows a sighting in one location does not automatically apply to all others, as the visibility of the new crescent moon depends on geographical and atmospheric conditions. The hadith of Kurayb, therefore, provides strong evidence for ikhtilaf al-matali‘, showing a leading companion prioritised local observation over a distant, confirmed sighting.
The core of the debate: ittihad al-matali‘ vs. ikhtilaf al-matali‘
The central legal debate revolves around general Prophetic traditions emphasising sighting (ru’ya) and the hadith of Kurayb. The core question: Is a confirmed sighting in one location binding on all Muslims, or only those within a specific region? Classical discussion frames this as unity of horizons (ittihad al-matali‘) vs. difference of horizons (ikhtilaf al-matali‘) – should each locality rely on its own sighting, or should one sighting be valid for all?
Proponents of ittihad al-matali‘ argue the Prophet’ssa command to fast upon sighting, sumu li-ru’yatihi, is universal. They believe a credible sighting anywhere obligates all, promoting unity. They view the Kurayb hadith as an exception.
Adherents of ikhtilaf al-matali‘ emphasise the hadith of Kurayb as a precedent for local sightings. They argue the sighting zone (matla‘) varies geographically. Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa supported ikhtilaf al-matali‘, stating that for a given locality, their sighting determines their relevant date. (“Is it permissible to observe global Eid-ul-Adha based on the Day of ‘Arafah for pilgrims?”, alhakam.org, 27 October 2023)
He referenced the foundational hadith already mentioned above: “Fast when you see the crescent [of Ramadan] and break your fast when you see the crescent [of Shawwal]. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 1909; Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1081c)”, noting it provides guidance based on sighting. He posed the question: Would it be correct to start fasts based on distant sightings without local observation? The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat answers that this is “contrary to the […] guidance of the Holy Prophetsa.” (Ibid.)
Those advocating for a unified global sighting believe the news of a sighting reaching worldwide necessitates unified observance. However, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa noted the illogicality of starting a fast in the daytime due to a distant sighting. He argued that if variations in celestial timings are accepted for prayer times, consistency demands the same for the beginning of the lunar month. He highlighted the hadith of Kurayb as direct support for the stance of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat: “[W]hen the crescent moon appears in a particular locality, the people of that locality should determine the commencement and conclusion of the lunar month based on that sighting.” (Ibid.)
These positions reflect a tension between the ideal of a unified global community and the practical realities of a geographically dispersed world.
Defining matla‘: A zone of probable visibility
Understanding ikhtilaf al-matali‘ requires grasping matla‘ (plural: matali‘). A matla‘ is not a fixed geographical boundary, but rather the sighting zone – the area where the new crescent moon (hilal) first becomes potentially visible after conjunction. It is a region of shared probable visibility, where the likelihood of seeing the moon is relatively uniform.
The size and shape of a matla‘ are determined by a complex interplay of factors: lunar elongation, i.e. the angular distance between the sun and moon, the moon’s altitude above the horizon at sunset, the sun’s altitude below the horizon, lag time, i.e. the time between sunset and moonset, geographical proximity and topography, atmospheric conditions and even the observer’s eyesight and experience. These factors are dynamic, making any precise matla‘ definition challenging.
There is no single, universally accepted way to define a matla‘. It is best understood as a zone of probable visibility, not a rigid geographical line. Classical scholars used travel distances to estimate it, while modern astronomy employs predictive models like Yallop and Odeh.
These models calculate visibility curves based on lunar elongation, the altitudes of the moon and the sun at sunset, lag time, and atmospheric refraction. These curves help define potential sighting areas. However, these models only aid in prediction; they do not replace the need for actual observation (ru’ya), which is the decisive factor in Islamic law.
Essentially, a matla‘ is the approximate maximum distance from a confirmed sighting where the moon would likely be visible under similar conditions, often around 300-500 km, but this is a guideline. Given clear skies, a sighting in one part of a matla‘ strongly suggests visibility in other parts of the same matla‘.
The role of Khilafat and practical challenges
The ittihad al-matali‘ vs. ikhtilaf al-matali‘ debate is complicated by fragmented religious authority and evolving global geography. The discussions of earlier scholars assumed a level of interconnectedness that does not exist globally today. While traditionally, Khilafat provided a central authority, this is not uniformly recognised today.
