The jurisprodential study of the death of Naib during Hajj

If Naib [he who represents someone else] dies during performing the Hajj for the client, his Niyabah [proxy] is controvertial from two aspects: (1) the validity or nullity of his Niyabah which has significant effect on performing or not performing the obligatory practice (Ijza) and (2) the remuneration entitled to the Naib, which was paid or is to be paid after practicing Hajj. In the former case, if he dies before assuming Ihram, jurists unanimously believe that his practice is void and does not discharge the client from his duty. Also, if he dies after assuming Ihram and entering Haram, jurists unanimously believe his practice is valid and release the client from his duty. However, there is contoversy among jurists in case the Naib dies after wearing Ihram and before entering Haram. In this case, there are two viewpoints, which the one highlighting the insufficiency of performing of any act except the obligatory one for the obligatory practice agrees with the clues and evidences. In the case of the later, if his Niyabah is to release the client from his/her duties, the Naib’s remuneration is dependent on performing or not performing the obligatory practice (Ijza) for the client. However, if the Naib is to perform particular Hajj practices (rather than releasing the client from the duty), the two following assumptions can be made:1. If the remuneration does not cover the general practices such as  going along the path, the Naib is not entitled to the remuneration. 2. If the Naib should perfom some particular Hajj pratices toghether with the basic ones (by observing the order or parts of the pratices), he is entitled to the remuneration of the part carried out on the behalf of the client.)