For example, suppose there is an evil son who has harmed his father and family, and then dies. His father’s face lights up with joy, and he says, “Praise be to Allah, who has relieved us of him.” Such a person is not to be consoled, even though people make kinship the basis for offering condolences. This is incorrect. The basis is the calamity itself.

For this reason, the scholars said: if a person suffers a loss but, after a long time, has forgotten his grief, then we should not offer him condolences; for if we offer condolences after a long time, this means that we have renewed his calamity and sorrow.

Weeping over the deceased is permissible, …

His statement, “Weeping over the deceased is permissible”: the evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ wept for his son Abraham and said: “The eyes shed tears, the heart grieves, yet we say only what pleases our Lord. Indeed, we are grieved by your departure, O Abraham.” (1) He also wept at the grave of one of his daughters while she was being buried.

This refers to weeping that is prompted by human nature and is not forced upon oneself. As for contrived weeping, I fear that it falls under the wailing to which the Prophet ﷺ referred when he said: “Indeed, the deceased may be punished because of his family’s weeping over him.” (2)

“May be punished,” that is, in the grave. The scholars differed regarding this hadith: how can a person be punished for another’s deed when Allah the Exalted says: “No bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.” [Az-Zumar: 7] Moreover, punishing a person for another’s action would be unjust to him, for it would mean punishing one who has done no wrong because of the deed of one who has. This is contrary to Allah’s justice and wisdom?!