I cannot recall giving charity or paying zakat without, shortly afterward, as if an action followed immediately by a reaction, receiving a job opportunity or a sum of money from an unexpected source, from where I had not anticipated. I often made it a point to take a pledge from the charity recipient or zakat once their financial situation improved. They had surplus beyond their basic needs and the needs of their dependents. They would promptly give to someone else and bind them with the same pledge, thus creating a continuous chain of charity passed from one person to another without interruption.
I would tell the initial recipient that the amount they received was not a debt they owed me personally, but rather a debt they owed to God, a form of extended endowment, and I prayed that it would continue until the Day of Judgment.
A friend once discussed the matter of zakat with me and pointed out that this obligatory act—the third pillar of Islam after the testimony of faith and prayer—must never, under any circumstances, be turned into a debt owed by the recipient. It is a rightful due given by divine command, as stated in the Qur’an in Surat At-Tawbah:
“Alms are only for the poor and the needy, and those employed to collect them, and for bringing hearts together, and for freeing captives and debtors, and for the cause of Allah and for the stranded traveler – an obligation from Allah. And Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.”
At this point, I am reminded of the story of Engineer Salah Attia, who made God his business partner.
Salah Attia, an agricultural engineer from the village of Tafna Al-Ashraf in the Dakahlia governorate in the northeastern Nile Delta of Egypt, began his journey with nine other young men. They dreamed together of starting a simple project during their mandatory military service.
In 1974, the nine of them agreed to establish a poultry farm with a total cost of 2,000 Egyptian pounds. However, they were looking for a tenth partner to simplify accounting procedures.
After a few days, Attia returned with a strange proposal: to make God Almighty their tenth partner by dedicating 10% of the profits to charitable causes. They agreed and named Him in the company contract as “The Supreme Partner.”
The profits from the poultry farm’s first cycle exceeded all expectations. They decided to increase the “Supreme Partner’s” share to 20% in the next cycle. After witnessing even greater profits, they raised it to 30%, and so on, until the share reached 50%.
Gradually, the other partners began to withdraw one by one to pursue their personal ambitions and private projects, leaving Attia as the sole remaining partner. Ultimately, he turned the entire project into a full endowment (waqf) for God, allocating 100% of the profits to charitable causes. He took nothing for himself except a modest salary to cover his basic living expenses for managing and supervising the project.
Salah Attia passed away in 2016, having never sought media attention or engaged in political, partisan, or even public religious activities throughout his life. He left behind an endowment worth nearly one billion Egyptian pounds. From it, he built a hospital in his village, as well as several Al-Azhar institutes covering the elementary, preparatory, and secondary levels in his village and the surrounding villages.
His ambition was to build a college in his small village, which had a population of no more than 6,000 people. Although the government initially rejected the idea because the village lacked a train station, Attia built one. Eventually, the single college grew into four colleges, making Tafna Al-Ashraf the only village in Egypt to have university colleges.
Muslim historians have traditionally focused their attention on the lives of politicians, military leaders, and scholars, rather than on the lives of ordinary Muslims as a society made up of individuals. In light of this, Qatari academic Hasan Al-Rumaihi, in an interview on the YouTube program “Inside the Box Podcast”, elaborated on the concept, essence, and evolution of waqf (Islamic endowment) throughout the ages.
Al-Rumaihi began by defining waqf from a social perspective, describing it as a charitable practice that has always existed, reflecting an individual’s initiative to contribute to the welfare of society—provided they possess an asset that generates income, such as a rental property, farmland yielding crops, or an investment fund generating profits. Through waqf, ownership of the asset transfers from the individual to God Almighty, and this decision is irrevocable. Thus, the endowed asset can neither be sold nor inherited until the end of time.
Seeking to simplify the concept for his audience, Al-Rumaihi presented it from a social angle, yet what he said closely mirrors the views of Islamic jurists and linguists. For instance, Al-Hamawi states in Al-Misbah Al-Munir:
“I made the house a waqf, meaning I withheld it in the path of God.”
