What is the ruling on people gathering to receive condolences?

What
is meant by gathering to receive condolences is when the family of the
deceased sit and gather in a certain place where those who wish to offer
condolences can go to see them, whether that is in the house of the
deceased’s family, or in the tents that they set up for that purpose, and so
on. 

This
matter is one of those concerning which there is a considerable difference
of opinion among the scholars. There are two scholarly opinions concerning
it: 

-1-

The
first opinion is that there should be no gathering for the purpose of
offering condolences, and such gatherings are makrooh. This is the view of
the Shaafa‘is and Hanbalis, and many of the Maalikis; some of them even
stated that it is haraam. 

The
strongest evidence quoted by those who say that it is makrooh consists of
two things: 

(i)               
The report of Jareer ibn ‘Abdullah who said: We used to regard
gathering with the family of the deceased and making food after the burial
as coming under the same heading as wailing (which is forbidden). Narrated
by Ahmad, 6866; and Ibn Maajah, 1612.

(ii)            
This is something that was not done by the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) or any of his Companions, hence it is something
that has been introduced; it is also contrary to the practice of the
righteous early generations, who did not gather to receive condolences. 

Imam
ash-Shaafa‘i said: I would regard such gatherings as makrooh, even if there
is no weeping involved, because it renews grief and imposes a burden on the
family of the deceased.

al-Umm,
1/318 

An-Nawawi said: With regard to sitting to receive condolences, ash-Shaafa‘i,
al-Musannif and others stated that it is makrooh. … They said: rather people
should go about their business, and whoever happens to meet them (the family
members of the deceased) may offer them condolences. There is no
differentiation between men and women with regard to being makrooh to sit to
receive condolences.

End
quote. Al-Majmoo‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 5/306 

Al-Mirdaawi said: It is makrooh to sit to receive condolences. This is our
opinion and it is the opinion of most of our companions, as was clearly
stated.

End
quote. Al-Insaaf, 2/565 

Abu
Bakr at-Turtooshi said: Our Maaliki scholars said: Sitting to receive
condolences is an innovation and is makrooh. But if a person sits in his
house or in the mosque grieving, without sitting for the purpose of
receiving condolences, there is nothing wrong with that. When the news came
to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) of the death of
Ja‘far, he sat in the mosque grieving , and the people offered him
condolences.

End
quote. Al-Hawaadith wa’l-Bida‘, p. 170 

This
view was mentioned in a fatwa by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy
on him), when he said: With regard to the family of the deceased, it is not
prescribed for them to gather in the house and receive condolences, because
some of the salaf (early generations) regarded this as being a type of
wailing (which is forbidden). Rather they should stay at home and close
their doors, and whoever happens to meet them in the marketplace or in the
mosque may offer them condolences.

End
quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 17/103 

-2-

The
second opinion is that there is nothing wrong with gathering and sitting to
receive condolences, so long as the gathering is free of objectionable
matters and innovations, and so long as it does not renew or perpetuate
grief, or involve imposing burdens on the family of the deceased. This is
the view of some of the Hanafis, some of the Maalikis and some of the
Hanbalis. See: al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq, 2/207; Mawaahib al-Jaleel,
2/230 

Ibn
Nujaym al-Hanafi said: There is nothing wrong with sitting to receive
condolences for three days, without committing any objectionable action such
as burdening the family of the deceased with requirements to make
preparations to receive the visitors and offer food.

End
quote. Al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq, 2/207 

This
view was narrated from Imam Ahmad by Hanbal and al-Khallaal. 

Al-Mirdaawi said: And it was narrated from him that he granted a concession
allowing that, because he offered condolences and sat to receive
condolences. al-Khallaal said: Imam Ahmad was lenient with regard to sitting
with the bereaved family in more than one place. … And it was narrated from
him that he granted a concession to the family of the deceased. This was
narrated by Hanbal and was the view favoured by al-Majd [i.e., Ibn
Taymiyah]. 

And it
was narrated from him that he granted a concession to the family of the
deceased and others, to calm them down.

End
quote. Al-Insaaf, 2/565 

Ibn
‘Abd al-Barr said in al-Kaafi (1/283): I hope that the issue of
sitting together briefly to offer condolences is not serious. End quote. 

