Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?
It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on supplicating with other than the transmitted (Ma'thur) supplications in prayer?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to supplicate (make du'a) during the prayer for anything from the affairs of religion or worldly life, and the prayer is not invalidated by doing so.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "Our madhhab [i.e., the Shafi'i madhhab] holds that it is permissible for a person to supplicate during it [the prayer] with anything that is permissible to supplicate with outside the prayer, from the affairs of religion or worldly life. He may say: 'O Allah, grant me wholesome sustenance, offspring, a house, and a beautiful young wife' — describing her; or: 'O Allah, free so-and-so from prison,' or 'destroy so-and-so,' and other such things — and none of this invalidates his prayer according to us. And this is also the view of Malik, ath-Thawri, Abu Thawr, and Ishaq." [Al-Majmu', Vol.3/P.454]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
What is the ruling on using snuff, inhaled vapor, or menthol rub (Vicks) during the day in Ramadan?
Using snuff, inhaled vapor, or menthol rub (Vicks) invalidates the fast because these substances enter the lungs through inhalation, and the lungs are considered part of the body cavity (jauf).
Whoever uses them must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day out of respect for the sacred month and make up for that day after Ramadan.
However, if it is merely a scent and none of its substance reaches the body cavity, it does not break the fast.
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.
