What is the ruling on performing Hajj on behalf of a deceased person, with or without payment?

The questioner : Regarding Hajj on behalf of a deceased person, Hajj on behalf of a deceased person.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : With payment or without payment, whether the Hajj is voluntary or obligatory, we need to detail this, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : First, Hajj on behalf of a deceased person is not permissible in an absolute sense; because the rule, as He (Glorified and Exalted is He) said: , and it came in the "Muwatta" of Imam Malik from the athar of 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "No one fasts on behalf of another, and no one performs Hajj on behalf of another." Accordingly, we should remain upon this rule except for what is excluded.
And as far as I know, there is nothing authentically excluded except what falls under this rule: . So the Hajj of a son, for example, on behalf of his father or his mother, there are hadiths regarding this. And the hadith of al-Khath'amiah is sufficient for you in terms of its fame; she met the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) during the Farewell Pilgrimage, so she asked him about her father. She said: "My father is an old man who cannot stay on a mount; should I perform Hajj on his behalf?" He said: . And in this hadith or in another, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . She said: "Yes." He (peace be upon him) said: .
And we have not seen a correct, explicit hadith indicating the permissibility of a person performing Hajj on behalf of another person with whom there is no kinship relation. All that is in this matter in this chapter is the hadith of Shubrumah, which came in the Sunan and in the "Musnad" of Imam Ahmad and in other books of the Sunnah, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) heard a man saying in his talbiyah: "Labbaik Allahumma 'an Shubrumah." So he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to him: . He said: "He is my brother or a relative of mine." He said: . He said: "No." He said: . So this hadith may be used as evidence by those who hold to the legitimacy of performing Hajj on behalf of another, because Shubrumah was not specified in the hadith as being his father; rather, he said: "He is my brother or a relative of mine." If he was a brother, then the argument with this hadith is established at that time that it is permissible to perform Hajj on behalf of someone other than one's parents as well. And if the narration was not about a brother of his but about a relative; then this is closer and more correct in terms of argumentation; because a brother is the closest relative, whereas a relative after the brother is further away from him.
But two matters arise against this argument, which appears to be sound:
The first matter, which is very important in my view, is that this hadith which came with this wording: "My brother or a relative of mine," this is not the text of the hadith that was the answer from the one performing talbiyah to the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he asked him: ; so it is not consistent for the answer, specifically from one who is asked by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), to say hesitantly: "My brother or a relative of mine"; because this hesitation is only valid for a memorizer who may make a mistake, whereas one who was entrusted or appointed to perform Hajj on behalf of another and knows for certain whether this other person is his brother or his father or so on. So if we remember this fact, we know at that time that the narrator's saying: "My brother or a relative of mine" did not come from the one performing talbiyah, but rather this is from one of the narrators; the narrator is the one who was uncertain and did not memorize the text; so he said on behalf of the one answering, who is the one performing talbiyah: "My brother or a relative of mine." Otherwise, it is almost impossible that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would ask one of his Companions who is performing talbiyah on behalf of someone, who is it? and he would answer with hesitation as if he is obscuring the degree of kinship between him and the one for whom Hajj is being performed.
If any individual asked his brother about this, his answer would not be consistent if he said: "This is my brother or a relative of mine," especially if it wasThe questioner : the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), so this observation confirms to us that this hadith was narrated by a narrator who was not firm in its text; so we cannot say that the one for whom Hajj was performed was his brother or was a relative of his. There is no doubt that kinship is very broad in scope; so at that time, it is not consistent to argue with this hesitation; by saying that he performed Hajj on behalf of someone other than his father; because the narrator did not fix this wording.
And I found in the "Mu'jam al-Tayyib" of al-Tabarani, and perhaps in others as well, that the one asked and the one performing Hajj on behalf of Shubrumah said in the answer: "He is my father." And at that time, the hadith is like the hadith of al-Khath'amiah; it is not valid to argue with it for performing Hajj as a substitute; Hajj on behalf of another, even if it is not his parents. This is the first thing that arises against this hadith.
The second thing: If we assume hypothetically and for the sake of argument that the one for whom Hajj was performed is not his father or his mother; then at that time, it is possible that the Hajj of this pilgrim on behalf of Shubrumah was on the basis of a bequest issued by Shubrumah. And at that time, the hadith takes on another aspect; which is executing the bequest of one who bequeathed that Hajj be performed on his behalf. And at that time, executing this bequest is a prescribed matter.
And it is known among the jurists that if a hadith or evidence is affected by probability, then argumentation with it falls, especially if it contradicts a legal rule: . And if the door of performing Hajj on behalf of another is opened, a very wide door of innovation in religion is opened, in my belief; so it would be permissible at that time for a person to pray on behalf of another, and to fast absolutely on behalf of another, and the like of that, which differs completely from His saying (Blessed and Exalted is He) mentioned earlier: .
What remains is the answer regarding taking a fee; so I believe that if we limit the scope of the substitute Hajj between a child and his parents; then at that time, much of what is related to the topic of taking a fee becomes invalid; except in one case; if a man who was obligated to perform Hajj bequeathed, and then for some reason or otherwise did not perform Hajj and did not make up the Hajj of Islam, so he bequeathed that Hajj be performed, either by specifying a particular person or by generalizing and saying: that a knowledgeable, virtuous, and righteous man perform Hajj on my behalf, and he has such and such. So his saying: "and he has such and such" is considered a reward for a specific task. And as we say in many occasions regarding the salaries that employees take in some religious positions such as leading prayer, delivering the sermon, and the call to prayer, and the like; these salaries are not permissible for those to whom they are allocated to take as wages for their worship; because that would invalidate it for them and remove the reward of the Hereafter from them. Rather, they take them as salaries. So likewise, if there is a man who bequeathed that a certain person perform Hajj on his behalf, and he made a reward for him, and he wanted to draw near to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) by executing that bequest; then what he takes from this reward falls under the category of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): ; so there is no harm in that. As for the substitute Hajj becoming a commodity that is bargained over by both parties, the pilgrim performing the substitute Hajj exaggerating in it, and the one for whom it is performed, meaning his family and relatives executing his bequest, lowering it, and so on; this is not of the nature of worship. And if the matter revolves around bargaining over the price of the Hajj, the substitute Hajj, then it means that what the pilgrim takes is a wage, and it is a burden on him. And what the one who paid the money in the way of performing Hajj on his behalf does not reach him anything; because the Hajj of this pilgrim is not for the sake of Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), but rather it is for a few small coins.
This is what can be answered regarding that question.