In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of worlds. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah and upon his family and Companions.

We would like to show our grateful acknowledgement to the institutions that invited us to share our views on ‘common values’ that hope to become a basis of understanding, mutual approach and harmony. Surely, this is promising if we look for the common fundamentals and spheres of agreement to manifest their hidden meanings and develop their incentives. This is the reason behind my personal research on this subject.

The research at hand is not expected to be a conclusive philosophic thesis. I will briefly discuss, after defining the word ‘values’, the issue of the existence of common values in light of philosophy, the texts of Shari`ah (“Islamic Law”) and the comments of scholars.

The definition of Qiyam (“values”)

Firstly, let us demonstrate the definition of ‘values’. If we reviewed the corresponding synonyms of the word values in French we will find ‘ethique‘ which indicates a set of rules of conduct. We also find the term ‘valeurs‘, which refers to matters qualified as being right, beautiful and good, in accordance with personal or societal criteria, and can be used as a criterion and reference of a moral principle.

As for the meaning of the word in Arabic, it is the plural of Qima (“value”) which refers to what makes something valuable or useful. An Arabic maxim says: “The value of a person is what they are excelled in.” The word value means a praiseworthy and noble character which prompts man to acquire it, just as precious things. Also, it refers to the price of a value.

The word Qiyam may be mentioned to refer to a singular infinitive as in the Qur’an: “Truly, my Lord has guided me to ‘Din-an Qiyam-an’ (a Straight Path, a right religion)” (Al-An`am 6:161) in one of the recitations of the Qur’an. Also, it is mentioned in Allah’s Words: “And give not unto the foolish your property which Allah has made ‘Qiyam-an’ (a means of support for you)” (Al-Nisaa 4:5) in the recitation of Nafi` referring to the means of support. If something is Qayyim, it has a precious value. Another recitation of the aforementioned verse says, “Din-an Qiyam-an” with the meaning of a straight religion or a religion sufficient for the interests of people and considers them.

Philosophers defined value as ‘man’s ruling on something which gives rise to objection and protest against existence with its current reality to change it to what should be.’ Depending on this linguistic meaning, the word ‘values’ stands for moral principles that are praised and commended while their opposites are denounced and condemned. Here, we should mention briefly the definition of ‘morals’, which stands for both the inherent characters in the soul and the outward manifestation of these characters. Some scholars view morals as psychological rather than external, as the outer appearance is conduct or treatment.(i)

Accordingly, a value is only what is approved, provided that such approval is general and continual. If someone loves a kind of food, this cannot be a value. Also, this general approval may be confined to certain society or may extend to the whole humanity. It is known that philosophers are not in agreement regarding the existence of common values.

The values belonging to certain societies that stem from conventions or religion are an undisputable fact. However, the existence of common values is questionable for philosophers. According to scholars of Usul-ul-Fiqh (“Principles of Religion”), we should verify the point of disagreement. Let us therefore pose the following questions: What is the core of ‘value’? Being the basis of all values, does goodness have an objective, absolute existence? Is there such a thing as goodness within the general meaning of the word or is it always subjective, pursuant to approval of certain persons or groups?

Philosophers disagree over this basic issue to such an extent that several approaches have emerged. These approaches have divided into the economists, socialists, opportunists and idealists. To summarize, there are two main stances: those who advocate relativity, maintaining that the existence of a common value is untrue, regardless of the title used; and those who state that values are common, regardless of the motives. After dealing with these two schools of thought, I will point out the position of Islam in this regard and conclude with a linguistic article.

Theories of relativity and absolute principle

The best expression about relativity and the dependence of values on community is clarified by Whitehead in his book Adventures of Ideas. Whitehead states: “The details of these moral criteria are related to the social conditions of the environment corresponding to life in a particular time, such as the life in the fertile part of Arabian Peninsula, the life on lower slopes of Himalaya, the life in the plains of China and India or the life in a delta. However, the meaning of these criteria is changeable and obscure, such as the concepts of monarchy, family, marriage, reason and Almighty God.

“For example, the behavior which brings about an appropriate criterion of agreeable satisfaction in a certain environment and stage may be in another environment and stage ignoble to the highest degree. Therefore, each society has its special pattern of perfection which bears specific inevitable difficulties in its stage. Thus, the claim that there are specific regulative concepts which are well-adjusted to clarify the details of behavior of all sensible beings on the earth, in any other planet and in each solar system, is a concept worthy of negligence because it is a single pattern of perfection applied to the whole universe.”(ii) This is the doctrine of relativity.

