When three congrega tions in Lahore joined the congregation of Peshawar in offering Eid prayers on Sunday instead of Monday, it seemed that the Ruet-i-Hilal Committee system had broken down, and it raised the question as to why the government invested so much effort into having one Eid. This reflected a realisation so ancient that it might no longer be meaningful, but Mufti Muneeb himself, while appearing on a TV talk show, had pronounced the necessary condition for the holding of one Eid: the institution of a Caliph. This showed what is not frequently realised that determining the Ruet (or appearance) of the moon is neither merely a religious function, nor a function to determine a holiday, but one of the functions of a government, which it must carry out. It becomes all the more crucial if the government is to follow the Hijri calendar, which is lunar rather than solar, for official purposes, including the disbursement of salaries. In that case, the Ruet of the Shawwal moon would not only determine Eid, but also payday, which would make it more crucial than it is today. Because of the salary issue, each Ruet would be watched very closely, not just the three - Shawwal, Dhul Hijja and Muharram - that determine the two Eids and Ashura. Indeed, there is usually no dispute over the latter two, the first not being at the beginning of a month, and the second being of interest primarily to a minority sect. The Ruet Committee is essentially a body of experts set-up to perform a function for the federal government, to avoid such a situation as prevailed this Eid, and which occurs almost every Eidul Fitr: that of multiple Eids, with Peshawar, and indeed the whole of NWFP, observing Eid the day before. On some Eid, because the tribal areas, usually, see the moon, which is not seen in Peshawar, there have been three Eids, because NWFP has had two. The Ruet Committee consists of the ulema from all schools of thought, and is assisted by, but does not include as members, the Met Office, SUPARCO and university astronomers. Before the committee meets, the Eid holidays have been announced, and the committee merely has to determine the offering of the Eid prayer. This is important, since the overwhelming majority of the population wishes to offer the prayer reliably, because there are massive penalties for wrongly offering the prayer, or fasting on the wrong day. This is a situation in which a government which has followed the Gregorian calendar has felt the need of experts. The experts are the ulema, or Muslim clergy, which might or might not explain why so far they have botched the job. One thing that has not been taken account of has been the ease and speed of modern communication. It was once quite a problem in communication, involving elaborate arrangements and prior understandings, to convey from one region to another, that the moon had been sighted. Now it needs only a casual phone call to establish real-time, inter-regional, interpersonal communication, and find out about anything, let alone the moon. No prior arrangements or understandings are needed. Therefore, finding out in Indonesia (or even further east) about a moon sighting in North America within seconds is entirely possible, and the completion of the interrogation within minutes as to the Shariat qualifications of the person making the sighting. However, the impact of nationalism has been such on the Muslim world that it has created borders where none existed before, and one effect has been because the borders do not follow the moon sightings. It has not helped that while the borders created by establishing separate nation-states have been rigid, the borders of the moon are quite fuzzy, which is why Pakistan, which is presumably athwart one of these borders, has such a problem. Because having a separate Eid has so many implications, the official sponsorship by the ANP component of the NWFP government, extended to the ulema in Peshawar who sighted a moon separately from the rest of the country, deserves special attention. Here there are separatist implications which should not be ignored. For further consideration, it should also be remembered that the issue of a separate Eid is also very much alive in the tribal areas, where the USA is not letting up on drone attacks nor is it making any of the Reconstruction Opportunity Zones it promised. The ANP cannot have its cake and eat it too. It is trying to act, over the moon-sighting issue, like a central government, which it is not. And this is not a provincial issue. Though the ANP has tried to draw close to the USA in its War on Terror, it has only ended up acting like a provincial government on this issue, and only coincidentally celebrating Eid along with the Arab countries. If it had wanted a separate Eid, it would have had to go further down the week, probably to Tuesday or Wednesday, where it would have 'avoided' the easternmost Muslim countries. The calendar is very much an instrument of official control. The Gregorian calendar is a 16th century reform by a Pope of a Roman calendar which had prevailed for more than 1600 years. The purpose was to get a more accurate date for Easter. This calendar was introduced to the subcontinent by the British, and was a symbol of their rule. However, the dates for all festivals, Hindu, Sikh and Muslim, followed their own calendars. The last this area has known of a calendar adapted to the people's religion was when the Mughals ruled, following the Hijri calendar. All the arguments made against a lunar calendar were made then, to bring the people round to the new calendar. But even now, people still follow the lunar calendar while celebrating religious festivals. Indeed, even after the introduction of the solar calendar, the pirs and sufi saints who died have their urs marked by the Hijri calendar. Devotees do not have a problem attending even then. The solution does not lie in increasing the science, as the Saudis have done. The movements of the moon can be predicted, but not that of the human eye. As the Ruet Committee experience has shown, only so much can be done voluntarily. A calendar has to be enforced by the government, and as Mufti Muneeb said, there can only be one Eid if there is a Caliph. This is both orthodoxy and good sense, because orthodoxy demands that Muslims have a single government, and good sense because only a single government can ensure a single Eid. Whether Muslims bother, is another matter.