Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:184

Al-Baqarah (The Cow): Verse 184

Issue 1: Grammatical Case of {A Few Days} (Ayyāman)

There are several opinions regarding its grammatical case (accusative):

1. Adverb of Time (Adverbial Object): As if the meaning is: "Fasting was prescribed upon you during a few days." Similar to saying: "I intended to go out on Friday."
2. Predicate of an Unspecified Verb (Fā'il Ma'lūm): This is the view of Al-Farra'. Similar to saying: "Zayd was given money."
3. Specification/Explanation (Tafsīr).
4. By Implied Command: By omitting the verb, as if saying: "So fast a few days."

Issue 2: Identification of These Days

There are two main opinions:

Opinion 1: They are days other than Ramadan. (View of Mu'adh, Qatādah, and 'Āṭif; narrated from Ibn 'Abbās).

• Sub-opinions:
  • Three days from every month ('Āṭif).
  • Three days from every month, plus the Day of 'Āshūrā' (Qatādah).
• Status: Some held this fast was initially voluntary, then became obligatory. All agreed it was abrogated (Naskh) by the fast of Ramadan.
• Arguments for this view:
  1. It is narrated that the fast of Ramadan abrogated every other fast, implying there was another obligatory fast before Ramadan.
  2. The verse mentions the ruling for the sick and traveler, and the subsequent verse (about Ramadan) also mentions their ruling. If this were Ramadan, it would be redundant without benefit.
  3. The phrase {And upon those who are able to fast [but cannot} (in the following verse) implies that fasting these days was optional (choose to fast or pay the ransom). Ramadan, however, is obligatory by specification (no choice). Therefore, these days must be different from Ramadan.

Opinion 2: They refer specifically to the month of Ramadan. (View favored by most verifiers, including Ibn 'Abbās and Al-Ḥasan).

• Argument: Allah first said, {Fasting is prescribed for you} (2:183), which could mean one day, two days, or several days. Then He specified it as {A few numbered days}, reducing the ambiguity. Finally, He clarified it completely with {The month of Ramadan, in which the Qur'an was revealed} (2:185). Since this sequence allows the "numbered days" to be Ramadan, there is no reason to assign them to something else and invoke abrogation, as that adds meaning not supported by the text.
• Rebuttal to Argument 1 (Ramadan abrogated all other fasts): The narration might mean Ramadan abrogated all previous obligatory fasts in previous dispensations, not every fast within the Prophet's own Sharī'ah. Or, even if it abrogated a fast established in his Sharī'ah, why couldn't that abrogated fast be one established by a different text than this verse?
• Rebuttal to Argument 2 (Redundancy regarding sick/traveler): Initially, Ramadan fasting was optional (choose between fasting or ransom). When the sick/traveler were permitted to break the fast, it might have been assumed they only owed the ransom or nothing at all due to hardship. Allah clarified that their ruling differed from the resident's choice: they must make up the days later. When fasting became strictly obligatory for the healthy resident (removing the choice), it could be assumed this new strictness applied to everyone, including the sick/traveler. Thus, Allah reiterated that the sick/traveler retained their original concession (breaking fast and making up days later). This explains the repetition without requiring the days to be non-Ramadan.
• Rebuttal to Argument 3 (Optional vs. Specific Obligation): Ramadan fasting was initially optional (choice between fasting or ransom) and later became specifically obligatory.

Note on Abrogation (Naskh): Under both interpretations, abrogation must have occurred. If Opinion 1 is true, it's obvious. If Opinion 2 is true, the second verse (Ramadan obligation) abrogated the optionality implied in this verse. This raises an issue: how can the immediately following verse, {So whoever of you witnesses [the month], he must fast it}, abrogate the choice implied here, given their textual connection?

• Answer: Connection in recitation does not necessitate connection in revelation order. This is like the ruling on the waiting period for a widow, where the text recited first (the abrogating one) was revealed later than the abrogated text.

Issue 3: Meaning of {Numbered} (Ma'dūdāt)

1. Fixed by a Known Count: Predetermined by a specific number.
2. Few/Small in Quantity: Like {a few silver coins} (Yūsuf: 20). The root implies that small amounts of wealth are counted precisely, whereas large amounts are poured or heaped.
   • Interpretation: Allah showed mercy by not obligating fasting the entire year or most of it, but only a few days.
   • Alternative View (Some Verifiers): {A few numbered days} might relate back to {As it was prescribed for those before you} (2:183). The similarity lies in the fast being tied to a non-lengthy period, showing Allah was merciful to all nations by making the obligation brief and manageable.

