Abu Dawud

Benefits and Issues:
➊
If the person digging the grave feels while digging that someone is already buried there, it is recommended (mustahabb) to change the location, or, with etiquette and respect, to move those bones to one side, ensuring that they are not harmed in any way.
➋
In the present era, the practice of dissecting the deceased under the name of post-mortem is un-Islamic (ghayr shar‘i).
To act upon this without an extremely severe legal (shar‘i) necessity is impermissible (najā’iz).
➌
The respect for the deceased and graves is legislated in the very manner that is described in these ahadith.

Benefits and Issues:
(1)
Just as Islam has prohibited mistreatment and disrespect towards a person during his lifetime, it has likewise maintained his honor, dignity, and sanctity after his death.

(2)
In the present era, the act of dissecting a dead human body under the name of post-mortem is un-Islamic. Without an extremely severe Shari‘ah necessity, practicing it is impermissible. The scholars of Saudi Arabia have divided this issue into three categories:

1. Post-mortem for the purpose of investigating a criminal case.

2. Post-mortem for the purpose of investigating epidemic diseases.

3. Post-mortem for educational purposes, i.e., for higher educational objectives.

In the first and second cases, post-mortem is permissible, because in these situations there are many benefits at play for maintaining law and order and protecting society from epidemic diseases. And the aspect of disrespect to the deceased whose post-mortem is being performed becomes negligible in comparison to these definite and numerous benefits. As for the third category, i.e., post-mortem for educational purposes, upon reflection on Islamic law, it becomes clear that its objective is to maximize benefits and minimize harms, even if it requires choosing between two harmful things—choosing the one whose harm is lesser and can be eliminated, and avoiding the one whose harm is greater. And when there is a conflict between benefits, the one that is preponderant will be chosen. The post-mortem of animal corpses cannot be a substitute for the post-mortem of human corpses. And since there are many benefits in post-mortem, which, due to today’s scientific advancement, are very useful for medical purposes, therefore, the post-mortem of a human corpse is permissible.

However, since the Shari‘ah has honored the Muslim after death just as it has bestowed honor and dignity upon him in life, as mentioned in the aforementioned narration, and since post-mortem is contrary to honor and dignity and involves disrespect to the human corpse, and since the need for post-mortem can be fulfilled by the easy availability of the corpses of non-innocent people, i.e., apostates (murtadd) and those at war (harbi), therefore, for this purpose, it is sufficient to use the corpses of non-innocent people, i.e., apostates and those at war, and not to use other corpses besides these. And Allah knows best.

(For details, see: Fatawa Islamiyyah (Urdu) 2/97, 98, published by Darussalam Lahore)

Linguistic Explanation:
«فِي الْاِثْمِ» In sin, that is, breaking the bone of a dead person is, in terms of sin, like breaking the bone of a living person—not in terms of pain and suffering.

Benefit:
Just as Islam has prohibited mistreatment and disrespect towards a person during his lifetime, similarly, after his death, his honor, dignity, and sanctity are to be maintained. In the present era, the practice of dissecting a dead human body under the name of post-mortem is un-Islamic. Without an extremely compelling Shari‘ah necessity, carrying it out is impermissible.

The scholars of Saudi Arabia have divided this issue into three categories:
➊ Post-mortem for the purpose of investigating a criminal case.
➋ Post-mortem for the purpose of investigating epidemic diseases.
➌ Post-mortem for educational purposes, i.e., for higher objectives.

In the first and second cases, post-mortem is permissible because in these situations, there are many benefits related to public safety and protecting society from epidemic diseases, and the aspect of disrespect to the deceased whose post-mortem is being performed becomes negligible in comparison to these definite and numerous benefits. As for the third category, i.e., post-mortem for educational purposes, a study of Islamic law shows that its objective is to maximize benefits and minimize harms, even if it requires choosing the lesser of two harms and eliminating the greater harm. When there is a conflict of interests, the one that is predominant will be chosen. The post-mortem of animal corpses cannot substitute for the post-mortem of human corpses, and since there are many benefits in post-mortem which, due to today’s scientific advancement, are very useful for medical purposes, therefore, the post-mortem of a human corpse is permissible. However, since the Shari‘ah has honored the Muslim after death just as he was honored in life, as mentioned in the above narration, and since post-mortem is contrary to honor and dignity and involves disrespect to the human corpse, and since the need for post-mortem can be fulfilled by using the corpses of non-innocent, i.e., apostates and those at war (harbi), the use of other corpses should be avoided. «والله اعلم» For details, see [فتاويٰ اسلاميه اردو 98 ، 97/2 مطبوعه دارالسلام لاهور].

Regarding the addition narrated from Umm Salamah radi Allahu anha in Sunan Ibn Majah, our esteemed researcher writes that this addition is weak in its chain. And Shaykh al-Albani rahimahullah writes regarding this that this addition is not established by any authentic hadith; rather, it is an explanation and clarification by a narrator. However, the aforementioned hadith does indicate the prohibition of breaking the bone of a believing deceased. «والله اعلم»

For further details, see: [احكام الجنائز وبدعها للالباني ، ص : 296 ، 295 طبع مكتبة المعارف الرياض وارواء الغليل ، رقم : 763]