Kitaab-uS-Siyaam (Prescript of fasting)
-
As known, prescript of fasting starts from 2183, but what is missed to understand is that this prescript is a part of a bigger concept of "Changing the qibla". We can see that regulation were prescribed for different people due to different reasons, for example sebt (Sabbath) or food forbidden after Israa'il. Changing the qibla is departing mu'minoon in praxis from ehl-ul-kitaab (Followers of the Scripts). The reason for this change is that these followers took scripts as their goal, as a purpose of their lives. They forgot that they should think about what's behind these scripts, besides that they wrote their own scripts and altered ones they got from Allah.
By changing the qibla Allah's showing that prescripts are just temporary to regulate some issues, to bring people back to the right path, to show who's who, to test people, etc. All of the Kitaab can be changed, if Allah wills so. Even the Qur'an is valid only in this life. Even if we fail in our mission, Allah can bring new creature instead of us.
So, 2183 is telling to mu'minoon that Siyaam was prescribed on them as it was prescribed on those before them to watch/look after themselves (the reason). Then in 2184 was told how it was prescribed to those before counted number of FULL DAYS (eyyaam) with a few exceptions. Then in 2185 was said how it is prescribed to mu'minoon.
šehru rameDaane is one IN which was sent down the Qur'an (as) Guidance for the people and interconnections from the Guidance and (from) the Criterion...
We should ask ourselves what's the topic of this ayet? Is it šehru rameDaane or the Qur'an? Since there's no explanation nor exposition of šehru rameDaane and there's for the Qur'an, I see that this ayet talks about the Qur'an as its topic.
... so whoever from you witnessed/participated eš-šehr fe-l-yeSum-hu...
Then we have exact same exceptions as for previous people's fasting in 2184, related to one being sick or on the trip. But let's see quoted part...
We had, at the start, šehru rameDaane and el-Qur'an. If this is not about the Qur'an as its topic then "šehide-hu" (witnessed it/participated in it) would be used. It was used eš-šehr, because we know that šehr is šehru rameDaane. Then, with the next verb was used -hu (it/he) which is a pronoun for the Qur'an. But the verb after fe- (then...) is not an imperative, it's jussive mood, which explains previously told, in this case this all mean so whoever from you witnessed/participated eš-šehr, then he already "fasted" it.
We could understand that "fasting" is related to the Qur'an for mu'minoon, and it should be related to previous scriptures for those before. People should be focused on scripts during these FULL DAYS and not doing common things, similar as sebt (Sabbath). Later on we can understand that previous prescripts for fastings included abstaining from wives and from food and drink, but due to changing of qibla this was changed for mu'minoon, but still fasting stays for FULL DAYS, except for married men who can go to their wives and continue fasting as said.
But what is šehru rameDaane? Šehr is a revelation, revealing; in context with the Moon it's any of its phases. All of them are ešhur, and plural of one (many, 3+) is šuhuur. But without the Moon in the context it's about revelation of something else, in this case of the Qur'an. RameDaane is used only here, and I think that it's the source of English "remedy", so they both mean "revelation of remedy". A proposition fi-hi (in it) is not about any time, but it's the way of sending down the Qur'an "in revelation of remedy".
So, whoever witnessed/participated in Revelation then he already "fasted" it. Now we can see that "it" suits both eš-šehr and the Qur'an.
Since the sending down the Qur'an was finished we cannot witness/participate eš-šehr. Fasting mentioned after is only for those who missed eš-šehr (revelation), but prescript for them was changed due to change of qibla.