The determination of the beginning and end of Ramadan represents one of the most prominent expressions of collective religious life in Islam. These moments are intended to unite Muslims in shared worship, discipline, and spiritual renewal. Yet in many contemporary contexts, particularly within Muslim minority societies, the issue of moonsighting has become a persistent source of discord. Instead of reinforcing communal bonds, differing approaches to determining the lunar calendar have fragmented families, divided mosques, and generated confusion in public institutions. This recurring phenomenon raises a fundamental question: is the disagreement over moonsighting a genuine juristic impasse, or does it reflect a deeper failure to understand the ethical and communal priorities of Islamic law?
A careful examination of the sources and objectives of the Sharīʿah indicates that moonsighting is not an act of worship in itself, but a means to establish the correct timing of worship. The obligation imposed upon Muslims is to fast during the month of Ramadan and to mark its conclusion with Eid; the sighting of the crescent moon is merely one method historically used to determine when that obligation begins and ends. The Qur’an explicitly frames the crescent moons as instruments of temporal organisation, stating that they are “time markers for people and for Hajj” (Qur’an 2:189). This formulation makes clear that the moon’s religious relevance lies in its functional role rather than in any intrinsic ritual value.
Understanding moonsighting as a means rather than an end has significant legal and ethical implications. In Islamic jurisprudence, means are evaluated according to their effectiveness in achieving certainty and facilitating obedience, not according to symbolic attachment. The Sharīʿah consistently prioritises yaqīn (certainty) over conjecture, and the method used to attain that certainty may vary depending on context, knowledge, and available tools. The prophetic instruction to fast upon sighting the moon was not a sacralisation of visual observation, but a practical directive suited to a community that lacked alternative means of precise calculation. The underlying objective was reliable knowledge, not adherence to a specific sensory process.
Within the juristic tradition, scholars have long recognised this distinction. While some held that visual sighting should remain the primary method for determining the lunar month, others accepted astronomical calculation, particularly when it offered greater accuracy or resolved ambiguity. A widely accepted moderate position acknowledges the value of calculation as a means of verifying or invalidating sighting claims, thereby preventing error and confusion. This approach does not negate the Prophetic model, but rather preserves its intent by ensuring that religious obligations are fulfilled with certainty rather than doubt. To reject reliable knowledge simply because it was not available in earlier periods is to confuse historical circumstance with legal principle.
However, the most critical dimension of the moonsighting debate lies not in epistemology, but in ethics. Islamic law places extraordinary emphasis on unity in collective acts of worship. Fasting Ramadan, celebrating Eid, and performing Hajj are not private devotions that each individual undertakes independently; they are communal obligations that derive much of their meaning from shared observance. In such matters, the Sharīʿah consistently subordinates individual preference to collective cohesion. This principle is analogous to congregational prayer, in which worshippers follow the imam even when their personal juristic views differ, in order to preserve the integrity of the congregation.
The prioritisation of unity over individual correctness is not a concession to weakness, but a deliberate legal and moral choice embedded within the Islamic tradition. Early Muslim jurists frequently deferred to communal or governmental decisions in matters affecting public religious life, even when those decisions diverged from their own legal reasoning. This restraint reflected an acute awareness of the destructive potential of disunity and an understanding that the preservation of social harmony is itself among the higher objectives of the Sharīʿah. In collective matters, insisting upon one’s own ijtihād at the expense of unity constitutes not piety, but ethical failure.
The harm caused by persistent disunity over moonsighting is both measurable and profound. Families often find themselves fasting or celebrating Eid on different days, undermining the sense of shared spiritual experience. Mosques within the same neighbourhood may observe Ramadan and Eid separately, sending conflicting signals to their congregations and to the wider society. Children face confusion and embarrassment in schools when religious observances lack consistency, while communities fracture into rival camps marked by mutual suspicion and recrimination. These outcomes contradict the very purposes of Ramadan, which is meant to cultivate taqwā, solidarity, patience, and compassion.
Such consequences suggest that the issue is not fundamentally religious, but administrative and organisational. Determining the Islamic calendar is comparable to establishing prayer times: both involve identifying the correct moment for worship, and both rely on technical means to do so. The sanctity lies in the act of worship itself, not in the mechanism used to calculate its timing. Just as Muslims routinely rely on scientific calculations and timetables for prayer without controversy, there is no inherent reason why the lunar calendar should be treated differently. Expertise in astronomy or administration, regardless of religious affiliation, can legitimately serve this function, as the task is technical rather than devotional.
The persistence of annual disputes therefore reflects a deeper structural failure within the Muslim community: the absence of agreed-upon systems for collective decision-making and the reluctance to accept outcomes that require personal compromise. The repeated circulation of the same arguments and evidences year after year has produced no resolution because the problem is not a lack of proof, but a lack of coordinated leadership and ethical discipline. Without institutional mechanisms capable of binding communities to a shared decision, individual interpretations inevitably proliferate, and unity remains elusive.
Addressing this challenge requires a shift in focus from debating methods to building structures. Unified national or regional bodies tasked with determining the Islamic calendar, inclusive of diverse schools of thought and community representatives, offer a practical solution. Even the idea of adopting a single global reference point for the start of Ramadan and Eid, despite acknowledged imperfections, reflects a recognition that shared observance is itself a value worthy of sacrifice. The precedent of Hajj demonstrates that the Ummah already accepts a unified calendar for its most significant collective ritual, prioritising cohesion over procedural exactitude.
Practical realities further underscore the need for predictability and coordination. In contemporary societies, Muslims require advance notice of religious dates to navigate education, employment, healthcare, and incarceration systems. Pre-determined calendars, including those based on calculation, provide clarity and stability. However, such systems can only succeed if communities commit to abiding by collective decisions rather than reverting to individual preferences when disagreement arises.
Islamic law draws a clear distinction between personal acts of devotion and communal obligations. While individuals may follow their chosen legal schools in private matters, collective rites demand conformity for the sake of the whole. Unity achieved through a less preferred opinion is ethically superior to division caused by adherence to a stronger one. This principle reflects a jurisprudence that measures success not solely by formal correctness, but by moral outcome.
In conclusion, the ongoing controversy over moonsighting exposes a broader challenge facing the contemporary Muslim community: the difficulty of prioritising collective responsibility over individual certainty. The solution does not lie in accumulating more arguments or refining legal positions, but in cultivating humility, discipline, and a genuine commitment to unity. The Sharīʿah does not require perfection in method; it requires sincerity in worship and cohesion in communal life. Until Muslims are prepared to step back from personal insistence for the sake of the Ummah, the cycle of division will persist. True reform in this matter begins not with the moon, but with the willingness to stand together beneath it.
Follow the الشيخ محمد أكرم الندوي channel on WhatsApp.
