What is the ruling on praying alone (munfaridan) in a row, and what should I do if I enter the mosque together with another person, and there is only a single gap in the first row with no second row present — should I fill that gap in the first row, or should I stand together with him in a new second row?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a person enters [the congregation] and finds no space available in the row, it is recommended for him — after making his opening takbīr for the prayer — to gently pull someone from the row in front of him to pray alongside him, provided he senses that this person would be agreeable to it. If that person does not agree, then he prays alone, and there is no dislike attached to his doing so in that case.
If he ends up praying alone [behind the row], it is sunnah for him to stand directly behind the imam. Then, if someone else arrives, that person stands to his right; and whoever comes after them stands to his left — and so on — such that the imam remains centered in the middle of the row. This is done so that everyone attains the reward of congregational prayer.
As for the case where two people enter the prayer together, and there is a gap in the row wide enough for only one person, then the two of them should pray together in a new row [of their own], and whoever arrives after them should fill that original gap. This is because if only one of the two fills the gap, the other would end up praying alone [which is to be avoided when it can easily be prevented].
Al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/P.494): "If he does not find space, then it is recommended for him, while still standing, to gently pull a single person from the row toward himself after making his opening takbīr — out of caution, so as to avoid the position held by some scholars that a person's prayer standing alone behind the row is not valid.
Az-Zarkashī and others said: this should only be done if it seems he would agree to it; otherwise, he should not pull anyone — indeed, doing so becomes impermissible, out of fear of causing discord (fitnah). It is recommended for the person being pulled to cooperate and agree, so that he may attain the reward of assisting in righteousness and piety (al-birr wat-taqwā). However, he should not pull one of two people [praying together] from the row, since this would cause one of them to end up praying alone. This is why the 'pulling' described here takes place only after the opening takbīr [i.e., once the person doing the pulling has already validly begun his own prayer]."
Accordingly: it is sunnah for you to pray alongside the person praying alone, and then, if someone else arrives afterward, you may go and fill the gap in the original row. 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 acceptable to perform the Aqiqah for a male child by slaughtering and distributing the first sheep, and bringing the second one cooked from the restaurant?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to slaughter the first sheep with the intention of Aqiqah (the newborn's sacrificial offering) and distribute it entirely [uncooked], and to slaughter the second sheep and have it cooked at a restaurant to bring home for the household. However, it must be noted that it is obligatory to give some portion of the Aqiqah in charity to the poor, even if it is a small amount, though it is preferable to send the food cooked to them.
Buying a pre-cooked, ready-made sheep from a restaurant does not suffice as an Aqiqah. However, if an agreement is made with the restaurant to explicitly slaughter a sheep with the intention of Aqiqah for the newborn, and then cook it afterward, this is permissible.
In conclusion, slaughtering the sheep and distributing it with the intention of Aqiqah is permissible, and through it, the foundational prophetic tradition (Sunnah) is fulfilled. As for simply buying a cooked sheep from a restaurant that was not specifically slaughtered with the intention of Aqiqah, it will not count as such. Conversely, if the restaurant owner is commissioned (Wakala) to handle both the slaughtering and the cooking as an Aqiqah, it is valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on a fictitious marriage for the purpose of obtaining citizenship?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no such thing in our noble sharīʿah as a "nominal" or "fictitious" marriage or divorce. Marriage and divorce are among the sacred ordinances of Allah, and it is not permissible to manipulate them or use them as a stratagem to obtain worldly gains.
The foundational purpose of a marriage contract is the permanence and continuity of the relationship between the spouses — to establish a family, and to bring forth righteous offspring. So sacred is this bond that Allah the Almighty Himself described it as a solemn covenant (mīthāq ghalīẓ), saying {what means}: "And if you wish to replace one wife with another and you have given one of them a great amount of wealth, do not take any of it back. Would you take it in injustice and manifest sin? And how could you take it while you have gone in unto each other and they have taken from you a solemn covenant?" [Al-Nisāʾ/ 20–21]
Accordingly, it is not permissible to resort to manipulation and deception in contracts that Allah, Mighty and Majestic, has described as a "solemn covenant" — all for the sake of material and worldly benefit. Marriage is built upon permanence and does not admit of a fixed time limit. If a time limit is stipulated in the contract, the contract is rendered invalid by the consensus of the jurists. Similarly, marriage is impermissible when there exists a mutual, concealed intention to limit its duration — even if no time limit is explicitly mentioned in the contract — for this constitutes a form of unlawful circumvention of the sharīʿah. This is to say nothing of the lying and deception that such conduct involves, the prohibition of which needs no elaboration. Lying, deception, and fraud for the purpose of obtaining worldly gains are among the gravest of sins.
If, however, the marriage contract is first concluded in a valid sharʿī manner and then registered civilly, it is sound and fully valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
