The Ruling on Dedication of the Reward of Reciting the Qur'an to the Deceased

Question:
The first message in this episode is from a listener: Abdullah Ahmad Nail, a Sudanese. Our brother asks and says: In a response of yours, you answered the following question: Is it permissible to recite the Qur'an for the deceased, or to dedicate its reward to him? I learned from your response that there is disagreement among scholars on this matter, and as you said: there is no evidence from the Lawgiver regarding this issue. I ask your eminence for further clarification on your comments on these observations. If it is permissible for us to perform Hajj on behalf of the deceased, and to give charity on his behalf, does this not mean that the one who performs Hajj on behalf of the deceased must perform all the rituals of Hajj, both the obligatory and the recommended ones?
So if he stands, for example, to pray two rak'ahs at the Maqam and the Sunnah, does he not dedicate the reward of this prayer to the deceased? And consequently: is not the Qur'an he recited in his prayer dedicated to the deceased, just like the other acts of Hajj?
Your eminence, supplication for the deceased is permissible, is not supplication the essence of worship? And if the Qur'an is mercy and healing for the believers, is not the deceased in greater need of this mercy? And the Qur'an contains many verses of supplication.
In summary: If reciting the Qur'an is not permissible for the deceased, does this mean we do not recite the comprehensive verses for his mercy? I ask you to shed more light on this path, and may Allah reward you with good for the living and the dead. Your brother: Abdullah Ahmad Nail.

Answer:
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, and may Allah send prayers and peace upon His Messenger, upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow his guidance. As for what follows:
So I thank the questioner for his care and interest in these great legal matters, and I ask Allah for more of every good for us and for him. O brother questioner: matters of worship are not a place for analogy, and worship is based on divine text as the scholars said. One does not say in them based on pure opinion or analogy from one act of worship to another, but the matter of worship is received from the Lawgiver—from Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)—and we do not analogize one thing to another without evidence.
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) approved performing Hajj on behalf of a deceased person and permitted it, and likewise for the incapable person—such as an old man who is unable—he may have Hajj performed on his behalf. The prayer that the pilgrim performs following the tawaf, its reward and the reward of the tawaf belong to the deceased, without the need to dedicate the prayer or the recitation; because he prayed following the tawaf, and this prayer was permissible as a follower, not independently. It is not prescribed for anyone to pray on behalf of a deceased person or to fast for them as a voluntary act; because this has not been established in the Shari'ah, and acts of worship, as mentioned before, are based on divine legislation. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , and Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) said in that matter, which is more general than this: [Surat al-Shura: 21], and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: meaning: in our religion and our Shari'ah meaning: so it is rejected.
So it is obligatory upon the people of Islam to follow what their Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) brought, and it is not permissible for them to innovate. So Hajj with its obligatory and prescribed acts came from the Lawgiver. If one performs Hajj on behalf of the deceased or the incapable one, the reward is for the one on whose behalf it was performed, for both the voluntary and the obligatory, according to what came from the Lawgiver. And we do not analogize from that to say: as the prayer following the tawaf was permissible for the deceased on whose behalf Hajj was performed, we say: we have the right to pray for the dead and fast for them? No, this is analogy.
Hajj is an independent act of worship, so it is not analogized to say that we fast for him as a voluntary act or pray for him as a voluntary act. Rather, it is upon us to follow and stop at the Shari'ah. And so is recitation. The recitation that a person reads in the prayer for the deceased, and the recitation in the two rak'ahs of tawaf, and the recitation in the tawaf, all of this is a follower. So independent recitation is not analogized to it, such as reading for the deceased and making the reward for the deceased, or reading at the grave, or reading outside of that in any place and intending it for the deceased. This needs evidence.
And although a group of scholars went to the permissibility of that and that there is no harm in it, and they analogized it to Hajj, supplication, and charity, but as mentioned, the legal principle is the prohibition of analogy, and that it is upon us to follow and not invent or innovate in the religion what Allah has not permitted. And if this door is opened, people will enter into innovations and not stop at a limit. So for this, I said previously and I say now: the stronger opinion is the non-dedication of the reward of recitation to the deceased, and the non-prayer on his behalf, and the non-fasting on his behalf, except if he has a debt, an obligatory fast from Ramadan, or from an expiation or a vow. Then there is no harm in fasting on his behalf due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): .
And he was asked more than once about one who died with fasting upon him, so the mufti issued a fatwa that he should fast on behalf of his deceased. We say this as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Whoever dies with fasting upon him, it is fasted on his behalf." This is prescribed by the command of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), even for Ramadan, on the correct opinion. If he died with fasting upon him and did not make it up without a legal excuse, it is permissible for his guardians to fast on his behalf, just as they fast on his behalf for expiations and vows. And some scholars restricted that to vows, and the correct opinion is that it is not restricted to vows but is general, due to what is in the two Sahihs of the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said: , thus he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: This is a generality , so it includes one who died with the fast of Ramadan upon him, or the fast of an expiation, or the fast of a vow.
And whoever claims to restrict that to vows has no evidence for it, and he has no argument that is sound to rely upon. And he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say: "Whoever dies with a prayer upon him, his guardian prays for him!" And he did not say: "Whoever dies, his guardian recites for him!" But supplication, yes, it is prescribed for us to supplicate for the deceased and to pray and supplicate for them. And Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) says in His great Book, praising His righteous servants with His saying: [Surat al-Hashr: 10].
So supplication is a required matter for both the deceased and the living. For this, Allah prescribed the funeral prayer because of the supplication in it for the deceased. So I hope, my brother! that the matter does not become confused for you, and that you be reassured that the Sunnah is to adhere to what the Shari'ah brought and not to deviate from it, and not to add to it in acts of worship because they are based on divine text. And success is from Allah.

The presenter: May Allah reward you with good.
Shaykh Abdul Aziz! Some of our brothers frequently use the word "Mawlana" (Our Master). And you once commented on this word in a response in a past episode?

The Shaykh: Likewise, it should not be used; because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: , thus Muslim narrated it in the Sahih. It should be left by the believer. And some scholars permitted it, and they argued with his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying regarding the slave: , they said: this is evidence for its permissibility, because it was permissible for the slave to say it to his master. So the better in this is that we do not analogize to the slave, but this is specific to the slave saying it to his master. As for others, it should be for him to be polite with the legal etiquette and say: O so-and-so, O my brother, O Abu so-and-so, O Shaykh so-and-so, and this is sufficient. And he should be cautious with his religion and stay away from the thing that has a doubt. Yes.

The presenter: May Allah reward you with good.