corrupted, and he is obligated to make up that day if he returns to Islam. This applies whether he embraces Islam during the day or after it has elapsed, and whether his apostasy was through a belief that constitutes disbelief, through his doubt (1) regarding something that constitutes disbelief if doubted, or by uttering a word of disbelief—whether he was joking or not. Allah the Almighty says: {And if you ask them, they will surely say, "We were only conversing and playing." Say, "Is it Allah and His verses and His Messenger that you were mocking? Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after your belief"} (2). This is because fasting is an act of worship for which intention is a condition, so apostasy invalidates it, like prayer and Hajj. Furthermore, it is a pure act of worship, so disbelief negates it, like prayer.

493 - Issue; He said: (And whoever intends to break his fast has broken his fast.)

This is the apparent view of the Madhhab. It is the opinion of al-Shafi‘i, Abu Thawr, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y), except that the People of Opinion said: If he returns and makes the intention before the middle of the day, it is sufficient for him, based on their principle that the fast is valid with an intention made during the day. It was narrated from Ibn Hamid that the fast is not corrupted by that, because it is an act of worship in which one must continue even if it is corrupted; therefore, it does not become invalid by the intention to exit it, like Hajj. Our response is that it is an act of worship for which intention is a condition, so it is corrupted by the intention to exit it, like prayer. Moreover, the fundamental principle is the consideration of the intention for all parts of the act of worship, but since considering its reality [in every moment] is difficult, the continuation of its ruling is considered, which is that one does not intend to break it. If he intends to break it, it ceases in reality and in ruling, so the fast is corrupted by the absence of its condition. What Ibn Hamid mentioned does not apply consistently to anything other than Ramadan, and it is not valid to draw an analogy with Hajj, for Hajj is valid with an absolute or indefinite intention, and with an intention on behalf of someone else if he had not performed Hajj for himself; thus, they are different.

Section: As for the supererogatory (nafilah) fast, if he intends to break the fast and then does not intend to fast thereafter, his fast is not valid, because the intention was severed and no other intention was found; he is thus like one who did not intend it at all.