Scholarly differences:

The jurists have disagreed about a person who dies while still owing days of fasting—may those fasts be performed on his behalf? They hold three views:

1. No fasts are to be made up for him under any circumstances, whether they were vowed or originally required by the Law. This is the position of Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, and al-Shāfiʿī in his later opinion.

2. Only the vowed fast is to be observed for him, not the fast that was obligatory in its own right. This is the view of Imām Aḥmad, Abū ʿUbayd, al-Layth, and Isḥāq, and it was championed by Ibn al-Qayyim.

3. Both the vowed fast and the original legal obligation are to be fulfilled on behalf of the deceased. This is the stance of Abū Thawr and the ḥadith scholars; Ibn Ḥazm upheld it and refuted those who dissented, as did a number of Shāfiʿī traditionists. It is also the earlier opinion of al-Shāfiʿī, who conditioned his endorsement on the authenticity of the ḥadith.

Al-Bayhaqī said, “Had al-Shāfiʿī examined all the chains of transmission for these reports and seen how they corroborate one another, he would not, God willing, have disagreed with them.”

Our teacher ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Saʿdī adopted this third view, adding that it is also the choice of Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah regarding every debt the deceased owes—whether to Allah or to another person, whether self-imposed or imposed by the Law.

Those who absolutely forbid making up the fasts advance several proofs. Among them is the verse, “and that man shall have only what he strives for” (Q 53:39), and the report from Ibn ʿAbbās: “No one may pray on behalf of another, nor may anyone fast on behalf of another.” A similar statement is related from ʿĀʾishah. Both she and Ibn ʿAbbās transmitted the hadiths on fasting for the deceased yet issued contrary legal opinions; their opinion, not their narration, is therefore followed, for they were more aware of what the hadith meant.

Those who permit the fasts to be made up without restriction rely on the hadith under discussion—its wording is general, covering both fasts originally mandatory and those made obligatory by a vow—and on the forthcoming hadith of Ibn ʿAbbās: “A man came to the Prophet ﷺ and said, ‘Messenger of Allah, my mother has died while she still owed a month of fasting; should I make it up for her?’ He replied, ‘If your mother had a debt, would you settle it for her?’ The man said, ‘Yes.’ He ﷺ then said, ‘A debt owed to Allah has even more right to be discharged.’”

Ibn Ḥajar observed, “Aḥmad and those who side with him restrict the general sense of ʿĀʾishah’s ḥadith by the specification found in the ḥadith of Ibn ʿAbbās. In reality there is no contradiction that needs harmonizing: the ḥadith of Ibn ʿAbbās deals with a specific case presented to the Prophet ﷺ, whereas the ḥadith of ʿĀʾishah lays down a universal principle.”