Among
contemporary scholars, this view was favoured by Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn
Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) when he said, as it says in Majmoo‘
al-Fataawa (13/373): This is the view favoured by Shaykh Muhammad
al-Mukhtaar ash-Shanqeeti in Silsilat Duroos Sharh az-Zaad. 

The
strongest evidence quoted by those who regard it as permissible is as
follows: 

-1-

The
hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah, the wife of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah
be upon him) according to which,
that if a member of her family
died, the women would gather together, then they would depart, except her
own relatives and close friends. She would order that a pot of talbeenah be
cooked, then some thareed would be made and the talbeenah would be poured
over it. Then she would say: Eat some of it, for I heard the Messenger of
Allah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Talbeenah soothes
the heart of the sick person, and it takes away some of the grief.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5417; Muslim, 3216.

Talbeenah is a broth made from (barley) flour and bran, to which honey may
be added. It is so called because it resembles milk (laban) in its whiteness
and consistency. 

This
hadeeth clearly indicates that they did not see anything wrong with
gathering, whether it was the family of the deceased who gathered, or others
who gathered with them. 

-2-

It was
narrated that Abu Waa’il said: When Khaalid ibn al-Waleed died, the women of
Banu’l-Mugheerah gathered, weeping for him. It was said to ‘Umar: Send word
to them, telling them not to do that, and that you should not hear anything
about them that you dislike. ‘Umar said: Why shouldn’t they shed tears for
Abu Sulaymaan, so long as they do not put dust on their heads or make a loud
noise 

Narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf (3/290) and ‘Abd
ar-Razzaaq as-San‘aani (3/558), with a saheeh isnaad. 

They
gave two responses to the report of Jareer ibn ‘Abdullah: 

(i)               
that the most correct view concerning it is that it is da‘eef (weak).
It was criticised by Imam Ahmad and ad-Daaraqutni. 

This
report was narrated by Ahmad ibn Munayyi‘ in his Musnad, Ibn Maajah
in as-Sunan (1612), and at-Tabaraani in al-Mu‘jam al-Kabeer
(2/307) via Hushaym from Ismaa ‘eel ibn Abi Khaalid, from Qays, from
Jareer. 

This
isnaad appears to be saheeh, because its narrators are known for their good
memory and are trustworthy. Hence it was classed as saheeh by a number of
scholars, such as an-Nawawi in al-Majmoo‘ (5/320), Ibn Katheer in
Irshaad al-Faqeeh (1/241), al-Busayri in Misbaah az-Zujaajah,
1/289, ash-Shawkaani in Nayl al-Awtaar (4/148), Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir
in Tahqeeq al-Musnad (11/126), al-Albaani in Ahkaam al-Janaa’iz
(p. 210), the commentators on Musnad Ahmad (11/505), and others. 

However in the hadeeth there is a subtle flaw that was pointed out by the
scholars and critics, which is the tadlees of Hushaym ibn Basheer; even
though he was trustworthy, he often practiced tadlees [tadlees means giving
the impression that he heard it from a particular person when he did not
hear it from him directly] and irsaal [irsaal means attributing a hadeeth
directly to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) without
mentioning the name of the Sahaabi in the isnaad or chain or narrators], and
sometimes narrated from da‘eef (weak) and majhool (unknown) narrators. 

Al-Haafiz adh-Dhahabi said in Tadhkirat al-Huffaaz (1/249): There is
no dispute that he was among those who were known for their good memory and
trustworthy narrators, but he practised tadlees a great deal; he narrated
from a number of people from whom he did not hear hadeeth directly. End
quote. 

Hence
a number of earlier scholars regarded this hadeeth of Jareer as flawed,
because of the tadlees of Hushaym. For example: 

Abu
Dawood said: I mentioned to Ahmad the hadeeth of Hushaym, from Ismaa‘eel,
from Qays, from Jareer, “We used to regard gathering with the family of the
deceased and making food for them as being acts of Jaahiliyyah.” He said:
They claimed that he heard it from Shareek. Ahmad said: I do not know of any
basis for this hadeeth.

End
quote. Masaa’il al-Imam Ahmad narrated by Abu Dawood as-Sijistaani,
p. 388 

In
al-‘Ilal by ad-Daaraqutni (13/462) there is something which suggests the
possibility of Hushaym practicing tadlees in this hadeeth. 

