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.
There are olive trees within the precincts of the mosque, and my father covers the costs of electricity, water, and other needs of the mosque. Is it permissible for him to take the olive harvest?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If trees and fruit-bearing crops are planted in a mosque for the mosque itself, they may only be spent on the mosque’s interests. If they were planted for the public way (musabbalah), that is, for the general public, then any Muslim who enters the mosque may eat from them. If the planter’s intention is unknown, they are treated like those dedicated for public use, wherever custom has so run.
It is stated in Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/p.295): “The fruit of a tree planted for the mosque within it is not freely permitted without compensation. Rather, the imam spends its equivalent value on the mosque’s interests. The tree left its planter’s ownership here without any verbal declaration because of the evident indication. The case of planting it for the mosque excludes planting it as musabbalah, in which case eating from it without compensation is permissible, and likewise if his intention is unknown, where custom has so run. The tree may be uprooted from the mosque if the imam sees fit. Indeed, if he makes the plot a mosque while a tree stands in it, the imam may uproot it, even if the endower included it within the endowment (waqf).”
The father is a donor (mutabarriʿ), so he is not entitled to take anything in return for his donation to the mosque.
The Ministry of Awqāf is the body that supervises the affairs of endowments, so it must be consulted and the Sharīʿah and administrative instructions regulating such matters must be considered. And Allah Almighty 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.
Can I start fasting based on the moon sighting of another country?
You must follow the moon sighting of the country you are in.
