What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.
Is it permissible to authorize charitable organizations to perform the Udhiyah on one`s behalf?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to authorize charitable organizations to perform the sacrifice (Udhiyah) on one’s behalf. However, if these organizations undertake the slaughtering for a group of people, those in charge of the slaughtering must maintain lists of the names of those who authorized them. Furthermore, at the time of slaughter, the slaughterer must intend that the specific sacrifice is on behalf of a specific person. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
If a person enters a mosque and finds the congregation in the final tashahhud, which is more virtuous — joining them or waiting for a second congregation to catch the opening takbīr (takbīrat al-iḥrām)?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a worshipper finds a congregation that is about to finish its prayer, and he hopes to catch the entire prayer from the beginning with another congregation, it is more virtuous for him to pray with this first congregation and then repeat the prayer with the second one — provided he does not intend to confine himself to a single prayer. If, however, he intends to perform only one prayer, then it is more virtuous for him to wait for the second congregation rather than joining the first, so that he may attain the reward of congregational prayer for every single rakʿah.
Al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "If members of a congregation enter the mosque while the imam is in the final tashahhud, al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn held that it is recommended for them to join him in prayer, and that they should not delay in order to form a second congregation. Al-Mutawallī, however, affirmed the opposite view, and al-Qāḍī's own statement elsewhere supports this latter position, which is the relied-upon view. In fact, it is more virtuous for a person who has missed part of the prayer with one congregation, and who hopes to catch another congregation with whom he can attain the entire prayer within its proper time, to delay so that he may catch it in full with them. This applies when he intends to confine himself to a single prayer; otherwise, it is more virtuous for him to pray with the first group and then repeat the prayer with the others." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol. 3/P.186] And Allah the Almighty knows best.
