Is it permissible to perform autopsies on the dead?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh: Yes.
The questioner : I learned about the topic of autopsies on the dead a hadith reported from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him):Sunan Ibn Majah 1616Hasan (Darussalam), and there is an argument using this hadith for the prohibition of dissecting the dead body regardless of any reasons; because the hadith was not conditioned such that if the cause is removed, we can dissect. So what is your opinion on the matter?
The Shaykh : My opinion is as the hadith indicates, but with a condition, which is the believer. So dissection for a Muslim is not permissible at all because it involves likening Allah to creation; as for a non-Muslim, if it is with the permission of his family, it is permissible because he does not have that sanctity that the Muslim has. Is the answer clear?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : Okay, now there is something called forensic medicine, meaning dissection reveals crimes and reveals this. There is no chapter in the Sunnah that permits that.
The Shaykh : This is not forensic medicine; this is jurisprudential medicine. Do you understand how? We must distinguish between the two. That is, some jurists, especially in the last of times, exert independent legal reasoning based on opinion, as it was said about the people of opinion in Kufa in the past. But these people are primarily characterized by their distance from studying the Sunnah jurisprudence, and I mean the jurisprudence derived from the Sunnah. Because they do not concern themselves, from the softness of their nails until they graduate as doctors in the Shari'ah, with studying the Sunnah and comprehending the treasures and texts within it. Rather, they use their opinion that public benefit requires it this way, and since there is no text in the Shari'ah preventing it, this is within the limits of their knowledge, so they issue such fatwas. But now look at how we have fallen into a time where what is textually stated in the Shari'ah we do not practice and do not rule by, and what is not textually stated in the Shari'ah, the least that can be said is we exert independent legal reasoning from ourselves in the way of what? Showing that this victim was killed by a bullet of a specific type, for example, this bullet is like police bullets, for example... You reach from revealing the type of bullet to determining the identity of the criminal. Good, if we say this excessive, or rather, this exaggerated investigation is permissible, what is the fruit of this? We discovered in the end who the killer is. Is he killed? He is not killed except very rarely; because you are establishing certain facts that do not require such precise medical research. Nevertheless, we are suspending the Shari'ah rulings, which is certainly known to you. So what is the purpose of forensic medicine, revealing the criminal? The criminals are by the dozens every day, and we do not establish the Shari'ah punishment for them. So take heed, O you who have insight. This, if we assume there is no likening Allah to creation of this victim's body, that he is above what is killing, and he found his end with his Lord, whether rightly or wrongly, Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is the One who will judge between people. So we come and dissect him and learn from him, and as it was said, as we read before in some books on proper conduct, "They were weak, so they described them." Now, did they describe a lion cub to you? If one has a power and a state, and they cannot liken him to creation in this way, they leave him and accuse Zayd, Bakr, and 'Amr for what? To take revenge for him; so naming this type of medical examination forensic medicine is, in my opinion, the least that can be said is a laxity in expression. Yes, indeed.
The questioner : I have another response I heard or read on this aspect, like forensic medicine or for the purpose of medical education. For forensic medicine, the point here is that the judge does not need information to issue a ruling or opinion in a case. The ruling, for the judge to issue it, needs evidence. And if sufficient evidence is found, he relies on circumstantial evidence. The evidences are known in Islam as four types, such as confession, taking an oath, documented testimonies, and witnesses. And these other matters from the impact, or from medical examination, or from marks left at the crime scene, are considered, or the whole picture is considered circumstantial evidence that the judge relies on. But it is not possible to rely on them in issuing the ruling. So their value before the judge, even if they are done, is weak.
The Shaykh : So they are secondary.
The questioner : Because it is circumstantial evidence, not evidence.
The Shaykh : Secondary. Sound speech, there is no response to it at all.
The questioner : I learned about the topic of autopsies on the dead a hadith reported from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him):
Breaking the bones of the deceased is like breaking his bones when he is alive.
كسر عظم الميت ككسره وهو حيThe Shaykh : My opinion is as the hadith indicates, but with a condition, which is the believer.
The believer: Breaking the bone of a dead believer is like breaking it while he is alive
المؤمن كسر عظم الميت المؤمن ككسره حياThe questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Go ahead.
The questioner : Okay, now there is something called forensic medicine, meaning dissection reveals crimes and reveals this. There is no chapter in the Sunnah that permits that.
The Shaykh : This is not forensic medicine; this is jurisprudential medicine. Do you understand how? We must distinguish between the two. That is, some jurists, especially in the last of times, exert independent legal reasoning based on opinion, as it was said about the people of opinion in Kufa in the past. But these people are primarily characterized by their distance from studying the Sunnah jurisprudence, and I mean the jurisprudence derived from the Sunnah. Because they do not concern themselves, from the softness of their nails until they graduate as doctors in the Shari'ah, with studying the Sunnah and comprehending the treasures and texts within it. Rather, they use their opinion that public benefit requires it this way, and since there is no text in the Shari'ah preventing it, this is within the limits of their knowledge, so they issue such fatwas. But now look at how we have fallen into a time where what is textually stated in the Shari'ah we do not practice and do not rule by, and what is not textually stated in the Shari'ah, the least that can be said is we exert independent legal reasoning from ourselves in the way of what? Showing that this victim was killed by a bullet of a specific type, for example, this bullet is like police bullets, for example... You reach from revealing the type of bullet to determining the identity of the criminal. Good, if we say this excessive, or rather, this exaggerated investigation is permissible, what is the fruit of this? We discovered in the end who the killer is. Is he killed? He is not killed except very rarely; because you are establishing certain facts that do not require such precise medical research. Nevertheless, we are suspending the Shari'ah rulings, which is certainly known to you. So what is the purpose of forensic medicine, revealing the criminal? The criminals are by the dozens every day, and we do not establish the Shari'ah punishment for them. So take heed, O you who have insight. This, if we assume there is no likening Allah to creation of this victim's body, that he is above what is killing, and he found his end with his Lord, whether rightly or wrongly, Allah (Mighty and Majestic) is the One who will judge between people. So we come and dissect him and learn from him, and as it was said, as we read before in some books on proper conduct, "They were weak, so they described them." Now, did they describe a lion cub to you? If one has a power and a state, and they cannot liken him to creation in this way, they leave him and accuse Zayd, Bakr, and 'Amr for what? To take revenge for him; so naming this type of medical examination forensic medicine is, in my opinion, the least that can be said is a laxity in expression. Yes, indeed.
The questioner : I have another response I heard or read on this aspect, like forensic medicine or for the purpose of medical education. For forensic medicine, the point here is that the judge does not need information to issue a ruling or opinion in a case. The ruling, for the judge to issue it, needs evidence. And if sufficient evidence is found, he relies on circumstantial evidence. The evidences are known in Islam as four types, such as confession, taking an oath, documented testimonies, and witnesses. And these other matters from the impact, or from medical examination, or from marks left at the crime scene, are considered, or the whole picture is considered circumstantial evidence that the judge relies on. But it is not possible to rely on them in issuing the ruling. So their value before the judge, even if they are done, is weak.
The Shaykh : So they are secondary.
The questioner : Because it is circumstantial evidence, not evidence.
The Shaykh : Secondary. Sound speech, there is no response to it at all.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.