✨The New Things That Invalidate the Fast

Praise be to Allah and peace be upon the Seal of prophets.

When Sheikh Khalid ibn `Ali Al Mushayqih (may Allah protect him) completed his explanation to the chapter of Fasting from Zad Al Mustaqna` book, he started to demonstrate some of the contemporary things that invalidate the fast. He spoke in length about those things and explained the preponderant views of scholars. May Allah reward him and bring benefits for the Muslims of his knowledge I ask Allah to make this work purely for His Sake for He is the Most Generous.

P.S. This article was presented to the Sheikh to correct and approve it and he did so.

Written by: `Isa ibn `Abdul-Rahman Al `Itiby

Contemporary things that invalidate the fast: Muftirat is the plural form of Muftir (things that invalidate the fast).

Scholars have unanimously agreed on four things which invalidate the fast, these are:

1 - Eating.

2 - Drinking.

3 - Sexual intercourse.

4 - Menstruation and Post-childbirth.

As for eating, drinking, and sexual intercourse, Allah (Exalted be He) explained them in the following Ayah: “So now have sexual relations with them and seek that which Allâh has ordained for you (offspring), and eat and drink until the white thread (light) of dawn appears to you distinct from the black thread (darkness of night), then complete your Saum (fast) till the nightfall."

These things are also explained in the Hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him) that was reported by Al Bukhari on the authority of `Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her): "Is not it true if a woman has her menses (reached the puberty age), she will neither offer Salah nor fast?" (This is a clear explanation to the fourth item that invalidates the fast.) The meaning of the new things that invalidate the fast is the new invented items that take the same ruling of food, drink, and so on; and they are numerous:

The first item is: The Mouth Sprayer:

It is a bottle that is filled with a liquid medicine. This medicine contains three elements: water, oxygen, and some pharmaceuticals. Does this spray invalidate the fast or not?

The Contemporary scholars have disagreed in this regard:

1 – Some of them say: It does not break the fasting, which is the view of Sheikh `Abdul-`Aziz ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on his soul), Sheikh Ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on his soul), Sheikh `Abdullah ibn Jibrin (may Allah protect him), and the Permanent Committee for Fatwas.

They all quoted the following as evidence:

A – It is permissible for the fasting person to rinse his mouth and nose, this unanimously agreed upon, and when he does so, the trace of water will mix with the saliva and enters the stomach. Likewise, the traces of the nose sprayer which will enter the stomach because it is a very small amount, therefore it takes the same ruling of water that remains after rinsing the mouth. The bottle contains 10 ml of liquid medicine; and that amount was designed for 200-time usage, so one spray equals half of one-tenth ml, which is extremely tiny.

B – The possibility that the spray reaches the stomach is doubted and the general rule is to depend on the original rule until we make sure that fasting is invalidated.

C – Mouth spray does not look like eating or drinking, but it looks like the aspiration of blood for analysis and using the non-nutritious needles.

D – Doctors have mentioned that Miswak (small branches of the Arc tree) contains eight chemicals substances, however, its use is permissible for the fasting person according to the preponderant view of scholars. No doubt, something of these substances will reach the stomach, hence, the liquid medicine is like these overlooked substances.

The Second view is: It is not permissible for the fasting person to use the mouth sprayer, and if he needs it, he may take it and compensate for that day. They quoted the following as evidence: If the content of the spray bottle reaches the stomach through the mouth, a person had broken his fast. The answer is: If we make sure that something will reach the stomach from these substances, it takes the same ruling of the remnant water of rinsing because it is so little, so the soundest view is the first.

The second item is: The bills that are placed under the tongue:

They are the bills that are placed under the tongue to treat some heart attacks. They are absorbed directly in the mouth and the blood carries them to the heart, causing the heart attack to cease at once. Their ruling: They are permissible because nothing of these bills reach the stomach, but they are absorbed immediately inside the mouth, so they do not break the fast.

The third item is: The Gastroscope:

It is a medical device that is inserted through the mouth to the pharynx then to the esophagus, then to the stomach. Its usage: it is to photo the stomach ulcers or eradicate some parts of the stomach for examination or other medical matters.

The former scholars had spoken about this device before when they discussed the issue of inserting non-nutritious item such as a pebble or a piece of iron enters into the stomach? The scope takes the same ruling, so will it break the fast or not?

