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

What does "All the deeds of the son of Adam are for him, except fasting" mean?

The Prophet ﷺ said: "Allah, the Almighty, said: 'Every deed of the son of Adam is for him, except for fasting; it is for Me, and I shall reward for it." [Agreed upon]
This means:
● Every deed of the son of Adam may be affected by showing off (riyaa’), except fasting, because only Allah knows whether a person is truly fasting or not.
● The reward for all deeds is known—one good deed is multiplied tenfold—except fasting, as only Allah knows its true reward.

The Jurisprudential Significance of the Ḥadīth: "Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr Prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking..."
"Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking: 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah, lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuḥyī wa yumītu wa huwa ʿalā kulli shayʾin qadīr' ten times — ten good deeds will be recorded for him, ten bad deeds will be erased from him, he will be raised ten levels, he will spend that day in protection from everything disliked and guarded from the devil, and no sin will be able to befall him on that day except associating partners with Allah" — does this noble ḥadīth apply to the imam, and what is meant by "extraneous speech"?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite, immediately after the final salām, the specific remembrance reported in the sunnah to be said before turning away from one's place of prayer. The imam then leaves his praying spot, and the act of "turning" is fulfilled when the imam faces the congregation — even without physically leaving his spot — by positioning his right side toward them and his left side toward the qiblah, and this applies even while he is engaged in supplication.
Al-ʿAllāmah Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Tuḥfah (Vol.2/P.105): "It is most virtuous for the imam, once he has given the salām, to rise from his place of prayer immediately afterward." He adds that an exception must be made for the remembrances that are specifically required to be recited before he turns away. He then notes, citing Sharḥ al-ʿUbāb: "Yes, an exception to this rising immediately after the salām applies to the Fajr prayer, due to the authentic report that the Prophet ﷺ, when he prayed Fajr, would remain seated until the sun rose." He further cites, from al-Khādim, the ḥadīth concerning one who recites, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer while still in the position of crossing his leg to rise: "Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah..." and the rest of the well-known ḥadīth. He comments that this makes explicit that this particular remembrance is to be recited before the worshipper turns his legs to leave, and the same applies to Maghrib and ʿAṣr, as reported in those contexts as well.
What is meant by "speech" in the relevant ḥadīth is extraneous worldly speech that is not called for after the prayer and for which there is no legitimate excuse. The remembrances reported to be recited upon concluding the prayer, however, do not fall under this category of extraneous speech, since they are themselves required by the sharīʿah.
Al-ʿAllāmah ʿAlī al-Shabrāmalsī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Nihāyah (Vol.1/P.551): "If someone greets a person with salām while he is occupied with reciting this remembrance [i.e., 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh...'], should he return the greeting — without this causing him to forfeit the promised reward, since he is engaged in an obligatory matter — or should he delay returning the greeting until he finishes, this being a legitimate excuse for the delay?" He continues: "I say: the more likely view is the former, and the prohibition on speech is to be understood as applying to extraneous speech for which there is no legitimate excuse. Based on this, should the worshipper give precedence to this remembrance ('Lā ilāha illā Allāh...') or to reciting Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ ('Qul huwa Allāhu aḥad')? This requires consideration, though it is not unlikely that the remembrance takes precedence, given that the Lawgiver urged hastening to it through his words 'while crossing his leg.' This is not considered ordinary speech, since it is not extraneous to what is required after the prayer."
Accordingly, it is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite this remembrance and to give it precedence over the other remembrances of the prayer, ensuring it is said before they move from their place. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What are the conditions for a valid Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
First: The age of the animal must meet the Sharia requirements. These requirements vary depending on the type of sacrifice:
 
Camels: Must have completed five years and entered their sixth.
 
Cows: Must have completed two years and entered their third.
 
Goats: Must have completed two years and entered their third. As for Sheep, they must have completed one year and entered their second.
 
Some scholars have permitted goats that have completed one year and entered their second.
 
The Hanafi school, along with an opinion in the Maliki school, permits sacrificing sheep that are at least six months old, provided they are healthy and physically substantial. According to the Shafi’i school, it is permissible if the sheep sheds its front teeth (ajdha') before reaching one year [Al-Iqna’, by Al-Shirbini (Vol.2/P.588)].
 
Second: Soundness and freedom from defects. The animal must be free from any defect that causes a decrease in its meat or market value. This is based on the hadith narrated by Al-Bara' bin 'Azib, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:
 
"Four [defects] are not permissible in sacrifices: A one-eyed animal whose blindness is evident, a sick animal whose illness is evident, a lame animal whose lameness is evident, and an emaciated animal that has no marrow in its bones." [Reported by Abu Dawood and Al-Tirmidhi, who graded it as authentic].
 
These defects are detailed as follows:
 
Evident Lameness: It is not permissible to sacrifice a lame animal if the lameness is severe enough to prevent it from walking to the pasture or seeking food, as this leads to a decrease in its meat. However, slight lameness that does not hinder its grazing is overlooked.
 
Evident Blindness (One-eyed): It is not permissible to sacrifice a sheep, cow, or camel that has a white film over its eye blocking light, or one that has lost an eye entirely. Weak vision that does not affect its ability to eat does not prevent the sacrifice from being valid.
 
Evident Illness: An animal with a clear sickness that prevents it from eating or moving is not valid. This includes severe mange (Jarab) that spoils the meat.
 
Extreme Emaciation: An animal so thin that there is no marrow left in its bones is invalid. The standard for emaciation that invalidates the sacrifice is that which spoils the quality of the meat to the point that people would find it undesirable even in times of plenty.
 
Additional Considerations:
These are the defects mentioned in the Prophetic tradition, and any defect that causes emaciation or reduces the meat or value is compared to them by analogy. This includes animals that are mentally unstable (diseased), those with mange, or those with a missing ear. In contrast, a slit or pierced ear does not affect the validity of the sacrifice. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Which holds greater virtue: The Udhiyah (Sacrificial Offering) or giving its value in Charity (Sadaqah)?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) holds greater virtue than donating its monetary value to the poor and needy. This is because the sacrifice is a prominent, manifest ritual among the sacred symbols of Islam. Allah Almighty says: "That [is so]. And whoever honors the symbols of Allah - indeed, it is from the piety of hearts." (Al-Hajj: 32)
 
Furthermore, there are numerous authentic and explicit Hadiths highlighting its immense reward. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) consistently offered this sacrifice, as did the Righteous Caliphs after him. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.
 

See More