On the other side we have the ‘absolute doctrine’ as explained by Hunter Mead who says: “In short, the absolute doctrine can be better illustrated by the fact that there is only one criterion or one law with regard to ethics that is right, since antiquity. This criterion or law is applicable to all people and is separated from time, geographic location, social customs, legal convention and anything else. Something that represents commitment in my country is equally the same in China, Spain or Poland.

“Moreover, it was a form of commitment for the Greeks and Europeans in middle centuries, whether they were aware of that or not. Also, it will be a commitment for all future races and civilizations. Whatever is good nowadays was the same in the past and will be so forever. There is no moral law for the past and another for the present or a criterion for the East and another for the West. Yet, goodness and right are comprehensive and applicable to every time and place.”(iii)

However, the theory of absolute principle is supported by divine religions, especially those that call to comprehensiveness. Hunter Mead admits that the source of the western civilization is Christianity. He elaborates: “When we mention a Christian, we mean in philosophy the ‘monotheistic’. This is because the belief in one God rules the universe which He created. This is the basis of religious western thought…These orders of Allah are comprehensive and applicable to all people everywhere.”

The logical source

It could be said that Kant was the most renowned rationalist in the field of ethics. He believed that analysis is always able to establish that violating the moral law represents violation of the law of logic. Actually, immorality contains contradiction. Let us quote the most famous examples which Kant gave in this respect: “When we make a promise with no intention to fulfill it, our behavior becomes a kind of evil, because we base our behavior on two contradictory principles in the same time. One of these two principles is that people should believe in promise but one violates it. This means that every person has the right to violate his promise as long as the moral law is comprehensive. Then, if everyone breaks his promise, no one will believe in the promise and we will have another principle that it is right that no one should believe in promises. Surely, this principle contradicts the first one.”(iv)

In regards to Muslims, all our intellectual conceptions refer to a common basis for values between humans, in accordance with the following principles:

1. Islam admits the principle of absolute equality between people and refers them to one source because their Lord is One and their father is one. Almighty Allah says: “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another.” (Al-Hujurat 49:13) The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “O people, your Lord is One and your father is one. You all are Adam’s offspring, and Adam was created from soil. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that who has piety. An Arab is not superior to a non-Arab, a non-Arab is not superior to an Arab or a white person is not superior to a red person except through piety.”(v)

Therefore, I support the view that there are common values and that globalization and its means (including means of transportation and communication) have removed the material barrier that Whitehead spoke of, though the psychological barrier is still present.

2. The Message of the seal of the Prophets, Muhammad (peace be upon him), is for all people. Allah (exalted be He) says: “Say, (O Muhammad), “O mankind, verily I am sent to you as the Messenger of Allah-to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. None has the right to be worshipped but He; it is He Who gives life and causes death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, who believes in Allah and His words…and follow Him that you may be guided“.” (Al-A`raf 7:158)

3. Islam maintains that an inclination to good, faith and right is the natural disposition of all people. Allah says: “So set your face towards the religion of pure Islamic monotheism, (Allah’s Fitrah) with which He has created mankind. No change let there be in  Khalqillah (the religion of Allah), that is the straight religion, but most of men know not.” (Al-Rum 30:30)

No matter how far the intellectual disputes over the absolute and proportional principle go and how the philosophic theories twist endlessly, it is obvious that there are common values among people. Reason (the best thing divided among people, according to René Descartes) and language are the best evidences for that.

Noble characteristics

All minds and languages consider ‘justice’ a noble and beloved word. It is commonly accepted that ‘truthfulness’, ‘freedom’, ‘tolerance’, ‘faithfulness’ and the like are praiseworthy words for all people. Mankind also deems the opposite of such words as dispraised and unacceptable, for example ‘injustice’ or ‘oppression’. If you say to the most wrongful person that he is unjust he will become annoyed, even if he is described fairly. The same is true for ‘lying’, ‘fanaticism’ and ‘betrayal’ that are reprehensible words and detested by all people. Likewise, nature and reason deny them. Is this not a practical evidence and clear proof on the existence of common values?

People should always respect human rights, as arguably this is a bare minimum quality without which humanity cannot survive. But, employment of noble characteristics, such as leniency, mercy, altruism, cooperation and helping the needy or disabled regardless of their race, religion or geographic origin, provides a new concept for humanity. This concept surpasses the neutral principle of human rights, such as equality and blindness to difference, to positivity in treatment which gives the other a sense of love and brotherhood.

