The crescent symbolizes the Muslim faith, almost like the cross symbolizes the Christian faith. The icon of the crescent is raised over minarets and stitched on the flags of many Muslim states. The Red Crescent is the counterpart in the Muslim World of the international organization of the Red Cross. The Muslim calendar is a lunar calendar, whereby one month ends and the next one start when the new moon sets just few minutes after the sun sets. Likewise, the time of day is determined by the relative position of the sun in the sky, or length of the shade, and by position of stars during the night. This is how times for the five daily prayers are determined.

Sighting of the new moon on the western horizon, which determines the entrance of a new month, is of prime importance to Muslims. This is how the entrance of the holy month of Ramadan is determined. Ramadan being the month during which every adult, capable, believing Muslim is obliged to fast from before sunrise to sunset every day, from the very first day of that month till the very last. In the same manner, the time for annual pilgrimage “Hajj” is determined. All important events in the Muslim history are deted according to the lunar Muslim calendar called Higera, which celebrates the date Muhammad quit Mecca to immigrate to al-Madinah.

The lunar calendar is 12 months, but it is 10 days less than the solar calendar. The length of a lunar month varies between 29 to 30 days, but it is never known whether the month will be only 29 days or full 30 days. This could be determined only through sighting of the new moon. However, this is not always so easy. Since the new moon sets just a few minutes after the sun sets, the western horizon does not get dark enough for the very small and very faint crescent to be visible by the bare sight of .the unaided human eye. The problem is compounded in cloudy, unfair weather. Also, it makes a difference whether the person sighting is at sea level or thousands of miles above sea level. At the approach of the month of fasting and the month of pilgrimage, authorities send an appeal to the effect that whosoever among the faithful is able to see the new moon to communicate his testimony to the proper channels. Due to the seriousness of the matter, not any one’s testimony is accepted; only persons with stable, worthy characters and good eyesight.

After all what have been said, you might very well wonder why, at this age, rely on eyesight when you could resort to exact, scientific, astronomical method! This is the very heart of the issue. This very same plain question has been posed by many ordinary, plain Muslims. Eyesight is extremely unreliable in such matters. Many a time the testimony by well-meaning, trustworthy characters turned out to be false. Imagine the amount of confusion and waste when, for example, individuals and travel agencies and hotels make all sorts of arrangements and reservations for millions of pilgrimages and then the pilgrimage date is shifted back or forth, depending on sighting of the moon, only few days in advance, as the initial sighting turned to be not true! In a published study on sighting for the last few decades, the percentage of false sighting turned out to be very high, rather alarming.

Yet, the commission of traditional grand ‘ulama (Muslim religious scholars) in Saudi Arabia authorized to verify such testimonies, will accept only eye sighting. Binoculars may be used, but no reliance on astronomical calculations is allowed. This same controversy goes back to the time of ibn Taymiyyah, a leading Muslim scholar of the 13^th/14^th centuries. He refused to accept the testimony of astronomers because, given the poor state of science then, astronomy is mixed up with astrology, a form of magic frowned upon by Islam. Furthermore, the traditionalists of modern day in Saudi Arabia base their refusal on a literal interpretation of a traditional saying by the prophet that fasting and breaking of fast should be according to the sighting of the new moon. They warn you not to be naïve and argue that during the time of the prophet there were no astronomical science and reliable astronomical instruments. They will tell you that whatever the prophet had don or said had been inspired by Allah, and Allah knows the past and the future. Had it been in His knowledge that in the future there will be means more reliable than eyesight to see the new moon He would have informed His prophet.

This issue is hotly debated in the Saudi press, which is another sign of changing times in Saudi Arabia. Not all ‘ulama accept such position. Some are willing to accept scientific facts as long as they do not contradict the true faith and to interpret religious text in a way that would minimize conflict with proven scientific facts. It is quite apparent to them that Muslims cannot survive in the modern world without relying on technology, the fruit of modern science. All such gadgets, from cars to computers to trains to plains to radio to TV, to electricity and what have you have become necessities of life. None of such gadgets were known by the prophet or explicitly condoned by him. Are we to abandon and reject them all because of that. Some of them, such as electrical equipments and the media have even been very useful in spreading the word of God and clarifying to the masses the true faith. These are good favors and beneficial graces bestowed by God to humanity. After all, these ‘ulama argue, the advantages of science and technology are quite obvious, even to a small child.

This, to you and me, might sound like a reasonable and realistic argument, which is in tune with the current thinking of modern times. But traditional ‘ulama, have a static view of history. They do not believe in progress. All change from the pristine time of the prophet is corruption. The more removed from that pristine state the more degenerate. To save your soul, you should freeze time and go back to the time of the prophet and try to live exactly and literally as he did. Any deviation will be counted against you. You should not follow the prophet only in performing your religious obligations, but you should conduct your life affairs and daily behavior as closely to his as humanly possible. For example, God will be more pleased with you if you use shinaan instead of soup and use siwaak instead of toothpaste and brush. It is true that the prophet urged his companions to use these primitive methods, which were the best available at the time, to keep their teeth and bodies clean and healthy, but the traditionalists hung on to the very literal interpretation of this injunction and missed the true spirit of its message. Examples along these lines could be multiplied endlessly.

What is interesting and somewhat revealing about this whole controversy is that it is engaged in in the open, not behind closed doors. It is not between theologians and laymen but between traditional theologians and progressive theologians. What is even more interesting is the fact that the progressives, in support of their argument, do not appeal to traditional texts but to scientific facts. Some of them are even willing to subject traditional sayings to the yardstick of reason. They are challenging the highest religious authority in the Kingdom, who seems to stick fast to the traditionalist point of view. It is practically always the case, and in any religion, that the higher the position of the authority the more conservative he is. It is not expected that the current highest religious authority in Saudi Arabia will yield. But such open discussion could pave the way for the one who comes after him to be more reconciled with science. It is small increment changes like these, which through accumulation could transform the quantitative into qualitative change. Eventual reconciliation of religion and science could open the way for more meaning and sustainable development.