What is the ruling on performing the Witr prayer as a single rak`ah?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to perform the Witr prayer as a single unit (rak‘ah). It was narrated from Ibn ‘Umar that a man asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about the night prayer, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ replied: 'The night prayer is offered two by two (mathna mathna). If one of you fears the approach of dawn, let him pray a single rak‘ah to make what he has prayed odd-numbered (Witr) for him.' (Related by al-Bukhari & Muslim)). However, limiting the prayer to only one rak‘ah is considered 'contrary to the preferred way' (Khilaf al-Awla).
It is stated in Al-Minhaj al-Qawim Sharh al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah (p. 137): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, but limiting it to that is contrary to what is best.'
The most complete form of Witr is eleven units, while the minimum level of 'perfection' is three units. It is stated in ‘Umdat al-Salik (p. 60): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, and its maximum is eleven, performing the taslim (salutation) after every two units. The lowest level of perfection is three units with two separate taslims (meaning 2+1).' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
Which is more excellent for a woman: to pray in the mosque or in her house?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Our Master the Prophet ﷺ said: 'It is more excellent for a woman to pray in her house than in her courtyard, and more excellent for her to pray in her private chamber than in her house.' Therefore, a woman’s adherence to her home and her refraining from going to the mosques—in obedience to the command of Allah the Exalted—attains a great reward and abundant recompense. Furthermore, women praying in congregation within their homes is better than their attendance at the mosques, based on the aforementioned Hadith. 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.
Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?
Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.