If the
one who practiced tadlees is Shareek ibn ‘Abdullah an-Nakha‘i, the qaadi of
Kufah, then the report is da‘eef (weak), because his hadeeth is da‘eef
according to all scholars of hadeeth; a hadeeth that is reported only by one
such as he cannot be accepted as the basis for a shar‘i ruling concerning
halaal and haraam. 

Yes,
he was followed (in the narration of a similar hadeeth) by Nasr ibn Baab, as
is narrated in Musnad Ahmad (6905), but it says in the biography of
this Nasr in Ta‘jeel al-Manfa‘ah (p. 420): al-Bukhaari said: They
accused him of lying. Ibn Ma‘een said: His hadeeth is worthless. ‘Ali ibn
al-Madeeni said: I rejected his hadeeth. Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: His
hadeeth is to be rejected. Abu Khaythamah Zuhayr ibn Harb said: He is a
liar. End quote. 

Therefore the similar hadeeth which he narrated cannot strengthen the report
of Shareek; rather there is a strong possibility that the one who practiced
tadlees in the report of Hushaym is Nasr ibn Baab himself, and not Shareek. 

To sum
up: the report of Jareer ibn ‘Abdullah al-Bajali has not been proven via any
saheeh isnaad, and the well-known report is flawed because of tadlees. For
more information see the book: at-Tajliyah li Hukm al-Juloos
li’t-Ta‘ziyah by Shaykh Zaafir Aal Jab‘aan, p. 27 

(ii)            
Even if we assume that it is saheeh, what is meant is gatherings in
which food is made by the family of the deceased in order to honour those
who come and gather with them. 

Hence
two things are mentioned in the report: “We used to regard gathering with
the family of the deceased and making food after the burial as coming under
the same heading as wailing (which is forbidden).” The gathering which
involves both of these two things is that which is regarded as coming under
the same heading as wailing. 

Ash-Shawkaani said: That is, they used to regard gathering with the family
of the deceased after the burial and eating food in their house as a type of
wailing, because that was burdensome for them and preoccupied them despite
what they were preoccupied with of the death of the deceased, and because it
is contrary to the Sunnah; they are instructed to make food for the family
of the deceased, but they went against it and burdened them with the
obligation of making food for others.

End
quote. Nayl al-Awtaar, 4/118 

Shaykh
Ibn Baaz said: What is meant is that gathering to read Qur’an and eat food
has no basis; rather this is a kind of innovation. But if a person visits
them to greet them, pray for them and offer condolences, and he recites in a
gathering a brief recitation without any prior intention of doing so,
because they have gathered, so he recites one or more verses for the benefit
of all and to offer sincere advice to all, there is nothing wrong with that.
But if the family of the deceased bring people together or they bring
together a certain group to recite Qur’an, or they give them food or money
(in return for doing so), this is an innovation for which there is no basis.

End
quote. Fataawa Noor ‘ala ad-Darb, 14/202 

With
regard to the view that gathering to offer condolences was not done by the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and his Companions,
therefore it is an innovation, the response to that is that gathering to
offer condolences comes under the heading of traditions or customs, and not
acts of worship, and the issue of innovation is not applicable with regard
to traditions or customs; rather the basic principle with regard to
traditions or customs is that they are permissible. 

Moreover, offering condolences is something that is prescribed in sharee‘ah,
and there is no means of achieving that nowadays except by receiving people
who come to offer condolences, or sitting to receive condolences, so this is
something that helps to fulfil the Sunnah. 

Shaykh
Ibn Baaz was asked about receiving people who come to offer condolences, or
sitting to receive condolences. He said: I do not see anything wrong with
the one who has suffered the calamity of the death of a relative or wife and
the like receiving people in his house who have come to offer condolences at
an appropriate time, because offering condolences is Sunnah, and receiving
those who have come to offer condolences is something that helps them to
fulfil the Sunnah. And if they honour them by offering coffee or tea or
perfume, all of that is fine.

End
quote. Majmoo‘ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi‘ah, 13/373 

Shaykh
Saalih Aal ash-Shaykh said:

What
we see of our scholars in this land and other lands, even the scholars, is
that they sit (to receive condolences), because this interest could not be
achieved otherwise, and if that is not done, then the Sunnah of offering
condolences cannot be done either.