The majority of scholars adopt the view of: such a thing invalidates the fast because anything reaches the stomach invalidates the fast. However, the Hanafi School of Fiqh stipulated that the thing should settle down in the stomach in order to consider it breaker of the fast, although the rest school of Fiqh did not stipulate this. They quoted as evidence that the Prophet (peace be upon him) command his nation not to use kohl. Based upon this, the stomach scope invalidates the fast according to the majority of scholars and does not break the fast according to the Hanafi School because it does not settle down in the stomach.

The Second opinion is: the non-nutritious items that reach the stomach do not break the fast. This is the view of Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on his soul), the view of some Maliki scholars, and the view of Al Hasan ibn Salih because the Qur'an as well as the Sunnah stated that the items that invalidate the fast must be nutritious. As for the Hadith of Kohl in which the Messenger (peace be upon him) commanded his nation to avoid the usage of Kohl during the Fast, it is a weak Hadith, so it does not break the fast. There is one exception which is if a doctor puts a nutritious substance to facilitate the insertion of the scope; in this case it invalidates the fast.

The fourth item that invalidates the fast is: The Eye Drop:

that is used through the nose; does it invalidate the fast or not? The later scholars have two views in this regard:
The first view is: it breaks the fast according to Ibn Baz and Ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on their souls).

They quoted the Hadith of Luqayt ibn Sabrah as evidence: "Over exaggerate in sniffing the nose except if you are fasting." This is an evidence that the nose is the entrance of the stomach. If this is the case, then the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited the use of eye drop. The forbiddance of the Prophet (peace be upon him) of excessive sniffing includes also the prohibition of inserting anything inside the nose even if this thing is so little because what goes inside the nose due to the over exaggeration of sniffing is so little.

The Second opinion is: it does not break the fast.

They quoted the following as evidence: By analogy to the remnant water after rinsing the mouth, the remnant of the drops is so little, therefore it takes the same ruling.

One drop equals 0.06 per cubic centimeter. These drops enter the nose and only so little amount reaches the stomach and that small amount is overlooked. Moreover, the general rule is the validity of the fast unless there is a hard evidence to annul it. Certainty cannot be removed with uncertainty. Both views are strong.

The fifth item is: The Nasal Spray:

The same as the mouth spray, so the Nasal spray does not break the fast.

The sixth item is: Anesthesia:

It includes many types:
First: The partial anesthesia through the nose: A patient smells gaseous substance that affects his nerves and causing anesthesia: this kind does not break the fast because the gaseous substance that enters the nose is not nutritious.

Second: The partial Chinese anesthesia:

In relation to China: This is done by inserting a dry needle into the centers of senses under the skin causing some glands to produce the natural morphine which is included in the body, thereby a patient loses sense. This kind of anesthesia does not affect the fast as long as it is partial, not general, and because the substance does not reach the stomach.

Third: The partial anesthesia by injection:

Injecting a vein with a short-acting drug to cover the mind of the patient in a few seconds. As long as it is partial, it does not break the fast and because it does not reach the stomach.

Fourth: The total anesthesia:

It is controversial among scholars: the former scholars discussed that issue of whether the fast of the person who enters into a coma valid or invalid?

First: to pass out all the day where a person does not wake up even part of the day: the fast of that person is invalid according to the majority of scholars. The evidence of this case is the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the divine Hadith: "He abandons his food and desire for My Sake." So, he ascribed abstaining to the fasting person; and the one who is in coma is not included in this.

Second: If a person does not pass out all day, this is a controversial matter. The soundest view is: If a person wakes up part of the day, his fast is valid; this is the view of Imam Ahmad and Ash-Shafi`i. According to Imam Malik, his fasting is not valid. According to Abu Hanifah, if a person wakes up before the decline of the sun, a person may renew the intention and the fast will be valid. The soundest view is of Ahmad and Ash-Shafi`i because the intention of abstention from food and drink was achieved by fasting part of the day. The same ruling goes for anesthesia.

The seventh item is: The Ear Drops:

The meaning is: "pharmaceuticals" are poured in the ear; does it invalidate the fast or not? Scholars had spoken in the past about the issue of “the ruling of a person who treats himself by pouring water into his ear."

According to the majority of scholars, it invalidates the fast. According to the view of the Hanbali school of Fiqh, it invalidates the fast. The second opinion is of Ibn Hazm, who considered it from the things that do not break the fast. His proof is: the eardrops do not reach the brain directly but it reaches through the pores.