This means the obligation of fasting during those numbered days applies only to the healthy residents. The sick and traveler may postpone the fast to other days.

Al-Qaffāl's Observation on Divine Mercy: Allah highlights five aspects of His grace in this legislation:

1. The Ummah shares a precedent with previous nations (making difficult matters easier when shared).
2. The wisdom behind fasting is achieving piety (Taqwā).
3. It is restricted to a few days, preventing immense hardship if it were perpetual.
4. It is specified to Ramadan, the noblest of months due to the Qur'an's revelation.
5. Hardship is removed by permitting postponement for the sick and traveler until they reach ease and comfort.

Issue 1: Condition and Consequence

The verse implies a conditional structure: If someone among you is sick or traveling, then he must fast an equal number of other days. The verb kāna (was/is) here implies the future (reception), as in: "Whoever comes to me, I will come to him."

Issue 2: Definition of Illness Permitting Breaking the Fast

The term illness means the lack of complete soundness in all limbs required for their proper function. There are three opinions on the illness that permits breaking the fast:

1. Any Illness/Any Travel: Any sick person or traveler may use the concession, applying the absolute wording to its minimum condition (View of Al-Ḥasan and Ibn Sīrīn).
2. Illness Causing Hardship: The concession is restricted to the sick or traveler who would face significant hardship and strain if they fasted (View of Al-Aṣamm). This applies the absolute wording to its optimal condition.
3. Illness Causing Harm or Worsening the Condition: This is the view of most jurists. The illness must lead to harm to the self or an increase in the existing ailment. (e.g., someone with a fever fears it will intensify if they fast). They argue that if every illness permitted breaking the fast, it would contradict the fact that some illnesses are actually improved by fasting. Therefore, the effect must be significant enough to warrant the concession.

Issue 3: Definition of Travel Permitting Concession

The root of safar (travel) relates to uncovering or revealing (e.g., the dawn reveals the light, a messenger reveals reconciliation, a woman unveils her face). A traveler is one whose face/character is revealed by leaving seclusion.

Jurists differed on the distance required for the concession:

• Dāwūd: Any distance, even one Farsakh (league), because the ruling is tied to the state of being a traveler, which is achieved immediately. He rejects limiting the general text of the Qur'an by a single weak narration.
• Al-Awzā'ī: The distance of one day's travel, as less than that might be experienced by a resident. Since no other number is preferable, they limit it to one.
• Al-Shāfi'ī (and Mālik, Aḥmad, Isḥāq): Sixteen Farsakhs (approx. 3 days' journey). A Farsakh is three miles (using the Prophet's established mile measure, where one mile is 12,000 feet or 4,000 steps).
• Abū Ḥanīfah and Al-Thawrī: Three stages (Marāḥil), totaling twenty-four Farsakhs.

Arguments for Al-Shāfi'ī's View (16 Farsakhs):

1. The verse implies general permission for travel. However, the hardship of a single day's travel is easily borne. Hardship arises when this effort is repeated over two days, making the concession appropriate for relief.
2. Narration from Ibn 'Abbās: The Prophet (PBUH) told the people of Mecca not to shorten prayers when traveling less than four Burud (plural of Barīd) from Mecca to 'Uṣfān. Since one Barīd is four Farsakhs, this totals sixteen Farsakhs.

Arguments for Abū Ḥanīfah's View (3 Stages):

1. The following verse {So whoever of you witnesses [the month], he must fast it} implies obligation. We deviated from this obligation for three days based on consensus that this amount warrants concession. Since the lesser amount is disputed, the obligation should remain for anything less than three stages.
2. Narration: The Prophet (PBUH) said: "The resident wipes [over his socks] for one day and night, and the traveler for three days and nights." This implies that the state of travel lasts three days; otherwise, the ruling on wiping socks would not be tied to that specific duration.

