Fasting on behalf of the deceased: False hadith

[Ruhi_Rose]

“Whoever died and he ought to have fasted (the missed days of Ramadān) then his guardians must fast on his behalf.”  Bukhari 1952, book 30, hadith #59.  Chapter titled “Can somebody else observe saum instead of the dead?”

This hadith is so blatantly incompatible with the Noble Quran that apologists have tried to make a lame excuse to justify it.  Yet, that excuse does nothing to help them.  The hadith remains incompatible with the Noble Quran.

First off, regarding fasting in the month of Ramadan, everyone knows for sure that there is no such Quranic concept of fasting on behalf of someone else, whether deceased or alive.  Moreover, after passing away no one is required to fast.  And if a living person misses their fasts, they need to make it up later.  If they are chronically ill, they should provide food to a needy person for every day of Ramadan, if they can afford that.  You can check all rules for fasting stated in the Noble Quran in this post and thread.   

Unable to refute the above aspects on Ramadan fasting, our ulemas claim that the hadith under discussion does not refer to fasting in Ramadan, rather it refers to fasting as penalty for breaking an oath.  Let us now read the Quran Verse on breaking an oath.

“Allah will not take you to task for that which is unintentional in your oaths, but He will take you to task for the oaths which you swear in earnest. The expiation thereof is the feeding of ten of the needy with the average of that wherewith you feed your own folk, or the clothing of them, or the liberation of a slave, and for him who finds not (the wherewithal to do so) then a three days' fast. This is the expiation of your oaths when you have sworn; and keep your oaths. Thus Allah expounds unto you His revelations in order that you may give thanks.”  5:89 Al-Maidah.

Needless to mention, V.5:89 is comprehensive, very simple to understand and straightforward with no scope of confusion whatsoever.  If you have broken a serious oath, for redress Allah Almighty provides you with 3 options and then a 4th, in case you are unable to afford any one of the first 3 options:

1)  Feeding 10 needy persons with the kind of food you and your family would normally have OR
2)  To provide clothing to the needy OR
3)  To free a slave OR
4)  To fast for 3 days if you are unable to feed or cloth the needy or free a slave.

There is absolutely NO concept nor any references nor the remotest hint that a 3 days’ fast in such a situation becomes the responsibility of the guardians or family members of a person who died after breaking their oath and could not afford any one of the first 3 options either.  In fact there is no concept of any of the 4 options becoming the responsibility of someone else in case the breaker of the oath dies prior to redress.

Breaking an oath is a violation that ensues from the decision of the person who breaks it.  The Almighty has made it very clear in His Final Message that every soul is responsible for their own deeds. 

“And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.”  35:18 Fatir.

Also, in the same Verse, Allah mentions:

“He who grows (in goodness), grows only for himself, (he cannot by his merit redeem others).”  35:18 Fatir.

I was discussing this matter with a sister at our Islamic community centre and she asked “what if a person breaks an oath at the advice of others or under the influence of others?”  In that case too the transgressor still carries the burden of their own transgression for giving in to misguided people who will also be answerable to Allah on the Day of Judgement. But even if the influencers do fast on behalf of the person they influenced, that will not exonerate the deceased of their responsibility.  In such a situation, the guardians or family of the deceased can only request Allah Almighty for grant forgiveness to the departed soul.  Performing the act of redress cannot absolve the deceased.  There is no conceptualization of such atonements in the Noble Quran. 

[N. Truth Seeker]

This idea of one person acting on another person’s behalf is typically a hadith theme.  Hadith also claims one person (who has already done Hajj) can perform Hajj on behalf of another person who is unable to undertake the journey.  But the Noble Quran doesn’t say any such thing.  If you are unable to perform Hajj for whatever genuine reasons, just let it be.  Allah knows the compulsions and if He wills, He will forgive.  Thus Allah says that it is for whoever is able to find a way ..  that is, whoever is able to afford it or able to handle the physical stress involved in the long journey.  But there is no mention of someone else doing your Hajj (which they call Hajj Badl).
 
Only monetary penalty can be accepted by the family or friends of the transgressor as this is a different matter.  Example if a person kills someone and the family of the deceased agree to accept blood money but the guilty person doesn't have the money.  In this case if someone else from the side of the guilty person steps in and is willing to pay on that person's behalf, it can be accepted.

[Ruhi_Rose]

Only monetary penalty can be accepted by the family or friends of the transgressor as this is a different matter.  Example if a person kills someone and the family of the deceased agree to accept blood money but the guilty person doesn't have the money.  In this case if someone else from the side of the guilty person steps in and is willing to pay on that person's behalf, it can be accepted.

Yes correct, that's a very different issue.

[Heba E. Husseyn]

And if you check this hadith carefully, they have forged the name of Aisha as the narrator.  Thus, a suggestion to hadithists that it’s so darn important for them never to accept the idea of isnad as a proof of correctness.  According to this forgery, Aisha is supposed to have said that the Prophet (pbuh) made his own law in contradiction of Quranic principles already asserted by Allah in Verse 35:18. 




Ever thought of the fallibility of isnad?

[N. Truth Seeker]

True, that's the insinuation of this forgery .... and isnad is really a dangerous trick that assists such forgeries.

[Zainab_M]

Completely senseless hadith and shameless forgery.   

I thoroughly appreciate your step by step analysis, Sister Ruhi.

[Ruhi_Rose]

You're welcome sis ..