<![CDATA[Hajj substitution (badal hajj) for a deceased person without a will remains a contested issue within the Mālikī school of Islamic jurisprudence. Previous studies have largely examined the issue through inter-school comparisons, while internal variations and the underlying legal reasoning within the Mālikī school have received less attention. This study examines the legal construction of badal hajj without a will, maps the divergent positions of Mālikī jurists, and assesses the methodological consistency of their legal reasoning. It employs normative legal research using conceptual and historical-intellectual approaches based on primary Mālikī jurisprudential works and relevant academic literature. The findings show that Mālik tends to require a will as the basis for performing Hajj on behalf of the deceased, whereas Ibn Ḥabīb grants a limited rukhsah allowing a child to perform Hajj for a deceased parent without a will. This divergence concerns the scope of niyābah, the practice of the people of Madinah, the bodily character of Hajj, and the interpretation of Prophetic precedents. The study argues that this divergence does not indicate methodological inconsistency but reflects internal coherence between the evidentiary foundations, legal reasoning, and conclusions of each position.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