• Rebuttal to Argument 1 (Abū Ḥanīfah): The verse about shortening prayer (which is related to travel) is countered by the verse about fasting, where the Shari'ah seeks ease in concessions (as per the Prophet's saying: "This is charity which Allah has given you, so accept His charity").
• Rebuttal to Argument 2 (Abū Ḥanīfah): The statement about wiping socks for three days does not mean travel must last three days; one becomes a traveler immediately upon intending to leave, just as one becomes a resident immediately upon intending to stay.

Issue 4: The Phrasing {or on a journey} ('alā safar)

Why did Allah say 'alā safar (on a journey) instead of just musāfir (traveler)?

• Answer: Illness (maraḍ) is an inherent quality of the self. Travel (safar), however, is related to intention. If a person stops somewhere, if he lacks the intention to stay (iqāmah), his stillness is considered travel. Thus, being 'alā safar means being in the state of intending travel.

Issue 5: Meaning of {an equal number} ('iddah)

'Iddah is derived from 'adda (to count), meaning "that which is counted," similar to ṭaḥn meaning "that which is ground." It also refers to a counted group of people.

Inquiry: Why is it indefinite ('iddah) and not definite ('iddatuhā - its equal number)?

• Answer: Since 'iddah means "that which is counted," Allah commanded him to fast counted days in its place. It is implied that the number must be the same as the days missed, making explicit definition unnecessary.

Issue 6: Grammatical Case of {an equal number} ('iddah)

It is read both raised (nominative) and lowered (accusative).

• Raised (Nominative): Implies an omitted predicate: "So, upon him is the fast of an equal number ('iddah)." The preposition 'alā (upon) indicates obligation.
• Lowered (Accusative): Implies an omitted verb: "So let him fast an equal number ('iddah)."

Issue 7: Obligation vs. Concession for the Sick/Traveler

Some Companions (Ibn 'Abbās, Ibn 'Umar) held that the sick/traveler must break the fast and make up the days later. (Ibn 'Umar reportedly said: "If he fasts while traveling, he makes it up in residence.")

Most jurists hold that breaking the fast is a concession; they may choose to fast or break the fast.

• Arguments for Obligation (Breaking Fast):
  1. Grammar: Whether read nominative (implying "upon him is...") or accusative (implying "let him fast..."), the structure points to obligation. Since no one permits combining both fasting and making up the days, breaking the fast must be obligatory.
  2. Context of Ease: The following verse states: {Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship} (2:185). This ease must refer to the permission to break the fast, and the hardship refers to fasting while sick/traveling. Thus, Allah intends for you to break the fast and not to fast.
  3. Narration: (1) "Fasting while traveling is not righteousness." (2) "The faster while traveling is like the one breaking fast while resident."

• Arguments for Concession (Majority View):
  1. Implied Verb: The structure implies: "If he breaks the fast, then [he must fast] an equal number..." The obligation is tied to the breaking, not the state of being sick/traveling.
  2. The Following Verse: If the obligation was to fast (as argued by the first group), then the subsequent verse {And that you fast is better for you} would be contradictory, as it suggests fasting is preferable.

• Refutation of the Obligation Argument (Grammar): The obligation to fast later ('iddah) does not necessitate that the initial breaking of the fast was obligatory. Allah commanded fasting on other days, not that the previous fast must be undone.

• Refutation of the Obligation Argument (Narration): The narration about fasting not being righteousness might be specific to a particular incident, though the general wording suggests broader application.

• Refutation of the Obligation Argument (The "If you know" clause): This clause relates to the preference of fasting over ransom, not the obligation of breaking the fast.

Issue 8: Rulings for Those Who Break Fast (Concession View)

Sub-issue 1: Is Fasting or Breaking the Fast Better?

• Better to Fast: Anas, 'Uthmān ibn Abī Awfā, Shāfi'ī, Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, Al-Thawrī, Abū Yūsuf, Muḥammad.
• Better to Break Fast: Ibn Al-Musayyib, Al-Sha'bī, Al-Awzā'ī, Aḥmad, Isḥāq.
• Better is the Easier Option: A third group.

• Arguments for Fasting being Better: {And that you fast is better for you} (2:184) and {So whoever of you witnesses [the month], he must fast it} (2:185).
• Argument for Breaking Fast being Better: Shortening the prayer is preferred, so breaking the fast should also be preferred.
  • Rebuttal: The debt of fasting remains if broken, while the debt of shortening prayer does not remain if completed. Also, the virtue of the specific time (waqt) is lost by breaking the fast but not by shortening the prayer.
• Argument for the Easier Option: {Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship} (2:185).

