Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on the items used in the trading process such as: cars , shops etc..?
No Zakah is due on equipments used in the trading process such as cars and the like.
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.
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 praying seated due to severe obesity, given that I experience hardship in performing the prayer — especially when rising from the ground after sujūd to perform the next rak‘ah?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Standing, when one is able to do so, is a pillar of the prayer. However, whoever would experience severe, intolerable hardship, or fears harm to himself or to a limb due to obesity, or finds that standing causes him to lose his khushū‘ (humble focus and concentration) in prayer, then there is no objection to his praying seated on a chair or on the ground, performing rukū‘ (bowing) and sujūd (prostration) through gesture — provided that the gesture for sujūd is made lower than that for rukū‘. Whoever is able, at any point, to properly perform any one of these pillars, is obligated to perform it in full; for omitting it is a concession that applies only in cases of genuine inability. The Prophet ﷺ said: "When I command you to do something, do of it whatever you are able." (Related by al-Bukhārī). As the scholars of fiqh have established: what remains possible is not waived on account of what is difficult.
The criterion for determining genuine inability, as chosen by Imam al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī (raḥimahullāh), is that the worshipper experiences hardship that causes him to lose his khushū‘.
As for voluntary (nafl) prayer, there is no objection to performing it while seated, even if one is able to stand. However, rukū‘ and sujūd must still be performed [in their proper physical form] by anyone who is able to do so. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
