Ruling on eulogizing the dead
Question

                What is the ruling on eulogizing the dead and holding parties and gatherings for that purpose?.
Praise be to Allah.
    Eulogizing (ritha’) means weeping and mourning for the 
    deceased after his death and praising him, or poetry composed for that 
    purpose. 

    See: Lisaan al-‘Arab (14/309). 

    It also means expressing anguish when calamity comes. For 
    example, in the hadeeth of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas (may Allaah be pleased with 
    him), it is narrated that the Prophet  (peace and blessings of Allaah be 
    upon him) said: “But poor Sa’d ibn Khawlah (died in Makkah)”; the Messenger 
    of Allaah  (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was expressing 
    his regret (yarthi) that Sa’d had died in Makkah. Narrated by al-Bukhaari 
    (1296). Al-Haafiz said in al-Fath that the phrase “the Messenger of 
    Allaah  (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was expressing his 
    regret (yarthi) that Sa’d had died in Makkah” was the words of al-Zuhri. 

    See: al-Faa’iq (2/36). 

    There are two scholarly views about eulogizing the dead. 

    1 – That there is nothing wrong with eulogies. This is the 
    view of the Hanafis and Shaafa’is. 

    See: Haashiyat Ibn ‘Aabideen (2/239); Nihaayat 
    al-Muhtaaj (3/17). 

    They quoted as evidence the fact that many of the Sahaabah 
    (may Allaah be pleased with them) did that, as did many of the scholars. 

    See: Sharh al-Minhaaj li’l-Jaml (2/215). 

    2 – That eulogies are makrooh. This is the view of the 
    Shaafa’is. 

    See: Nihaayat al-Muhtaaj (3/17). 

    They quoted as evidence the fact that the Prophet  (peace 
    and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade eulogies. It was narrated that 
    ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Abi Awfa (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The 
    Messenger of Allaah  (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade 
    eulogies. Narrated by Imam Ahmad (18659) and Ibn Maajah (1592). 

    The narrator of this hadeeth is Ibraaheem al-Hijri who 
    narrated it from ‘Abd-Allaah. Al-Busayri said on him in Misbaah 
    al-Zajaajah: He is da’eef jiddan (very weak). He was classed as da’eef 
    by Sufyaan ibn ‘Uyaynah, Yahya ibn Ma’een, al-Nasaa’i and others. 
    Al-Bukhaari said of him: he is munkar al-hadeeth, i.e., his hadeeth is to be 
    rejected. Hence al-Albaani classed him as da’eef in Da’eef Ibn Maajah. 

    It says in al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (22/98): 

    It says in al-Durr al-Mukhtaar, which is a Hanafi 
    book, that there is nothing wrong with eulogizing the deceased in verse or 
    otherwise, but it is makrooh to go to extremes in praising him, especially 
    at his funeral. Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’, quoting from the author 
    of al-Tatimmah that it is makrooh to eulogize the deceased by 
    mentioning his forefathers, his attributes and his deeds, and it is better 
    to pray for forgiveness for him. The Hanbalis said that that which stirs up 
    the feelings of loss, whether it comes in the form of exhortation or 
    reciting poetry is a form of niyaahah (wailing for the deceased), i.e. it is 
    forbidden. This was stated by Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen. End quote. 

    In al-Furooq (2/174), al-Qaraafi divided eulogizing 
    into four categories, and said: 

    It is not just the matter of allowing eulogies and not 
    regarding as faasiqs (evildoers) the poets who eulogize deceased kings and 
    prominent figures in all cases, even though that view is well known among 
    the people. In fact eulogizing falls into four categories, haraam and a 
    major sin, haraam and a minor sin, permissible, and recommended. 

    The guideline on that which is haraam and a major sin is any 
    words which make people feel that Allaah, may He be exalted, has been unfair 
    in His decree or that expresses discontent with His will, and suggests that 
    the death of this deceased was not a good thing, rather it was a great evil. 
    Making the listeners believe that is haraam and a major sin, whether it is 
    done in prose or poetry, such as if the poet says in his eulogy: 

    “There has died one among whose troops was death, one before 
    whom the divine decree felt scared”  

