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 follower`s prayer if the Imam stands for a fifth rak`ah?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
If the Imam stands up for an extra unit (rak‘ah) of prayer out of forgetfulness, he must return to the sitting position as soon as he remembers, and he should perform the prostration of forgetfulness (Sujud al-Sahw). It is the duty of the congregants (Ma’mumin) behind him to remind him. However, if the Imam is in a state of doubt regarding the extra unit (and not certainty), it is not permissible for him to return.
As for the congregants: anyone who is certain that the Imam has stood for an extra unit is forbidden from following him. In this case, the follower has two choices: either intend to separate from the Imam (Mufaraqah) and finish the prayer alone, or wait for the Imam in the sitting position and perform the final salams with him—the latter being the preferred option. If a follower knowingly follows the Imam into an extra unit, their prayer becomes invalid. However, if a follower is in doubt and not certain of the mistake, they must continue following the Imam, as the Imam was appointed to be followed.
It is stated in Al-Majmu’ (Vol.4/P.145): 'If [the Imam] stands for a fifth rak‘ah, the follower should not follow him, even if it is assumed that the Imam might have omitted a pillar from a previous unit; because if the reality is known, following him is impermissible since the follower has certainly completed their own prayer. Even if the follower had missed a previous unit (Masbuq) or was in doubt about performing a pillar like the Fatihah, and the Imam stood for the fifth, it is not permissible for the latecomer to follow him in it. This is because we know that this unit is not counted for the Imam and that he is mistaken in performing it.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
Is it permissible for the guardian to give Sadaqa (voluntary charity) from the money of the orphans?
It is impermissible for the guardian to donate from the money of the orphans because he is entrusted with the safekeeping of that money, and is prohibited from donating it.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on someone who wakes up in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity) near the very end of the prayer's designated time, during cold weather — should he heat water in order to perform ghusl, even though the prayer's time will expire as a result, or should he perform tayammum instead?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If the water is cold, and cannot be used due to fear of harm that is not ordinarily tolerable, or that would result in illness, then in this case it becomes obligatory to heat the water — even if heating it causes the time for Fajr to expire — and no sin is incurred in doing so, due to his valid excuse. He may not resort to tayammum (dry ablution) instead, since water remains available [and merely needs to be heated].
Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad ar-Ramlī (raḥimahullāh) said: "He was asked regarding a person who, if he were to use cold water, would experience harm that permits tayammum, and who has access to something with which he could heat the water — but if he heats it, the prayer's time will expire. Is it obligatory for him to heat it even if the time expires, or should he pray with tayammum within the prescribed time? He answered that it is obligatory for him to heat the water, even if the time for that particular obligatory prayer expires." [Fatāwā ar-Ramlī, Vol.1/P.98]
Imam al-Bājūrī (raḥimahullāh) said in his Ḥāshiyah on Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim (Vol.1/P.173): "And if he fears [harm] from using cold water, and is currently unable to heat it, but knows of a place where firewood is available, such that if he were to go there he would not return until after the prescribed time has expired — what appears [to be the correct position] is that it is obligatory for him to go and seek the firewood, even if the time expires as a result, as this is the position ultimately settled upon by ar-Ramlī, and as related from him by Ibn Qāsim." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