Similarly, Al-Husayni states in Taj al-Arus:
“Habs (sequestration) refers to anything its owner has endowed permanently, making it impermissible to sell or inherit—be it a palm grove, vineyard, land, or property—whereby the asset’s principal is held and its yield is donated.”
The right to property is held sacred in Islamic law to the extent that anyone who dies defending their property is considered a martyr, as narrated by Sa’id ibn Zayd from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ:
“Whoever is killed defending his property is a martyr, and whoever is killed defending his religion is a martyr, and whoever is killed defending his life is a martyr, and whoever is killed defending his family is a martyr.”
Under Islamic law, no one may seize another’s property except under a legitimate legal justification, such as debt repayment or serving a public interest, provided that the owner is fairly compensated. If someone willingly dedicates their property to God, committing its benefit to charitable causes, then it cannot thereafter be seized or inherited, allowing its benefits to continue uninterrupted for those who meet the donor’s conditions.
In a remarkable balance between individual ownership and societal solidarity, Islam succeeded in elevating personal ambition without limit—each according to their own effort and striving—while simultaneously mandating the wealthy to allocate a right of their wealth to support the vulnerable segments of society. It also prohibited infringements upon private property, even under the pretext of state authority—unlike what is seen in communist societies, which abolished private ownership, stifled individual ambition, and consequently harmed competitiveness and creativity.
If individual property is granted such strict protection, how much greater must be the sanctity of property dedicated to God?
Unlike the class struggle emphasized in communist ideology, which fosters mutual hatred between the wealthy bourgeoisie and the working proletariat, and unlike the capitalist view that survival is for the strongest—legitimizing monopolies and the exploitation of the weak, and permitting no development without the taint of usury, as the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ foretold in a hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah:
“There will come a time when no one will remain without consuming riba (usury), and if they do not consume it, they will still be affected by its dust.”
Islamic economic thought stands alone, calling for love for the sake of God. It sees striving for good deeds, through limited worldly giving in anticipation of unlimited eternal reward, as an inexhaustible engine fueled by love and sustained by sincerity. As the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said in a hadith narrated by Anas ibn Malik:
“By Him in Whose Hand is Muhammad’s soul, none of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself of good.”
The Relationship Between Waqf and the State
About a century and a half after the Prophetic era, Abu Yusuf Al-Ansari, the Chief Judge during the Abbasid period (d. 798 CE), authored Kitab Al-Kharaj to outline the legal responsibilities that a Muslim ruler must uphold.
Al-Rumaihi points out that despite the extensive detail in Abu Yusuf’s book regarding financial matters, there is no mention of the rulings on Islamic waqf (endowments). From his perspective, this absence indicates that waqf was not considered part of the state’s responsibilities. Al-Rumaihi also notes that waqf is similarly absent from Kitab Al-Amwal (The Book of Wealth) by Abu Ubayd Al-Qasim ibn Sallam (d. 838 CE), which focuses on the rulings of money, zakat, and charity.
At that time, the primary role of the state was limited to providing internal and external security through the military, police, and judicial system, while the private sector handled most other aspects of development, such as education and healthcare. The state maintained a supervisory role through the hisbah system (market and moral oversight) and, at most, played a supplementary role when the private sector failed to meet societal needs.
Upon reviewing the terminology associated with waqf, it becomes clear that the party responsible for managing the waqf was known as the mutawalli (trustee), whether it was the endower himself or another individual or entity designated by the endower. The judge’s intervention was limited to situations where the mutawalli was absent or proven unfit to manage the endowment. The judge’s role was thus always minimal, and the ruler had no involvement whatsoever in the administration of waqf properties.
Al-Rumaihi explains that the independence of waqf from the state allowed it to remain unaffected by political upheavals or changes in leadership, enabling it to continue its charitable mission without negatively impacting individuals or society. Consequently, the development of education, the growth of student bodies, the independence of scholars, and the construction and maintenance of mosques were not hindered by political changes or setbacks. This was because waqf assets were not part of the state treasury (Bayt Al-Mal), but rather voluntary individual initiatives aimed at serving society and seeking the pleasure of God.