This notion conforms with the Arabic saying: “Treat people as you would like them to treat you.” There is a hadith which refers to such deeper meanings which states: “None of you believes until they love for his brother what they love for themselves.” This hadith confirms the value of love and the value of human brotherhood which gives a sense of kinship. In fact, this explanation is not my own as, many centuries ago, scholars such as Ibn Rajab Al-Hanbali in his explanation of Al-Arba`in Al-Nawawiyyah (“The Forty Hadith compiled by Al-Nawawi”) and Al-Shabrakhiti said, “The brotherhood mentioned in the hadith is the human brotherhood.”

Love is a graceful value, as every human being yearns to be loved. It is rare that you come across a person who enjoys being hated by others. Such behavior is a paradox, where some people quarrel with others on the plea that the latter do not love them. However, they mistake the means to people’s hearts, as maintained by the Mauritanian scholar. When love is felt by both sides, no aggression emerges. Love is constituted of sentiment, behavior, incarnation, and declaration. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “When one of you loves another, let he inform him of that.” So, it is a value because all people have a high opinion of it, even those who do not share it. Such is the criterion of value. Everybody seeks to acquire it because everyone wishes to be just and tolerant.

However, these values may dry up if they are not fostered and developed by education. An Arabic poet once said: “If nurtured by noble deeds…good manners grow like a plant.” As a matter of fact, the most important value that symbolizes the solution of the world’s problems is the respect of disagreement, or even love of disagreement, so that it is regarded as a source of cultural richness, a sort of gracefulness and a basis for human character. If we think highly of disagreement and develop the law of virtue in addition to the law of human rights, we can put the basis of employing the common values that turn difference into harmony and change enmity to love. In accordance with Allah’s saying: “The good deed and the evil deed cannot be equal. Repel (the evil) with one which is better; then verily! He, between you and whom there was enmity (will become) as though he was a close friend.” (Fussilat 41:34) It is a moral law confirmed by the Qur’an, namely tolerance, that gives birth to love.

Application of values in modern society

We hope that the common forms of goodness and the human munificent common values will be developed. This can be realized through our virtuous manners, tolerance, generosity, truthfulness, faithfulness and honesty. These values will, in turn, convince others to show us the same noble treatment because they, being human, share the same satisfaction with these values. Goodness leads to goodness and similarly generosity. Moreover, convincing others with good treatment is the most important human concern. We quote the saying of Plato:

“The spread of morals in the world is an indication of the triumph of persuasion over power. The value of people is expressed in their willingness for persuasion. They are eligible for conviction on all sides where it is possible to replace power with persuasion, as one of them is the best and the other is the worst. Yet, civilization is to maintain the social system through natural convincing expressed in choosing the best. No matter how inevitable it is, the use of power reveals the failure of civilization whether for the community in general or for individuals.”

Therefore, this sort of harmony should not be limited to societies with different cultures, but in fact this kind of accord is needed in the life of each person who embodies different cultures. For example, a person may have an Asian origin, Muslim religion and British birth and upbringing. Sometimes this creates a sort of struggle of values inside them but this should change to harmony and cultural richness. We studied something of that in the biographies of late scholars and it was a source of richness, rather than contradiction. So, let us try to achieve such harmony within ourselves in order to have our hope founded on a firm basis; otherwise it is not hope, simply deception. It is unacceptable that one does nothing for love and expects to realize it. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali said: “This is like someone who waits for harvest without sowing or wants children without marriage.”

Another problem is the great inconformity between words and deeds, or ‘hypocrisy’ as indicated by Al-Tughra’y. There is a great difference between the actions of politicians and values. Indeed, if this inconformity decreased, it would be possible to evade many of the foolish sacrifices that society has to make. We should pay greater attention to the value of tolerance in place of hatred or violence and direct the powers of youth to channels of innovation and general interest, instead of forcing them on wars in armies or volunteering to die in suicidal groups. We should provide alternatives to reach interests without engaging in wars.

The awakening of international conscience is necessary in order to rewrite the law of virtues, to remind people of their human rights and that they are legal privileges for every human being. However, when we hear of the struggle between Democrats and Republicans in the country of the world’s greatest power, one realizes that this hopeful awakening is out of reach. This is because the dispute is around the means and not the aims or the principles. This is a very uncomfortable reality, as the world has waited for a long time, but still no change has materialized.

Such disagreement is about the greatest basic values, such as the right to life, honor and freedom. We hope it is in fact about the finer details of those who deserve life and those who deserve freedom. Surely respecting disagreement, establishing its importance and building the bridges of unity is the sole path to restoring the values of man, because all of us deserve these values.

