for people, it is disliked, because it adds to their calamity, causes them more work on top of their current state, and is a resemblance (4) to the practice (5) of the people of the Age of Ignorance (Jahiliyyah). It is narrated that Jarir visited Umar and he asked: "Is there wailing over your deceased?" He said: "No." He asked: "Do they gather at the house of the deceased and provide food?" He said: "Yes." He said: "That is wailing (6)." However, if a necessity calls for it, it is permissible; for it may be that those who come to attend the funeral of their deceased come from distant villages and places and spend the night with them, and it is not (7) possible for them [not] (8) to host them.

388 - Issue: He said: (And if a woman dies while she has a child in her womb that moves, her abdomen should not be incised; rather, the midwives should reach in and extract it.)

The meaning of "the midwives reach in" is that they insert their hands into her private part and extract the child from its exit. The school of thought (Madhhab) is that the abdomen of a deceased woman should not be incised to extract her child, whether she was a Muslim or a Dhimmi (a non-Muslim subject under Islamic rule). The midwives should extract it if its life is known by its movement (1). If there are no women present, men should not reach in (2) for it, and the mother should be left until her death is certain, then she is buried. The school of Malik and Ishaq is close to this. It is possible that the mother's abdomen could be incised if it is highly probable that the fetus will live; this is the school of al-Shafi'i (3), because it is the destruction of a part of the deceased to preserve a living being, so it is permissible, just as if part of it had emerged alive and it was not possible for the rest to emerge except by incision. Moreover, because it is incised to extract money from within, then it is more appropriate to do so for the sake of preserving a living person.