Modern medicine demonstrates that there is no canal between the ear and the brain to bear the fluid except in one case which is if there is a hole in the eardrum. According to this, the soundest opinion is: it does not break the fast. A case: If there is a hole in the eardrum, the treatment should be taken through the ear. In this case, it takes the same ruling of taking medicine through the nose as was previously mentioned.

The eight item is: The Ear Lotion:

It takes the same ruling of the ear drop, but scholars said: If the ear drum is breached, the quantity that will enter the ear invalidates the fast. The ear lotion is divided into two sections:

1 - If the eardrum is present, it does not break the fast.

2 - If the eardrum is breached, it invalidates the fast because the quantity of the liquid will be a lot.

The ninth item is: The Eye Drop:

It is a controversial matter between the later scholars based upon a previous disagreement which is the case of Kohl; does it invalidate the fast or not? The first view is: it does not break the fast. This is the view of the Hanafi and the Shafi`i schools of Fiqh. They quoted as evidence that there is no connection between the eye and the stomach and if this is the case, applying Kohl does not break the fast. The second opinion is of the Maliki and the Hanbali school of Fiqh that Kohl invalidates the fast because they said that there is a connection between the eye and the stomach. Thereby, the later scholars differed according to the eye drops:

The first view is: the eye drops does not break the fast. This is the view of Ibn Baz and Ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on their souls). They quoted as evidence that one eye drop equals 0.06 per cubic centimeter. This amount will not reach the stomach because it is so little. The tiny thing is overlooked exactly as the remnant of water that remains in the mouth after rinsing. The second evidence is: the eye drop is not stated in the Qur'an or in the Sunnah and does not take the same ruling of food and drink.

The second opinion is: it invalidates the fast exactly as the kohl. The soundest opinion is: it does not break the fast. Although modern medicine proved that there is a connection between the eye and the stomach through the nose, these drops will be absorbed when passing by the lacrimal canal, so nothing of these drops will reach the throat, consequently nothing will reach the stomach. If something reaches the stomach, it will be tiny and will be overlooked as the remnant water of rinsing is overlooked.

By analogy to the case of kohl, this is not true for the following:

1 - Because it was not proved that it invalidates the fast and the reported Hadith in that regard is weak.

2 - It is an analogy for something controversial in the first place.

3 – Because of the stated proofs to the first opinion.

The tenth Item is: Therapeutic Injections:

They include the following:

1 – Cutaneous injection.

2 – Intramuscular injections.

3 – Intravenous injection.

As for the non-nutritious cutaneous and intramuscular injections, they do not break the fast according to the modern scholars, as Ibn Baz and ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on their souls) stated. The proof to that is: The general rule is the fast until something invalidates it and these injections are not food, drink, or something of the like.

As for the nutritious intravenous injection, it is a matter of dispute among scholars:

The first view is it invalidates the fast: This is the view of Sheikh As-Sa`dy, Ibn Baz, Ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on their souls), and the Islamic Fiqh Academy. The evidence to that is: it is similar to food and drink, so the one who takes these injections will be in no need for food and drink.

The second opinion: it does not break the fast because they do not reach the stomach through the usual outlets. Assuming they reach the stomach, they reach through the pores, and that is not the stomach and is not similar to the stomach. The soundest view is: they invalidate the fast because the reason is not reaching the stomach but achieving nutrition which is done by these injections. A case: The injections that a diabetic takes do not break the fast.

The eleventh item is: Ointments, creams, and therapeutic stickers:

The skin contains blood vessels that absorb anything that is placed on through the capillaries which is a very slow process. Based upon this, does anything is placed on the skin invalidate the fast? Shaykh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on his soul) discussed this issue and said that they do not break the fast and this is the view of the Islamic Fiqh Academy, moreover some scholars reported consensus in this regard.

The twelfth item is: Artery Catheterization:

It is a fine tube that enters the arteries for the treatment or photography. The Islamic Fiqh Academy adopted the view that they do not break the fast because it is not similar to food, drink, or anything of the like.

The thirteenth item is: Dialysis:

It has two ways:

First: Washing by a machine called the "artificial kidney" where the blood is drawn to the device, then it filters the blood from the harmful substances, then the blood go back to the body again through the vein. During this process, a patient needs nutritious liquids that are taken through the vein.

Second: Through the peritoneal dialysis membrane in the stomach:

A small tube is injected into the stomach through a hole above the navel, and two liters of liquids contain a high percentage of sugar inside the stomach for a while then the liquids are drawn again; this process is done repeatedly. Modern scholars disagreed whether it invalidates the fast or not?