Al-Rumaihi further notes that even when rulers made endowments for the sake of God, these were considered private waqfs within the Muslim community. The ruler acted not in his capacity as sovereign, but as a member of the general public. Despite the grandiosity, size, and abundance of the endowments typically made by rulers, this gave them a way to influence educational content within schools.
This can be observed during the Mamluk era, where the Mamluks, adhering to the Shafi’i school of thought, endowed significant funds to Shafi’i schools. As a result, Shafi’i jurisprudence flourished in the cities of Greater Syria due to the support from these endowments.
Today, however, the situation is reversed. The public sector has become primarily and almost exclusively responsible for developmental aspects such as education and healthcare, while the private sector plays only a secondary, supplementary role in cases where the state cannot fully meet societal needs.
In his article Waqf in the Modern Era, Sayed Al-Mansi notes that the state has been intensely focusing on reorganizing the waqf system. This attention stemmed from the importance, impact, and variety of waqf services within society. However, mismanagement plagued the waqf sector, undermining its objectives and giving justification for the state to intervene. As a result, the state restructured the waqf system to combat waste, sell off unproductive endowments, and undertake other measures. Consequently, in most countries, this led to a decline in new endowments, as individuals became reluctant to contribute to society through waqf initiatives actively. Additionally, many waqf properties were lost.
Categories of Waqf (Islamic Endowments)
Like all economic aspects, waqf classifications are diverse and multifaceted, varying according to legal rulings, designated beneficiaries, management mechanisms, and the economic nature of the endowment. This diversity reflects the historical development of the waqf system and its various applications by individuals and states across different periods.
In his comprehensive work The Compendium of Rulings on Waqf, Gifts, and Bequests (2013), Professor Khalid Al-Mushaighikh extensively classified waqf types as recognized in Islamic tradition. Based on Islamic jurisprudence, waqf may be categorized as recommended, which is the normative form; obligatory, such as fulfilling a vow; permissible, such as endowing one’s entire wealth; prohibited, when it involves unlawful purposes; or discouraged, such as when a poor individual donates assets while their heirs are in need.
Waqf is also distinguished based on the beneficiaries it serves. It may be directed toward general beneficiaries, such as mosques or the poor, or toward specific beneficiaries, such as widows, orphans, or a particular individual or group.
Furthermore, waqf may be either joint, established by multiple individuals, or private, established by a single person.
The nature of waqf can also depend on the health status of the endower. A waqf established during sound health is the default and binding, whereas a waqf made during illness is only considered valid for up to one-third of the individual’s estate without the consent of the heirs. Anything beyond that limit requires the heirs’ approval.
Waqf can encompass various types of assets, including real estate, movable property, cash, usufruct rights, and even intellectual property.
In terms of duration, a waqf may be perpetual, from which the endower cannot retract, or temporary, ending after a specified period.
Regarding continuity, some waqfs remain continuous from inception to fulfillment, such as those dedicated to students. Others may face interruptions either from the outset or at a later stage, such as a waqf established for a beneficiary who no longer exists or that ceases with the death of a designated individual unless provisions have been made for succession.
Waqf may also be classified according to the establishing entity. It can be private sector waqf, initiated by individuals, or public sector waqf, including irsad, where public assets, such as government land, are allocated for public benefit.
Economically, waqf can be direct, where its proceeds immediately serve its intended purpose, or investment-oriented, managed to generate returns that are then allocated toward the waqf’s objective. Scholars also differentiate between usufruct waqf, which focuses on using the asset’s utility, and exploitation waqf, which seeks to maximize financial benefits.
In terms of management, there are regulated waqfs administered by dedicated bodies, and annexed waqfs overseen by appointees under formal supervision.
Hasan Al-Rumaihi highlights that a ruler’s waqf, known as irsad, is established personally from the public treasury (Bayt Al-Mal) and often served as a tool to appeal to the popular sentiment, which strongly supported waqf as a religious and charitable institution. The golden age of waqf occurred during the Mamluk era, where rulers, many former slaves who rose to power, sought to consolidate societal support through extensive endowments.
The Ottoman state also showed considerable interest in strategic waqf types, particularly arms waqf, which contributed to the advancement of the weapons industry, and monetary waqf, which involved endowing sums of money to finance merchants through profit-sharing models such as mudarabah. These initiatives fueled unprecedented economic growth across Ottoman cities and urban centers, including Sarajevo.
