Excavating the Graves of Muslims and Non Muslims

Question: Is it permissible to excavate the graves of the Muslims and the graves of the disbelievers?

Answers: There is a difference between excavating the graves of the Muslims and excavating the graves of the disbelievers. Thus, excavating the graves of the Muslims is not permissible except until after the corpse has deteriorated and become decay. This is since excavating the grave would expose the buried cadaver and its bones to wreckage, and the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “Breaking the bones of a deceased believer is like breaking his bones if he were alive.” So the believer has sanctity after his death, just as he used to have sanctity during his lifetime. However, this sanctity is of course within the legislated bounds.

As for excavating the graves of the disbelievers, then they do not possess this (same) sanctity. Therefore, it is permissible to excavate them based on what is established in Saheeh Al-Bukhaaree and Muslim that when the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) migrated from Makkah to Madeenah, the first thing he instituted was the construction of the Prophet’s masjid, which is still in existence today. But (at that time), there used be a garden there that belonged to a group of orphans from the Ansaar, in which were graves of polytheists. So he, (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said to these orphans: “Give me a price for your land.” He meant by this, “Sell me your land for its price.” They responded: “It is for Allaah and His Messenger. We do not want any price for it.” And there was found old ruins and graves of polytheists on that land. So the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) put someone in charge of the graves of the polytheists and so they were levelled (and the bodies were taken out). And he put someone in charge of the old ruins and they were flattened. Then the Prophet’s masjid was established on the ground of that garden.

Therefore, the excavation of the graves is from two perspectives. As for it being done to the Muslim graves, then it is not permissible. And as for it being done to the disbelievers’ graves then it is permissible. I have indicated in the response, that it is not permissible to excavate the Muslims’ graves until the bodies first deteriorate and become dust, but when is this? Indeed, it differs according to the different types of land. There are arid desert lands, which expedite the decaying of the bodies buried in them. Thus, it is not possible to put a regulation that would determine the specific time it takes for the bodies to decay. So just as it is said: “The inhabitants of Makkah are the most knowledgeable about its mountain trails,” then those individuals who bury people in that land know best the approximate time it takes for the dead buried in the graves to decay.

Source: The Fataawaa of Shaikh al-Albaanee From al-Asaalah Magazine Issues 1-21, p. 80

Is a Muslim Excused Due to Ignorance?

Claiming that one is ignorant or using this as an excuse is a matter which needs further discussion. Not everyone can be excused for his ignorance. With regard to the things which were brought by Islam, which the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) explained and which were made clear in the Book of Allaah and are widely known among the Muslims, no claim of ignorance will be accepted in these cases, especially in matters with have to do with ‘aqeedah and the basics of religion.  Allaah sent His Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to teach the people their religion and explain it to them, and he conveyed the message clearly and explained to the Ummah the truths of their religion.

He explained everything and left them with a clear path which is always obvious. In the Book of Allaah there is guidance and light. If some people claim to be ignorant about things which are known to be essential parts of the religion and which are well known among the Muslims, such as claiming to be ignorant about shirk and worshipping anything other than Allaah, or claiming that Salaah is not obligatory, or that fasting Ramadaan is not obligatory, or that paying Zakaah is not obligatory, or that doing Hajj when one is able to is not obligatory – in these and similar matters, claims of ignorance are unacceptable from those who live among the Muslims, because they are matters which are well known among the Muslims. They are known to be essential parts of the Muslim religion and are widely known among the Muslims, so the claim of ignorance of these matters is unacceptable.

This is the case if a person were to claim that he does not know that what the mushrikeen do at the graves or idols is wrong, when they call upon the dead, seek their help, offer sacrifices to them and make vows to them, or offer sacrifices to the idols, stars, trees or rocks; or seek healing or help against their enemies from the dead or idols or jinn or angels or Prophets… All of these are things which are known essentially in the religion that they are major shirk.

Allaah explained this clearly in His Book, and His Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) explained it clearly. He remained in Makkah for thirteen years warning the people against this shirk, and he preached the same message in Madeenah for ten years, explaining to them that it is obligatory for their worship to be purely and sincerely for Allaah Alone, and reciting to them the Book of Allaah…  

The same applies in the case of those who make fun of the religion, attack it, mock it and insult it – all of these are forms of major kufr and are things for which none may be excused on the grounds of ignorance, because it is well known in the religion that insulting the religion or insulting the Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) are forms of major kufr, as is making fun of the religion or mocking it. 

With regard to matters which may be unclear, such as some transactions and some matters of prayer and fasting, the one who is ignorant of them may be excused, as the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) excused the man who entered ihraam dressed in a cloak and wearing perfume. The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said to him, “Take off the cloak and wash off the perfume, and do in your ‘Umrah what you do in your Hajj.” He did not tell him to pay a penalty (fidyah) for his ignorance.

