What is the ruling on someone who possesses gold with the intention of saving/hoarding it, and owns nothing else — is he obligated to sell a portion of it in order to pay the zakāh due on it?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh becomes immediately obligatory on cash, and likewise on gold — that which is not designated for a woman's personal adornment— once both reach the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has passed over them. It is not permissible to delay payment when it is genuinely possible to pay — meaning, when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both available. It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.129): "Zakāh is obligatory immediately once it becomes feasible to pay it, meaning when the wealth and the eligible recipients are both present."
The one paying zakāh must discharge the obligatory zakāh due on saved (hoarded) gold either from the gold itself, or from its equivalent monetary value, in the event that no other funds are available — since paying from the gold itself is the original default (al-aṣl). It becomes permissible to pay from other funds instead only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency, as stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib (Vol.1/p.366): "When a full ḥawl has elapsed on wealth other than trade goods... zakāh attaches to the actual asset itself (al-‘ayn), and the poor effectively become partners in it — even, for example, [becoming partners] in camels through the value of a sheep [owed as zakāh on them]... Paying from other wealth is permitted only because zakāh is built upon the principle of ease and leniency."
Accordingly: the one paying zakāh must discharge it either from the actual saved gold itself, or by selling a portion of the gold equal to the amount of zakāh owed. He may also borrow money to pay the zakāh, or pay the zakāh in installments before the ḥawl is complete [as an advance payment]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
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.
Is it required for a discerning child to make the intention at night if they wish to fast?
If a discerning child wishes to fast during Ramadan, they must make the intention at night because intention is one of the pillars of fasting, even though fasting is not obligatory for them.
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.