Conclusion

Scholars of religion should be a part of the solution and not a part of the problem. We have witnessed in the past some scholars who have only agitated disagreement by trying to please others, but such actions have reflected negatively on the values of human cooperation and good understanding. Media, institutions of civil society, universities and research centers are also invited to play a positive role in developing values. Likewise, political leaders should take part and make great effort to decrease injustice. Leaders should look to obtain solutions for enduring problems, even if they are not conclusive or perfectly fair, as solving matters through military means is simply immoral.

We would recommend the three following goals to achieve a better balance in society’s values:

1. Deliver lectures about values to convince Europeans, particularly the Muslim youth,  to prevent them from falling into terrorism and crime.

2. Ask the concerned authorities in the West to give the Muslim youth their due rights, especially their cultural rights, so that they become a positive factor with their specific characteristics that do not contradict the main values of European society.

3. Inviting the West to reconsider its relationship with the Muslim world in light of such values to bring about a more agreeable coexistence for all. A moral, intelligent and generous goal.

(i) Ahmed Amin, The Ethics, p. 63.

(ii) Whitehead, Ideas Adventures, translated by Anis Zaki Hassan, p. 439.

(iii) Hunter Mead, Philosophy, Its Kinds and Problems, translated by Fuad Zakariyya, p. 264.

(iv) Op cit. p. 267.

(v) Related by Al-Tirmidhi.

I was asked to write on this subject, which is of extreme importance as it constitutes a significant means to preserve the identity of Muslims in the West and to secure suitable conditions so that they can practice the rites of their religion.

Introduction

This brief paper on endowment in the West aims to manifest the importance of endowment in Western countries.

Therefore, we shall talk about Muslim minorities, the aim of this paper, and about the obstacles that face Islamic endowment in the West and the solutions, including the necessity of helping Muslims and the importance of achieving mutual solidarity.

We will look at the definition of endowment in Islam along with a quick comparison with the foundation system in the West – using France as an example – to form the proper concept of endowment in the West.

Endowment has to be adapted to the Western environment.

First: Muslim minorities

“Minority” as a term was not known in the past. It emerged in the last century and has gained much strength since the beginning of the 15th Hijrah century with the establishment of Islamic organisations interested in the situation of Muslim communities in the West. The Muslim World League is the leading such organisation, followed by the Organisation of Islamic Conference. The word “minority” has grown to be used for a group of people with special characteristics who live among a congruent, larger group of people who wield more influence as they possess all or most of the power.

Much dispute took place about the term “the fiqh of Muslim minorities”. The European Council resolved this dispute in the round held in Dublin, Ireland, by approving the use of this term, as there should be no contention with regard to terms, and also as it was used in contemporary speech. In addition, the term minority is conventionally used internationally as a political term that stands for groups of people in a state who belong to a different ethnicity, language, or religion than that which the majority belong to. The Council also approved the opinion that the subject of the fiqh of Muslim minorities is the fiqh rulings related to Muslims who live outside Muslim countries.

The special characteristics of the minority could be religious or ethnic. Therefore, the majority usually tend to ignore the rights of this minority if not harass them, physically or psychologically, because they are bothered by the values and ideals of this minority. This is the most important problem that faces minorities; namely, how to balance between adhering to their values and achieving adaptation and congruity with the bigger society.

History has witnessed many disasters that befell minorities due to their disputes with the majorities. We are not going to give a historical survey of the massacres of minorities that the world witnessed at the turn of the twentieth century in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

But in the modern age, an important development took place in the world. The system of human rights has become the grounds for the existence of a minority among the majority particularly in the West, which fostered the principles of human rights, which was basically established as a means of coexistence between the followers of Protestant and Catholic Churches. But in the course of time, minorities from Africa and Asia have been allowed to live there. These minorities emerged for different reasons that had led to the migration of the workers from colonies to the colonizing countries.

For a period of history the Islamic civilization was the only human civilization which regulates the rights of minorities with regard to the practice of their religious rites and their right to resort to their own courts.

Thus the Coptic minority has lived for 14 centuries protected by Islam, as was the case with the Jewish minority in Morocco.

After World War I, many of the international treaties were concerned with the protection of minorities. The issue of minorities was one of the most important problems that faced the League of Nations.

The situation of Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries can be described as one of necessity in the general sense of the word which includes need and necessity in its particular sense.

Therefore, it needs a special kind of fiqh. This does not mean the formation of a new fiqh outside of the framework of the Islamic fiqh whose basic references are the Quran and the Sunnah together with other evidences such as ijma` (consensus), qiyas (analogical reasoning), juristic preference, public unrestricted interests, blocking the means to evil, custom and presumption of continuity, in addition to all other evidences approved by scholars when they expressed their different juristic opinions, which represent a rich and broad legacy. Thus the issues of minorities are old in genre but new in type.