By the same token, some matters which may be unclear should be taught to the one who is ignorant so that he will come to understand them. But as far as the basics of ‘aqeedah, the pillars of Islam, and things which are clearly haraam are concerned, claims of ignorance cannot be accepted from anyone who lives among the Muslims. If anyone who lives among the Muslims were to say, “I did not know that zinaa is haraam”, this is no excuse. If he were to say, “I did not know that disobeying my parents is haraam,” this is no excuse; rather he should be beaten and disciplined. Or if he were to say, “I did not know that homosexuality is haraam,” this is no excuse. These are matters which are clear and are well known among the Muslims and in Islam.

But if he lived in a land far away from the Muslim world or in a remote part of Africa where there are no Muslims around him, then the claim of ignorance may be accepted from him, and if he dies in that state his case will rest with Allaah; he will come under the same ruling as those who lived during the fatrah (time between two Prophets). The correct view is that they will be tested on the Day of Resurrection: if they respond and obey they will enter Paradise, and if they disobey they will enter Hell. But the one who lived among the Muslims but did actions of kufr and neglected the well-known obligations, has no excuse, because the matter is clear and there are Muslims around him, who fast and perform Hajj. All of this is well known and widespread among the Muslims, so the claim of ignorance in this case is a false claim. And Allaah is the One Whose help we seek. 

Source: Summarized from Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutnawwi’ah by Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ibn ‘Abdullaah Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), vol. 7, p. 132[1]

---

[1] See https://islamqa.info/en/10065

Understanding the Principles of Takfeer

Question: O Shaykh, may Allaah preserve you and take care of you – what is the meaning of the statement of Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, “Takfeer of a specific individual requires specific evidence.”

Answer: You know, may Allaah bless you, that the (Sharee’ah) rulings are sometimes associated with a description (wasf) and sometimes associated with an individual. For example we say, ‘Every believer is from the people of Paradise’. This is a general statement which is associated with a description; every believer is in Paradise and every disbeliever is in Fire. However, do we say in the case of a specific individual, so and so is in Paradise? Do you say about this specific individual, so and so is from the people of Fire?

Hence, there is a difference between that which is associated with a description and that which is associated with an individual. When a person utters a statement of disbelief or commits an act of kufr, then we do not declare him to be a disbeliever until we look at what motivated him to do that. Then, we behave with him (i.e. pass a ruling over him) based upon what his (specific) situation demands

A man is compelled to prostrate to an idol, so he prostrates. And another is compelled to utter a statement of kufr, so he says it. Have both of these men disbelieved? No. because Allaah said: “Whoever disbelieved in Allaah after his belief, except him who is forced thereto and whose heart is at rest with Faith, but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from Allaah, and theirs will be a great torment.” [Soorah an-Nahl 16:106]

So His statement: “Whoever disbelieves in Allaah after having Faith” is inclusive of the one who disbelieves by words or deeds. So this man who prostrated to an idol under compulsion and the man who uttered a statement of disbelief under compulsion, is his action one of kufr or not? Yes, his action is one of kufr. But is he a kaafir? No. this is because, there exist a preventive barrier that retrains from takfeer, and that is compulsion.

And then [there is the case of] the man who exceeded in transgression against his own soul and who said to his family, ‘When I die, burn me and scatter my ashes into the sea’. He did this thinking that he would be saved from the punishment of Allaah by it. Then his family did what he has ordered them. And Allaah – the Mighty and Majestic - gathered his ashes together and brought him back and asked him: Why did you do it? He replied, ‘My Lord, I feared Your punishment.” And so Allaah forgave him. [Bukhaaree]

The act of this man is one of kufr, why? Because he doubted in the power of Allaah, and doubted that Allaah is able to bring him together again and punish him. However since the reason behind the act of his was his fear of the punishment of Allaah the Mighty and Majestic, Allaah forgave him.

Hence, the meaning of the words of Shaykhul-Islaam (may Allaah have mercy upon him) it is said: the disbelief that is associated with a description, then judgement can be made by it in all circumstances [such as] whoever disbelieves in Allaah will be in the Fire, whoever prostrates to an idol is a disbeliever, whoever says that there is another deity alongside Allaah is a disbeliever [and so on]. However with respect to a specific individual, you must not make a judgement against him until you investigate; he could be ignorant and not know, or he could have made an interpretation (ta’wil) [that is incorrect], or there could be a situation in which he was made to utter words without actually intending them.

 The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) informed us that Allaah rejoices more with the repentance of His servant than [the rejoicing of] a man who has lost his camel in the desert, seeking to find it but to no avail, so he despairs of finding it again. Then he rests under a tree and waits death. And then he finds that the camel is tied to the tree by its reigns, so he takes it by its reigns and says out of extreme joy, ‘O Allaah you are my servant I am your Lord.’ [Muslim]. This word here is a word of kufr since he claimed Lordship (rububiyyah) for himself and claimed Allaah is a servant. However, he did not actually intend this, but he was made to err on account of his great excitement and joy, and as the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said, ‘Allaah will not take him to account.

Source: Liqaa al-Baab al-Maftooh, vol. 36, no. 1020 of Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him)