Sub-issue 2: How to Make Up the Fast?

• Consecutively: 'Alī, Ibn 'Umar, Al-Sha'bī.
• Intermittently (Consecutive is recommended): The rest of the jurists.

• Arguments for Consecutiveness: (1) The reading of Abū: "So [he must fast] an equal number of days" (implying a specific, continuous count). (2) Making up the fast is analogous to the original performance (adā'), which was consecutive.
• Arguments for Intermittence: The indefinite phrasing "an equal number of other days" implies making up the count generally, without restricting the manner. (Narration: The Prophet (PBUH) compared it to paying off a debt incrementally).

Issue 9: The Word {Other} (Ākhar)

It is diptote (indeclinable) because it combines two reasons for being diptote: it is a plural form (jam') and it is treated as a ma'dūl (diverted from its standard pattern). It is derived from ākhir (last), which is on the pattern of af'al. Normally, af'al is used with min (e.g., "better than") or al- (e.g., "the best"). Here, min is omitted because the word itself implies it, and al- is incompatible with the implied min. Thus, ākhar and ukhrā are diverted from their normal grammatical rules.

Issue 1: The Reading of {are able to fast} (yuṭīqūnahu)

The famous, transmitted reading is {yuṭīqūnahu} (they are able). 'Ikrimah, Ayyūb Al-Sakhtiyānī, and 'Āṭif read {yuṭāqūnahu} (they are made able/they are compelled). Ibn Jinni noted that the root ṭāqa often takes a wāw (as in lā ṭāqata lī bihi - I have no strength for it). If read as yuṭāqūnahu, it means "they are compelled/burdened."

Issue 2: Interpretation of the Verse

There are three main interpretations:

Opinion 1: It refers to the sick and traveler.

• Some sick/travelers cannot fast at all (covered by the previous verse).
• Others can fast but with great difficulty. This latter group is referred to here: they are given the choice between fasting or breaking the fast and paying the ransom (fidyah).

Opinion 2 (Majority of Commentators): It refers to the healthy resident.

• Initially, the healthy resident was given the choice between fasting or paying the ransom. This was later abrogated, making fasting specifically obligatory.

Opinion 3: It refers to the extremely old man (Al-Shaykh Al-Haram).

• Argument 1: Wus' (ability/ease) is easier than Ṭāqah (ability with strain). Ṭāqah implies capability despite hardship.
• Argument 2: The variant reading {yuṭāqūnahu} (they are compelled/burdened) only makes sense for someone who can manage it only with difficulty.

• Sub-opinions under Opinion 3:
  • It applies only to the extremely old man (View of Al-Suddī). He does not make up the fast but pays the ransom (Narration that Anas did this before his death).
  • It applies to the old man, the pregnant woman, and the nursing mother (View of Ḥasan Al-Baṣrī, who said pregnancy is a greater hardship than illness).

• Consensus: The extremely old man must pay the ransom if he breaks the fast.
• Dispute: Do the pregnant/nursing women pay the ransom if they break the fast?
  • Al-Shāfi'ī: Yes, because the verse applies to them, and the ransom is obligatory for the old man, so it should be for them too.
  • Abū Ḥanīfah: No. The old man cannot make up the fast, so ransom is the only option. The pregnant/nursing woman can make up the fast, so imposing both the make-up and the ransom is combining two substitutes, which is impermissible.

Arguments Supporting Opinion 1 (Sick/Traveler who can fast with strain):

1. If illness is defined as either extreme inability or moderate strain, the moderate category is ill-defined and leads to ambiguity, which is contrary to the principle of clear legislation. Thus, the extreme inability is covered by the previous verse, leaving the moderate strain for this verse.
2. The first part of the verse established the obligation. This verse then details the rulings for the excused: those who cannot fast at all (covered previously) and those who can fast only with strain (covered here, given the choice).
3. The term yuṭīqūnahu is conventionally used only for capability achieved through strain.
4. This interpretation avoids the necessity of abrogation, which is preferable.
5. If this verse were abrogated by the Ramadan obligation verse, the subsequent phrase {Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship} would be inappropriate, as the abrogation imposed strictness (removing ease).

Rebuttal to Al-Qaḍī (against Opinion 1): He argued that yuṭīqūnahu is coordinated with the sick/traveler, and a coordinated term must differ from the term it is coordinated with.

