> *Abstract:*

> This research addresses the issue of deputyship (niyabah) in acts of worship on behalf of the deceased, taking the act of fasting as a model. Ibn Taymiyyah held an opinion that contradicts the views of the proponents of the well-known jurisprudential schools (madhahib), which resulted in a diversity of the legal ruling (hukm shar'i). Ibn Taymiyyah considers it permissible to fast on behalf of a living person who is unable to fast, just as he considers it permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who died with an outstanding obligation of fasting, while weakening the evidence cited by those who prohibit it and favoring the opposite view.

> *Keywords:* Deputyship in worship, Ibn

> Whoever follows Al-Baji's hadith opinions, and the evidence he uses to support the school of Imam Malik, will realize the extent of Al-Baji's deep knowledge in the science of hadith, and his proficiency in clarifying its issues, explaining its problematic parts, and reconciling its contradictory texts. He often uses hadith evidences and various narrations that support and strengthen his opinion. And in many instances he inclines towards preferring some jurisprudential opinions, and he supports his statements through the context of the hadith and the occasion in which it was mentioned. He may also support and strengthen his opinion by considering the reliability of the narrator with his sheikh, in addition to other various methods that Al-Baji employed in preferring some opinions over others. All of these demonstrated Al-Baji's ability to employ evidences and testimonies to give preponderance to the choices he adopted. And there is no doubt that those criteria for preponderance do not depart from the methodology of the scholars in tarjeeh [giving preponderance].

Abstract:

The Prophet - peace be upon him - found the Jews fasting on the day of Ashura. He asked them, and they said, "This is the day on which Allah saved Moses from drowning." He said, "We have more right to Moses than you." So the Prophet - PBUH - and his companions began fasting on the tenth day of Muharram and were keen to do so, until the Qur'an was revealed making fasting in the month of Ramadan obligatory. Thus, the obligation of fasting on Ashura was abrogated and remained as a recommended act (mustahabb). Allah made fasting Ramadan obligatory and linked its fasting to the sighting of the crescent moon, or completing Sha'ban as thirty days. However, scholars differed regarding the criterion for establishing the new moons. Some said that what counts is naked-eye sighting or the testimony of trustworthy witnesses, while others held that astronomical calculations can be relied upon to confirm the beginning of the month or not. From this arose the issue of differing moon sighting locations (ikhtilaf al-matali'). The majority of scholars held that if the crescent is confirmed in one region, fasting or breaking the fast becomes obligatory upon the rest of the regions, and this is the preponderant opinion. Scholars also differed regarding fasting on the Day of Doubt. The majority held that fasting on the Day of Doubt, which is the thirtieth day of Sha'ban, is prohibited, and this is the preponderant opinion due to the convergence of evidence prohibiting its fasting.