The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat believes in the continuation of Khilafat. For Ahmadi Muslims, the Khalifa provides guidance, including on moon sighting. The decisions of the Khalifa are binding, providing a unified approach within the Jamaat, aligning with ikhtilaf al-matali‘ and prioritising local sightings.
However, a globally unified calendar for all Muslims remains challenging. Vast distances make a single, global horizon (matla‘) impractical. Most of the Muslim world lacks a single, universally recognised authority. Even if ittihad al-matali‘ were accepted, implementation would face hurdles, e.g. accepting a New York sighting for Malaysia would mean starting the fast during daytime.
Ideally, Muslim-majority states would need a binding treaty, but this is improbable. Arguments against ikhtilaf al-matali‘ based on limited communication no longer hold; rapid information dissemination now highlights the impracticality of ittihad al-matali‘.
Such a treaty would not even bind Muslims in non-Muslim countries. Local scholars often determine the start of Islamic months, highlighting potential divergence from the authentic Sunnah without a unifying authority like Khilafat. This underscores the unified approach of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat.
This diversity, stemming from differing interpretations, the lack of a universal authority outside the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, changed geography and practicalities, led to varied moon sighting methods. Some follow local sightings, others Saudi announcements, and others pre-calculated calendars, often resulting in Muslims in the same area observing Ramadan on different days.
The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, through Khilafat, offers a solution, providing guidance rooted in the Quran and Sunnah, emphasising local sightings and maintaining global unity within the Jamaat. Closer cooperation and dialogue among Muslim states and scholars are needed.
Modern approaches and the enduring importance of ru’ya
Modern approaches to moon sighting often incorporate astronomical calculations, ranging from helpful aids to complete replacements for physical observation. Many methods use calculations to predict the likelihood of sighting and to guide observers but still require visual confirmation.
At the other extreme, a more radical approach advocates relying solely on calculations, abandoning physical sighting entirely. Proponents of this view argue that calculations offer certainty. However, this position is overwhelmingly rejected by traditional scholars as contradicting the emphasis on actual observation (ru‘ya) in the Quran and Sunnah.
The Promised Messiahas highlighted the wisdom of visual confirmation. In Surma-e Chashm-e Ariya, he stated that Allah “has not burdened [believers] with unnecessary difficulties.” Requiring ordinary people to master astronomical calculations would be an “unbearable burden,” especially since such calculations are “prone to numerous errors.” Instead, he emphasised the simplicity and accessibility of direct observation. (Surma-e-Chasham-e-Arya, Ruhani Khazain, Vol. 2, pp. 192-193)
Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa clarified that Ahmadi Muslims follow established moon-sighting committees where credible witnesses exist. In other cases, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat determines the start of the month based on a “clear possibility of the moon being visible,” but crucially, “the moon must be clearly sighted, as its physical sighting is essential.” The Promised Messiahas “emphasised the precedence of actual sighting.” (“The Advent of the blessed month of Ramadan”, Friday Sermon, alislam.org, 3 June 2016)
Thus, both the Promised Messiahas and Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa underscore the importance of ru’ya. Calculations are valuable, but cannot replace physical sighting. The Quran and Sunnah emphasise witnessing the moon. Calculations inform and aid, but sighting remains decisive.
There are two kinds of calculations: unquestioned astronomical data (hisab qat‘i) and prediction (hisab zanni). Hisab qat‘i can invalidate a sighting report contradicting established facts (e.g. claiming a sighting before moonset). Hisab zanni can inform where and when to look, but cannot replace ru’ya.
The Ahmadi Muslim position: Adherence to the Sunnah, respect for diversity
The Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat firmly adheres to ikhtilaf al-matali‘, prioritising local sightings for determining Islamic months, including Ramadan. This position is not a modern innovation, but is rooted in classical Islamic legal understanding, the practice of the Prophet Muhammadsa and his Companionsra and consideration of both textual and astronomical evidence.
This position stems from several interconnected reasonings.
