The Ruling on Praying for the Absent

Is the prayer for the absent prescribed, especially if it is thought that he has already been prayed for in his country?
The correct view regarding the prayer for the absent is that it is not a recommended practice, except for one who has not been prayed for, such as a man who died in the sea and drowned and was not prayed for; in that case, we pray for him. However, if he has been prayed for in any place, he is not prayed for as an absent one; because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) did not pray for the absent one except for one man who had not been prayed for, and that was the Negus. If the prayer for the absent one had been prescribed, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) would have been the first to establish it for the Ummah.
Likewise, it is not reported from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) that they prayed for the absent one. The commanders died, the caliphs died, and the princes died, and they were not prayed for. This is what we have mentioned, and it is the choice of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), and he was guided to the truth. But if the one in authority orders it, it becomes obedience.Meaning: The prayer for the absent one becomes obedience; because it is part of the obedience to the one in authority who ordered it.Allah the Exalted said: [Al-Nisa:59] And indeed, some people have gone astray. It reached us that when the one in authority ordered the prayer for Shaykh Abdul Aziz ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him), they lagged behind and did not pray. This is due to their ignorance, because we pray for the absent one by the order of the one in authority in obedience to Allah (Mighty and Majestic).because of His saying, the Exalted: [Al-Nisa:59] So if this person says: I see that it is a religious innovation, do we agree if the one in authority orders a religious innovation?We say: No, this is not a religious innovation because it is a matter of scholarly disagreement among the scholars.And in matters of jurisprudential disagreement, it is not said: It is a religious innovation.If we said: If it were a religious innovation, then all the jurists would be innovators, meaning that every person would say to another, if he is in disagreement with his opinion: You are an innovator. And no scholar has said this.Therefore we say: The independent legal reasoning of these brothers is not in its proper place.

In any case: The correct view is that the prayer for the absent one is not a recommended practice, but if the one in authority orders it, it is obedience to Allah (Mighty and Majestic); because he ordered it.