End
quote from the shaykh’s website (in Arabic):

http://saleh.af.org.sa/node/42 

Even
according to the view that it is makrooh, it is no longer makrooh in the
case of need, as is well known to the scholars. Undoubtedly sitting to
receive condolences is needed more nowadays because it makes it easier for
people who want to offer condolences. 

The
children and relatives of the deceased may live in different places or in
locations that are far away from one another in the same city, which makes
it difficult for those who want to offer condolences to travel between
them. 

This
reason was mentioned by Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz when he was asked
about the ruling on sitting to receive condolences. He replied: If they sit
for people to offer them condolences, there is nothing wrong with that, in
sha Allah, so that they will not make things difficult for people, but that
should be without making food for the people.

End
quote. Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 13/382 

Shaykh
Muhammad al-Mukhtaar ash-Shanqeeti said: The salaf (early generations)
disallowed that, and Imam Maalik (may Allah have mercy on him) was very
strict on this matter and disallowed it. That was the way of the salaf, but
later scholars and fuqaha’ issued fatwas stating that there is nothing wrong
with it in these later times. 

The
reason for that is that in earlier times people were few and it was possible
to see the family of the deceased in the mosque, or on the road or at the
well, and offer condolences to them, and the matter was easy. In fact you
could say that if a person died, all the people of the village would know
and would attend his burial, and offering condolences was easy. 

But
nowadays many people live in big cities and it is difficult to go to each
relative in his own house; this causes such difficulty the extent of which
only Allah knows, and the matter is burdensome. Hence if they gather in the
house of one of the relatives, that is easier for the people and easier for
them, and it is more effective in achieving the purpose of offering
condolences to all and consoling them all. Hence they issued fatwas stating
that in this case there is nothing wrong with them sitting (to receive
condolences) and this is not regarded as coming under the heading of wailing
(which is forbidden); rather it is prescribed because there is a need for
it.

End
quote from Silsilat Duroos Sharh az-Zaad (86/16). 

Many
of the scholars only denounced such gatherings because of what usually
happens in them of innovations and objectionable matters. But if the
gathering is free of that, then there is nothing wrong with it. 

Shams
ad-Deen al-Minbiji al-Hanbali said: If the gathering includes exhortation to
the bereaved to be patient and accept the divine decree, and this social
gathering brings consolation and comfort by reminding one another of verses
and hadeeths that speak of patience and acceptance, there is nothing wrong
with gathering in this manner. Offering condolences is a Sunnah of the
Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). But it should
be done in a manner other than it is done nowadays, when people sit in the
well-known manner to read Qur’an, sometimes at the grave in most cases, and
sometimes in the house of the deceased or in large gathering places. This is
an innovation that was disliked by the salaf.

End
quote. Tasliyat Ahl al-Masaa’ib, p. 121 

Conclusion: 

The
issue of gatherings (to offer condolences) that are free of objectionable
actions and provocation of grief is a matter concerning which there is a
difference of opinion, and the matter is broad in scope; however in cases
where there are objectionable actions and innovations, then it is not
allowed. 

But if
it is free of such things, then the evidence quoted in support of the second
opinion, which is the opinion that it is permissible, is more sound in terms
of isnaads, and clearer in terms of evidence. As for the evidence for
disallowing it, it is da‘eef (weak) reports in which nothing is clearly
attributed to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
Moreover, the evidence is open to interpretation, as it seems that the
prohibition is not on gatherings for receiving condolences, rather it is on
burdening the family of the deceased by expecting them to make food for
people when they are preoccupied with the calamity that has befallen them. 

Moreover, it is quite obvious that the view that it is permissible is closer
to making things easier for people, especially as times have changed and
people are very busy, which has required them to adopt some customs that
help them to organise their affairs, including gatherings in which the
family of the deceased may receive condolences from people when the calamity
is still fresh, so that those who wish to offer condolences do not have to
look for the family of the deceased one by one in their workplaces or
mosques or even in their houses, and they do not have to leave their work
for several days on end in order to achieve that, when people live further
apart and circumstances and times have changed. 

If
saying that it is permissible did no more than relieve people of some
hardship, that would be sufficient to regard it as more correct, so how
about when it is supported by clear, sound evidence? 

And
Allah knows best.