What is the ruling on performing the night prayer (*qiyām al-layl*) between the first and second adhān of Fajr? And which is better: delaying the prayer until shortly before the Fajr adhān, or performing it earlier than that?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The time for night prayer (qiyām al-layl) begins after the Maghrib prayer and lasts until the second adhān of Fajr. The best time for it is the last third of the night, and best of all are the fourth and fifth sixths of the night. If the night is divided into two halves, the latter half is better.
Whoever intends to pray at night is encouraged to delay the Witr until he has prayed the night prayer. If he knows that he will not wake up, it is better for him to pray and perform Witr before sleeping, so that he does not miss both the night prayer and the Witr.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vpl.1/p.462): “I say: The voluntary prayer of the night, that is, the absolute voluntary prayer (al-nafl al-muṭlaq), is better than the absolute voluntary prayer of the day, because of the report in Muslim: ‘The best prayer after the obligatory prayer is the night prayer.’ In another narration of his: ‘In the night there is an hour that no Muslim man meets while asking Allah for any good of this world and the next except that He gives it to him, and that is every night.’ It is also because the night is a time of heedlessness. I restricted the voluntary prayer to the absolute kind following the commentator, although what the ḥadīth and the underlying meaning require is that the night rawātib be preferred over the day rawātib, since the jurists preferred the two rakʿahs of Fajr over everything except Witr. The middle of the night is better than its two ends if it is divided into thirds, because heedlessness is greatest then and worship is hardest. If he wishes to pray during some third, the best is the fourth and fifth sixths, based on the ḥadīth in the two Ṣaḥīḥs: ‘The most beloved prayer to Allah the Exalted is the prayer of Dāwūd: he would sleep half the night, stand for a third of it, and sleep for a sixth.’ Then the latter part is better than the first if he divides it into two halves, because of the saying of Allah the Exalted: ‘And in the hours before dawn they would ask forgiveness’ [al-Dhāriyāt: 18], and the report of the two Shaykhs: ‘Our Lord, Blessed and Exalted, descends,’ meaning His command descends, ‘to the lowest heaven when the last third of the night remains, and says: Who calls upon Me, that I may answer him? Who asks of Me, that I may give him? Who seeks My forgiveness, that I may forgive him?’”
It is also stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik (p. 60): “It is better to perform it [the Witr] immediately after the sunnah of ʿIshāʾ, unless he has tahajjud, in which case it is better to delay it so that he performs Witr after it. If he performs Witr and then wishes to pray tahajjud, he prays two rakʿahs at a time and does not repeat the Witr, nor does he need to cancel it with a single rakʿah before the tahajjud. It is recommended that he not deliberately pray after it.”
Qiyām al-layl is a term applied to any prayer performed at night. Tahajjud, on the other hand, refers to the night prayer that follows sleep, whether it is prayed after Maghrib or after ʿIshāʾ, or the prayer performed after ʿIshāʾ without sleep. On this basis, the Witr is also called tahajjud, since it is only prayed after ʿIshāʾ.
It is stated in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.4/p.84): “The sound position, as stated in al-Umm and al-Mukhtaṣar, is that the Witr is called tahajjud.”
It is stated in Nihāyat al-Zayn (Vol.1/p.114): “Among the absolute voluntary prayers is qiyām al-layl. If it is performed after sleep, even during the time of Maghrib and after having prayed ʿIshāʾ early (taqdīman), it is called tahajjud.”
And it is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī ʿalā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.1/p.418): “His statement: ‘(the night prayer)’: the genitive construction (iḍāfah) carries the sense of fī, meaning a prayer in the night. His statement: ‘(it would be more fitting)’: the reason it is more fitting is that the night prayer includes both tahajjud and other prayers.” And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.
What is the ruling on one who slept while firmly seated on the ground, regarding nullification of ablution?
The default ruling regarding sleep is that it nullifies ablution. An exception to this is one who slept while firmly seated on the ground; his ablution is not nullified by sleep if he wakes up while still firmly seated on the ground. And Allah the 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.