    This line of verse includes a rejection of the divine decree 
    in the words “one among whose troops was death”, which is a veneration of 
    this person who has died. One such as this deceased person should not have 
    resigned from the position of caliph; how could there ever be such a person 
    again in the future? Similarly, the words “one before whom the divine decree 
    felt scared” suggest that Allaah, may He be exalted, was afraid of him. If 
    this is not blatant kufr then it seems from these words to be very close to 
    it. Hence when Shaykh ‘Izz al-Deen ibn ‘Abd al-Salaam was in the gathering 
    in which the sultaan assembled the prominent, Qur’aan readers and poets to 
    mourn the caliph in Baghdad, and one of the poets recited the line,  “There 
    has died one among whose troops was death, one before whom the divine decree 
    felt scared”, when the Shaykh heard that, he ordered that he be disciplined 
    and imprisoned, and he denounced that in the strongest terms and criticized 
    his eulogy. After his ta’zeer punishment he remained in prison for a long 
    time, then he asked him to repent after the governors and leaders interceded 
    for him. He told him to compose a qaseedah praising Allaah, as expiation for 
    what his poem had said about condemning the divine decree and suggesting 
    that Allaah, may He be exalted, was afraid of the deceased. The poets often 
    tried to indulge in such critical issues so as to attract attention by 
    coming up with unique ideas. 

    This type is the worst type of eulogy.  

    The guideline on that which is haraam and a minor sin is any 
    prose or poetry that does not go as far as the type mentioned in the first 
    category, but it deprives the family of the deceased of consolation and 
    stirs up their grief to such an extent that they torment themselves and have 
    little patience, and it may lead them to despair, rending their garments and 
    striking their cheeks. This is haraam and is a minor sin. 

    The guideline on that kind of eulogy which is permissible is 
    words that do not include any of the things mentioned in the two previous 
    categories, rather it mentions the religious commitment of the deceased, and 
    states that he has gone on to the reward for his good deeds and will be in 
    the company of the people who are blessed; that there has come to him that 
    which is decreed for all people; this is inevitable and it is something that 
    all creatures have in common, a door which they will inevitably enter. This 
    is permissible and is not forbidden. 

    The guideline on the kind of eulogy that is recommended is 
    everything that falls into the permissible category and will increase the 
    family of the deceased in patience and encourage them to seek reward, and 
    remind them to seek reward for their loss for the sake of Allaah and rely on 
    Allaah’s care, etc. This is recommended and enjoined.  

    An example of this is what was narrated from al-‘Abbaas ibn 
    ‘Abd al-Muttalib (may Allaah be pleased with him), when he died and his son 
    ‘Abd-Allaah found it too difficult to bear. A Bedouin came from the desert 
    and asked after ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas. When he entered upon him he said: 

    “Be patient, we are being patient for your sake, for the 
    people will be patient when their leader is patient.

    The reward that comes after is better than al-‘Abbaas and 
    Allaah is better for al-‘Abbaas than you.”  

    When ‘Abd-Allaah ibn al-‘Abbaas heard this eulogy and 
    understood his poetry, he felt relieved. 

    These words were the best kind of eulogy, that lessened the 
    impact of the calamity, took away grief, and expressed a positive attitude 
    towards the divine decree, praising the Lord in the best of ways. This is a 
    good thing. 

    Based on the four categories described above, we may 
    categorize eulogies accordingly. And Allaah knows best. End quote. 

    It says in Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi: 

    If it is said that the Messenger of Allaah  (peace and 
    blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade eulogizing as was narrated by Ahmad 
    and Ibn Maajah, and classed as saheeh by al-Haakim, if he forbade it than 
    how could he have done it? i.e., in the hadeeth of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqaas (may 
    Allaah be pleased with him) quoted above. 

    The answer is that the kind of eulogizing that is forbidden 
    is that which praises the deceased and mentions his good qualities, so as to 
    stir up grief and renew the sorrow, or which is done in gatherings convened 
    for that purpose, or when the eulogy is limited to that without mentioning 
    anything else. What is meant in this hadeeth is the Prophet’s expression of 
    sorrow for Sa’d because he died in Makkah after having migrated from it, not 
    praising the deceased and stirring up grief. This was stated by 
    al-Qastallaani. End quote.  

    See: Fath al-Baari (3/164-165) 

    Shaykh Ibn Baaz was asked: Do the qaseedahs which eulogize 
    the dead come under the heading of death announcements that are forbidden? 

    He replied: The qaseedahs that eulogize the dead do not come 
    under the heading of death announcements that are forbidden, but it is not 
    permissible for anyone to go to extremes in speaking of anyone or describe 
    him in false terms, as is the habit of many poets. End quote. 

    Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz. 

    Based on this, holding gatherings to eulogize the deceased is 
    forbidden, especially if that is accompanied by stirring up grief or 
    expressing discontent with the divine decree, or describing the deceased in 
    false terms that were not true, and other haraam things. 

    As for simply listing the good qualities of the deceased and 
    expressing one’s sorrow at his passing, there is nothing wrong with that so 
    long as it is free of the haraam things mentioned above, etc.