Furthermore, during the Ottoman period, the endowment for lighting Al-Aqsa Mosque expanded significantly, particularly through the contributions of the wives of sultans and wealthy women. This was inspired by the prophetic tradition narrated by Maimunah, wherein she asked the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ about Jerusalem. He replied, “It is the land of resurrection and gathering. Visit it and pray there, for one prayer there is equivalent to a thousand prayers elsewhere.” When she inquired what to do if she could not reach it, the Prophet ﷺ advised, “Then send oil to be used in its lamps; for whoever does so, it is as if he had prayed there” (narrated by Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah).
The Role of Colonialism in the Decline of Waqf
Muslims lived for centuries enjoying the vast and flourishing benefits of waqf, a system that only began to decline with the grim advent of colonialism in the Islamic world. The British colonizers, who entered India under the pretense of trade through the East India Company, encountered administrative obstacles due to the widespread presence of waqf properties, which could neither be sold legally nor religiously.
The British occupiers sought advice from the orientalist William Jones, a professor at the University of Oxford. Jones recommended studying Hanafi jurisprudence, the school followed by the Muslim Mughal rulers of India. Seizing the opportunity, the colonial authorities established courts presided over by British judges who claimed to apply Islamic law after translating it into English. Through this judicial centralization, the Islamic waqf system was no longer a private initiative conducted independently of state authority.
For the first time in Muslim history, the ruling power could cast doubt on the legitimacy of family endowments (waqf dhurri) made to the endower’s descendants. They exploited a misinterpretation of a prophetic hadith narrated by Abu Umamah Al-Bahili in Sunan Abu Dawood:
“Allah has given every rightful person their due, so there is no will (bequest) for an heir.”
Using this, the colonial administration invalidated private family waqfs.
Meanwhile, the French colonizers in Algeria adopted a different strategy. They claimed that waqf properties hindered real estate and developmental projects, and their efforts to dismantle waqf institutions led to violent confrontations with the Algerian people.
At the beginning of the 19th century, these colonial ideas spread to Egypt under the rule of Muhammad Ali Pasha, who was obsessed with Western models of modernization. Since waqf properties were exempt from taxation, Muhammad Ali sought religious rulings that allowed the abolition of waqf.
To mitigate public outrage, Muhammad Ali introduced employment grades and salaries. From that moment on, state penetration into the economy deepened, and the public became increasingly dependent on the government for their livelihoods.
Worsening the situation, in the mid-19th century, the Ottoman Sultan in Istanbul issued a decree mandating that the revenues of irsad waqfs (public endowments) across the empire be sent centrally to Istanbul. The official justification was to combat corruption and to support military resilience against Russian aggression. However, this measure led to the collapse of industries, schools, and charitable activities across the Ottoman Empire, all of which had previously thrived on local waqf revenues.
Subsequently, waqf administration shifted from being based on dynamic religious jurisprudence to being governed by rigid secular laws. A sign of this legal stagnation was the publication of the Majalla al-Ahkam al-Adliyya (The Ottoman Civil Code), which first appeared in 1882 and remained in use for nearly six decades until it was abolished by Sultan Abdul Hamid II shortly before the official dissolution of the Ottoman Empire by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1922.
Ultimately, these developments led to the social collapse of the waqf system and the withering of independent Islamic jurisprudence under the heavy hand of state control. Consequently, individual Muslims lost the spiritual incentive to contribute to the development and progress of their societies.
Waqf in the State of Qatar
In modern times, the Qatari legislator drew inspiration from the legacy of Islamic jurisprudence to organize and codify the regulations governing waqf, issuing provisions that structure and support it. The most recent legislation on waqf, Law No. (9) of 2021, covers numerous aspects across 58 articles.
