The explanation concerning these two reports is as follows: if the sky is cloudy, as both reports state, then a person should fast the fifth day from the fasting day of the previous year on the basis that it is from Sha’ban, provided that the deficiency of Sha’ban has not been authentically established for him. He does this as a precaution. Then, if it turns out to be from the month of Ramadan, it suffices for him. And if it is from Sha’ban, it is written for him among the supererogatory acts (nawafil). This is the same as the ruling concerning fasting the day of doubt (yawm al-shakk). There is nothing in the report indicating that he should fast the fifth day on the basis that it is from the month of Ramadan. Therefore, since this is not the apparent meaning of the report, and since the report can bear the meaning we have mentioned, using it as an objection falls away. It does not contradict what we have stated regarding acting according to the crescents (ahillah).