What is the ruling of Islamic Law on performing prayer on the upper floors of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Facing the actual structure of the Ka‘bah (‘ayn al-Ka‘bah) is one of the conditions for the validity of the prayer. The scholars have clarified what is meant by "the actual structure of the Ka‘bah."
Imam ash-Sharwānī (raḥimahullāh) said: "What is meant by its ‘ayn (actual structure) is its physical body, or the airspace directly aligned with it — if the person praying is not inside it. But if he is inside it, then the airspace alone does not suffice; rather, the actual physical structure must be faced, such that even if he faces a projecting part of it measuring roughly two-thirds of a dhirā‘ (cubit) or more, this would be sufficient." [Ḥāshiyat ash-Sharwānī ‘alā Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol.1/P.484]
Sheikh al-Qulyūbī (raḥimahullāh) said: "Unlike one who prays outside it — i.e., outside the Ka‘bah — for him the airspace (directly above it) suffices, even if he is higher than it, or even if he is at the location where it (hypothetically) has been demolished." [Ḥāshiyat al-Qulyūbī ‘alā Sharḥ al-Minhāj, Vol.1/P.154]
Accordingly, the prayer is valid on the upper floors of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām, even though these floors are higher than the roof of the Ka‘bah itself. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
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.
What is the ruling on the Friday bath (ghusl al-Jumu'ah)?
The Friday bath is a confirmed Sunnah, based on the Prophet's (peace be upon him) saying: "Whoever performs ablution on Friday, it is good for him, and whoever takes a bath, bathing is better." (Reported by Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi who said it is a hasan hadith). It is recommended for everyone who wants to attend the Friday prayer, even if they are not from its usual attendees, like a woman or a boy.
If a person is in a state of major impurity (junub) and intends by his bath both lifting the major impurity and the Friday bath, he achieves both. If he intends only one of them, he achieves only what he intended. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