• Answer: The sick/traveler in the first part are those who cannot fast at all, while those in the second part are those who can fast with strain. Thus, there is a difference.

Conclusion on Interpretations: Opinion 1 (supported by Al-Aṣamm) is not weak. If we accept the majority view (Opinion 2), then Opinion 3 (old man, etc.) remains. Al-Shāfi'ī favored Opinion 2 and argued against Opinion 3, stating that if it referred only to the old man who cannot fast, the phrase {And that you fast is better for you} would be meaningless. (However, this can be countered by saying it applies to the old man who can fast with great difficulty, and enduring that difficulty yields greater reward).

Issue 1: Readings of the Phrase

• Reading A (Nāfi', Ibn 'Āmir): {Fidyatan} (indefinite) {ṭa'āma} (genitive, as possessor) {masākīn} (plural).
  • Meaning of Addition: (1) Adding the description to the noun: Ransom is food (like "the congregational mosque"). (2) Fidyah is the specific required amount, while ṭa'ām is general. The addition means "a ransom of food" (like "a garment of silk").
  • Plural Masākīn: Since the ones able to fast are a group, each one owes the feeding of a poor person.
• Reading B (Others): {Fidyatan} (indefinite) {ṭa'āmun} (nominative) {miskīn} (genitive).
  • Meaning: The following words explain the indefinite Fidyah. The poor person is singular because the meaning is "the feeding of a poor person for each day."

Issue 2: Amount of Ransom

• Abū Ḥanīfah: Half a *ṣā' of wheat, or one ṣā' of other grains (equivalent to two Mudd).
• Al-Shāfi'ī: One Mudd.

Issue 3: Proof that Ability (Istita'ah) Precedes Action

Al-Jubbā'ī used this verse to prove that ability exists before the act: The pronoun in {those who are able to fast} refers to fasting. Since ransom is due if they do not fast, it proves they had the ability to fast before the act of fasting occurred.

• Counter-argument: Why can't the pronoun refer to the ransom? (1) Ransom wasn't mentioned before. (2) The pronoun is masculine, while fidyah is feminine.
• Response to Abrogation: Even if abrogated, the verse, before abrogation, demonstrated that ability precedes action, and facts do not change.

1. He feeds more than one poor person, or feeds the same poor person more than the required amount.
2. Al-Zuhri said: It is better for him if he fasts and pays the ransom.

1. Addressed only to those able to fast (with strain): "And that you fast, O those able to fast, while enduring the hardship, is better for you than the ransom."
2. Addressed to everyone mentioned (Sick, Traveler, and Able): This is preferred because the wording is general. The connection to the previous clause does not restrict its scope. This confirms the necessity of the implied verb in the sick/traveler clause: "If he breaks the fast, then [he must fast] an equal number of other days."
3. Connected to the beginning of the verse: "Fasting is prescribed for you, and that you fast is better for you."

1. If you know that fasting is prescribed for you, then know that what we said—that fasting is better for you—is true.
2. The end of the verse relates to the beginning: Fasting is prescribed for you, and that you fast is better for you, if you knew (i.e., if you reflected, you would know the meanings that lead to piety, etc., mentioned earlier).
3. Knowledge of Allah necessitates fear of Him ({Only those of His servants who have knowledge fear Allah}). Thus, "knowledge" here means "fear." One who fears Allah observes precaution (iḥtiyāṭ), and precaution dictates fasting. So, it means: If you fear Allah, fasting is better for you.

Al-Baqarah (The Cow): Verse 185

(The commentary on the rulings for the sick/traveler and the preference for fasting over ransom/making up days has already been covered in the analysis of verse 184, as the text explicitly links them.)

Focus on New Elements:

{Allah intends for you ease and does not intend for you hardship} This confirms that the legislation is rooted in mercy, removing the strictness that might have been assumed after the obligation was finalized.

{and [wants] you to complete the number [of prescribed days]} This reinforces the obligation to make up the missed days, ensuring the total count is fulfilled.

{and that you magnify Allah for that [to which] He has guided you} This refers to the guidance provided by the Qur'an revealed in this month, and the guidance to the correct practice of fasting.

{and perhaps you will be grateful} Gratitude is the expected response to this comprehensive mercy, ease, and guidance.