If a person enters a mosque and finds the congregation in the final tashahhud, which is more virtuous — joining them or waiting for a second congregation to catch the opening takbīr (takbīrat al-iḥrām)?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a worshipper finds a congregation that is about to finish its prayer, and he hopes to catch the entire prayer from the beginning with another congregation, it is more virtuous for him to pray with this first congregation and then repeat the prayer with the second one — provided he does not intend to confine himself to a single prayer. If, however, he intends to perform only one prayer, then it is more virtuous for him to wait for the second congregation rather than joining the first, so that he may attain the reward of congregational prayer for every single rakʿah.
Al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "If members of a congregation enter the mosque while the imam is in the final tashahhud, al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn held that it is recommended for them to join him in prayer, and that they should not delay in order to form a second congregation. Al-Mutawallī, however, affirmed the opposite view, and al-Qāḍī's own statement elsewhere supports this latter position, which is the relied-upon view. In fact, it is more virtuous for a person who has missed part of the prayer with one congregation, and who hopes to catch another congregation with whom he can attain the entire prayer within its proper time, to delay so that he may catch it in full with them. This applies when he intends to confine himself to a single prayer; otherwise, it is more virtuous for him to pray with the first group and then repeat the prayer with the others." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol. 3/P.186] 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.
A man wishes to offer more than one uḍḥiyah (sacrificial offering), and intends by these sacrifices "on behalf of everyone whom Allah and His Messenger love." Is this intention valid?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The uḍḥiyah (sacrificial offering) is not valid with this intention, because if the sacrificial animal is from sheep or goats, it suffices for one person only; and if it is from cattle or camels, it suffices for seven persons.
However, one may sacrifice it on his own behalf, and then gift the equivalent of its reward to whomever he wishes.
Imam ar-Ramlī (raḥimahullāh) says: "Ash-Shāfi‘ī (raḍiyallāhu ‘anh) said: It is within the vastness of Allah's bounty, the Exalted, that He rewards the one giving charity as well. From this, the scholars of the madhhab said: it is recommended for a person to intend the charity on behalf of his parents, for example — for Allah, the Exalted, will reward them, without this diminishing his own reward in any way." He then relates, as the relied-upon position, the permissibility of saying: "O Allah, convey the reward of what I have recited specifically to so-and-so, and to the Muslims generally." Az-Zarkashī said: "For reward varies in degree — its highest form is what one designates specifically, and its lowest form is what one dedicates generally [alongside others]." [End of quote from Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
What is the ruling on applying perfume while fasting?
Applying perfume does not break the fast. However, it is better to avoid it, as fasting is a practice of simplicity and restraint, while perfume is a form of luxury.