The types of waqf defined under Article 5 closely align with the traditional Islamic concept. A charitable waqf is one whose benefit is initially dedicated to a charitable cause. A family waqf is where the endowment benefits the endower themselves or their descendants, or both, or is allocated to any other individuals and their descendants, provided that it ultimately reverts to a designated charitable cause. A mixed waqf is one where the benefits are divided between a charitable cause and specific family beneficiaries. Additionally, a bequest intended for a charitable, family, or mixed waqf is treated as a waqf unless the testator specifies otherwise.
Among the significant provisions in Qatari waqf law is what is stipulated in Article 6, allowing any property, whether real estate or movable assets—including stocks, bonds, and all financial instruments capable of being endowed—as well as intangible assets, to be made into a waqf, provided that such assets are utilized in a manner permissible under Islamic law. It also allows for the endowment of money for lending purposes, its conversion into tangible assets, or its deposit in investment accounts with Islamic banks.
The Qatari legislator further emphasized that the sale or substitution of waqf property is strictly prohibited except under specific conditions. According to Article 15, the competent authority may sell or substitute waqf property only with the approval of the Minister if there is no party available to maintain it, if it is at risk of ruin, or if its benefits have ceased and it no longer serves the purpose for which it was dedicated. In such cases, the proceeds from the sale must be used to purchase new assets that replace the original ones, which must then be invested legally, with the resulting income directed to the original waqf purpose. Moreover, the law permits selling part of the endowed property in order to repair another part if the waqf’s revenues are insufficient to cover necessary repairs.
In Qatari law, mosques are given special importance. Any mosque built and opened for public prayer is automatically considered a waqf dedicated to God Almighty, regardless of who constructed it. This also includes facilities designated for serving the mosque. However, if a mosque is constructed on state-owned land without obtaining the necessary approvals from the relevant authorities, it will not be considered a waqf unless such approvals are secured and all required conditions, standards, and planning permits are fulfilled, as stipulated in Article 27.
The Importance of Waqf in the Modern Era
Al-Mansi reminds us in his article that the transformation and renewed focus on the waqf system was not merely the result of imaginative innovation, but rather a deeply rooted effort based on the desire to shift society from a needy, dependent state lacking self-sustaining mechanisms to a society where individuals support one another, fulfilling their needs collectively and advancing together toward the highest ideals of human and individual rights, which elevate the stature of every nation.
All that remains for Muslim societies today is to expand awareness of waqf and its various forms to revive its flourishing role as it once was in earlier times. Every state would undoubtedly welcome any voluntary initiative that alleviates the burdens of societal development and progress, as competition in such noble pursuits is a hallmark of true believers who are keen on filling the gaps within their communities.
The efforts of individuals in the field of waqf cannot be denied. An example is the “Waqf Al-Wuquf” initiative, where a benefactor in Qatar endowed 100,000 Qatari riyals with the aim of generating new endowments and supporting existing ones. Additionally, universities continue to organize forums advocating for legislation that would help transform traditional charitable waqfs into models that align with the digital age.
During a scientific symposium at Qatar University on the practical investment of charitable waqf funds, participants raised questions such as, “What prevents the establishment of a digital school offering remote education?” and “Why not develop educational, health, and cultural applications that contribute to charitable work and the building of an advanced civil society?” Such initiatives could extend beyond Qatari society to benefit the broader Islamic and Arab worlds.
The decline of waqf in the Islamic world has led to the disappearance of many forms of benevolence that once reflected great compassion and humanity. These were replaced by institutions modeled after Western civil society, which often lacks a spiritual dimension and financial independence. As a result, many Muslims have grown disillusioned with such models, just as they have distanced themselves from secular democracy compared to their historical attachment to the Islamic concept of shura (consultative governance).
The Western model of civil society, compared to the Islamic waqf system, suffers from the absence of religious grounding, reliance on temporary financial resources, lack of an independent civilizational vision, and vulnerability to political influence. In contrast, the Islamic waqf system enjoys absolute sustainability, legal independence, and comprehensive charitable scope.
This spirit of mercy, embodied by the Muslim who lovingly and voluntarily dedicates their wealth in life and after death for the benefit of both Muslims and non-Muslims, humans and non-humans alike, in pursuit of divine forgiveness and pleasure, cannot be compared to any tax system imposed by human authorities, monitored by banks, or promoted by philosophical ideologies.