The first view is: it invalidates the fast according to Ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on his soul) and the Permanent Committee for Fatwas.

Their evidence is: dialysis provides fresh blood for the blood, and perhaps it is mixed with another nutritious material, so two things that invalidate the fast were brought together.

The second opinion is: it does not break the fast. They hold as evidence that it is not mentioned by name in the Qur'an or in the Sunnah or even similar. The soundest view is: it invalidates the fast.

A case: if only the blood is purified, it does not break the fast, but the fact is there are some nutrients, salts, and so on are added to dialysis.

The fourteenth item is: suppositories that are inserted into a woman's vagina:

Likewise: the vaginal lotions. Do these things invalidate the fast or not?

Scholars have spoken about these substances in the past as well as in the present: According to the Maliki and the Hanbali school of Fiqh if a woman dripped a fluid in her vagina, it will not break the fast. Their evidence is: There is no connection between a woman's vagina and her stomach. The second view is of the Hanafi and the Shafi`i school of Fiqh which maintains that if a woman drips some liquid into her vagina, her fast is over. Their evidence is: there is a connection between the bladder and the vagina. Modern medicine proved that there is no outlet between the reproductive system of women and their stomachs; hence these drops will not break the fast.

The fifteenth item is: Suppositories that are taken through the anus:

They are used for various medical purposes such as to reduce body temperature and to relieve the pain of hemorrhoids. The same ruling goes for the enemas.

First, the enemas: Scholars have spoken about in the past:

The Four leaders of the Fiqh schools adopted the view that these injections invalidate the fast because they reach the stomach.

The second opinion is of the Zhahiry School and the chosen view of Shaykh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyah is: these injections do not break the fast because they are not nutritious by any mean, but they drain out everything in the body as if a person smells laxatives and because this fluid does not reach the stomach. As for the later scholars, they based their views on the previous disagreement. Is there a connection between the anus and the stomach?! The scholars, who adopted the view that they invalidate the fast, say that there is a connection because the anus is connected with the rectum and the rectum is connected with the colon (the gut). The absorption of the food is done through the small intestine, and perhaps it is done through the absorption of some salts and sugars. As if non-nutritious substances are absorbed, such as medicine, it will not break the fast because they do not contain food or water. This detail is the closest to believe.

Second: The anal suppositories are controversial:

It does not break the fast, which is the view of Ibn `Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on his soul) because they contain therapeutic medication; not liquid food, so they are not food, drink, nor anything of the like. This is the correct view.

The sixteenth item is: The Anal Scope:

The doctor may insert the telescope into the anus to reveal the intestine, and the same details mentioned in the stomach scope are applied here.

The seventeenth item is: anything that enters the body through the urethra, such as scope, solution, or medicine:

Do this break the fast? Scholars have discussed this issue in the past and reached the following conclusion:

The first view is of the Hanafi, the Maliki, and the Hanbali school of Fiqh: Dripping in the urethra does not break the fast even if it reaches the bladder. Their evidence is: there is no outlet the inner part of the rectum and the abdomen.

The Second view is the chosen by the Shafi`i school of Fiqh that this action invalidates the fast because there is an outlet between the inner part of the rectum and the abdomen.

In modern medicine:

There is no connection between urinary tract and the digestive system: based upon this, it does not break the fast.

The eighteenth item: Blood Donation:

This is based on the issue of cupping. The popular view is: it invalidates the fast and that is the chosen view of Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on his soul). The view of the majority scholars is: it does not break the fast.

The soundest and preponderant view is: it invalidates the fast. Based on this, it is not permissible for a person to donate his blood during the fast except if there is a necessity.

The nineteenth item is: Taking a Blood Sample For Diagnosis:

This does not break the fast because it is not the same as cupping, because cupping weakens the body.

The twenty item is: Toothpaste:

It does not break the fast because it does not reach the stomach, but it is better for a person not to use it except after breaking the fast. It is enough to use the Miswak or the brush without the toothpaste. Allah knows the best.

إقرأ المزيد :

the day of Ashura

Worshipers of Allah, from the mercy of Allah upon His servants is that He has pr...

Prohibition of singing in islam

All praise is due to Allah. I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship e...

Can you pray if you have brown discharges before menses?

With regard to the yellowish or brownish discharge before the menses , if it com...

Asking Forgiveness

An article in English taken from "Majmoo' Al-Fatawa" written by Imam Ibn Taymeyy...