First, the hadith of Kurayb is central, providing a clear precedent for prioritising local observation. Ibn ‘Abbasra rejected a confirmed sighting in Syria for the Muslims of Medina, explicitly stating this was per the Prophet’ssa command. This demonstrates a practical application of sighting (ru’ya) within a specific geographical context.
Secondly, there is no reliable historical evidence that the Companionsra attempted a unified calendar based on a single, centralised sighting. All available evidence instead points towards the practice of local observation. This emphasis on the local aligns with the views of numerous classical scholars throughout Islamic history, especially those within the Shafi‘i school, but also influential figures within other schools. The principle of ikhtilaf al-matali‘ is not merely a matter of convenience, it is a recognition of the varying conditions under which the new crescent moon becomes visible in different parts of the world.
The third and most important principle is ru’ya – the actual seeing of the moon. The Quran and Sunnah consistently emphasise witnessing the moon as the determining factor. Local sighting ensures this principle is upheld.
Finally, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat recognises the practical impossibility of a truly global, unified calendar, given current geographical realities. Local sighting, supported by, but not replaced by, astronomical calculations, provides a reliable and Islamically sound method. It is a position of both principle and practicality, upholding the Sunnah while respecting the diversity of the global Muslim community. It is not about division, but about a responsible and authentic application of the Sunnah. This approach acknowledges that while the ummah is one, its geographical dispersion necessitates a degree of flexibility in applying the principle of ru’ya.
The legal principle “no value in clearly mistaken judgement” (la ‘ibra bi-z-zann al-bayyin khata’uh) reinforces reliance on verifiable observation (ru’ya) and using definitive astronomical data (hisab qat‘i) to assess sighting reports.
Conclusion: Striving for unity, grounded in reality
The annual disagreements over the start of Ramadan or the dates of the two Eids, the moon sighting paradox, highlight a tension between the ideal of a unified ummah and the practical and legal realities of a geographically dispersed Muslim world. A global calendar based on a single sighting (ittihad al-matali‘) is neither practical nor supported by a careful reading of Islamic legal tradition. The historical context of the early Islamic scholars, whose known world was far smaller than ours, must be considered.
Furthermore, the vast geographical distances and time differences in the modern world make a single global horizon (matla‘) unworkable. The Ahmadi Muslim position advocates for the prioritisation of local moon sightings (ikhtilaf al-matali‘), a position deeply rooted in the Quran and Sunnah.
This is not a rejection of unity, but a recognition that authentic Islamic unity must be built upon sound legal foundations and the practical realities of observing the new crescent moon. To insist on a single, global sighting is impractical and risks undermining the very principle of ru’ya that it seeks to uphold.
A more fruitful path forward lies in embracing the validity of ikhtilaf al-matali‘, respecting informed differences of opinion based on established Islamic principles and focusing on reviving the Prophetic Sunnah of local moon sighting. A practical approach may involve developing criteria for defining regions within which a single sighting would be considered valid, thereby balancing ikhtilaf al-matali‘ with the desire for some degree of regional unity.
Widespread education within the Muslim community about the legal basis for ikhtilaf al-matali‘, proper observation techniques and the appropriate role of astronomical calculations is essential. These calculations are invaluable tools, but remain subservient to the principle of ru’ya, as explicitly emphasised in the Quran, the Sunnah and the words of the Promised Messiahas.
By grounding our practice in the Sunnah, guided by sound astronomical knowledge and fostered by respectful dialogue and understanding, the Muslim community can move towards a more authentic and consistent observance of Ramadan. The Ahmadi Muslim approach, under the guidance of Khilafat, offers a practical and principled resolution to the moon sighting paradox, rooted in a shared commitment to the Quran, the Sunnah and the verifiable evidence of the crescent moon.
This approach ultimately strengthens, rather than weakens, the unity of the Muslim community. This is a unity that embraces diversity within the framework of shared principles, recognising that faithful observance of the Sunnah may manifest differently yet remains united in its core commitment to the commands of Allah and His Messengersa.
True and lasting unity is not found in forced uniformity, but in a shared, principled adherence to the authentic teachings of Islam, even with variations in their practical application across diverse geographical contexts.