The growing Islamic existence poses new challenges and tasks, and endowments could be a means to deal with this complex situation if the Islamic endowment is established in different fields besides mosques, or houses of worship as they are called in the West, and educational institutions, which are of major importance in all the levels of educations including elementary and secondary levels where the individual’s creedal and ethical personality is formed, in addition to providing a solution for the problem of banning hijab in some European countries. This is also the case with regard to higher and university education, such as the institute of Human Sciences in Paris, which students from Europe attend, and cultural centres where cultural activities can take place to preserve Muslims’ cultural and intellectual distinctiveness and to play a role that integrates with the role of the educational institutes and mosques. There are also some other important fields that Muslims have not paid attention to such as study and research centres. The European Council for Fatwa and Research has a research branch that issues the Council magazine. We need endowments in the field of research, thoughts, social studies, dialogue, etc.

Similarly, Muslim minorities need active economic and cultural institutions to compensate for their weakness, safeguard their creed, and preserve their children through teaching them their religion, and help the needy, the poor, and the sick among them; particularly after the number of Muslims in the West has increased and their existence there has become no longer accidental but rather perpetual and growing. According to some researchers, their number has exceeded 60 million in America and Europe including both native Muslims in Eastern Europe and newcomers. There are cities where the number of Muslims tends to grow faster than the number of the people of other religions as in the case of Brussels in Belgium, capital of Europe. In Paris, the number of Muslims has reached two million.

Endowment in Western Countries

Second: the obstacles of Islamic endowment in the West

Endowment in the West faces obstacles:

The first obstacle is the scarcity of resources, which resulted mainly from the fierce attack against charity institutions, which has driven many of charity doers to abstain from giving money that helps in establishing endowments in the West. Hence, they spend instead – when they do spend – on building mosques and orphanages within a very limited geographical area, while missionary institutions spend lavishly to establish their call in Muslim countries in Africa and Asia without restriction.

Therefore, this subject should be added to the list of dialogue with the West and the attention of officials should be drawn to the importance of equal treatment in such issues.

Muslims are like one body. We cannot let down Muslim minorities that constitute a part of the Muslim nation, a bridge for cultural communication, and a link in the chain of the relation with the West.

The second obstacle is that there are some flaws in achieving solidarity and cooperation between individuals and Islamic associations in West countries. This constitutes an obstacle before making collective efforts to establish challenging multi-purpose endowment institutions. However, there is an undeniable level of solidarity – thanks to Allah – in more than one district.

The third obstacle is the lack of organisational and administrative competency to achieve the maximum utilisation of the available – or potentially available – human and financial resources.

The fourth obstacle is working in conformity with the Western systems and laws. Muslim minorities live in a non-Muslim society under positive laws which mostly differ from the rulings of the Shari`ah that regulates the Islamic endowment owing to its special nature that requires rules that cannot be harmonised with the Western systems even with the employment of ijtihad and selection of juristic opinions.

Solutions:

To face these obstacles we can suggest, with regard to the first obstacle, that significant endowment organisations in the Islamic world can grant large funds to acknowledged Islamic institutions in these countries to carry out an endowment program resisted.

I confess that this solution requires intense communication between the beneficiary Islamic organizations and the officials, particularly after some organisations in European countries have started to set up local funding institutions to build and supervise houses of worship as protective measures against what is called “incoming fundamentalism.”

With regard to the second obstacle, there is a need for more awareness in the ranks of Muslims in order to convince them to integrate their organizations, as in the meantime institutions and mosques are established on ethnical or sometimes doctrinal basis. This then will help in forming huge endowments to meet the need. In this context rose the new European Islamic endowment and a similar one in America which supervises over 130 mosques. The European Council for Fatwa and Research and the International Union of Muslim Scholars can play a leading role in this field.

As for the third obstacle, which is related to lacking the organisational and administrative competency for ideal utilisation, it can be overcome, in my view, through exchanging experiences, organising courses, and focusing on successful examples to be raised as models. The General Secretary of Endowments in Kuwait can supervise these courses.

With regard to the fourth obstacle, which is related to fiqh and legal sides, we have to point it out to clarify in brief the nature of endowment in Islam.

The definition of waqf (endowment):

In Arabic, the words waqf and habs (dedication) are used synonymously by jurists for the same meaning, though al-Rassa` held the view that waqf is a stronger term than tahbees. [SeeSharh al-Rassa` 2:539]

This word can be used for the endowed thing and for the act of endowing itself.

Ibn `Arafah defined it as endowing the utility of something as long as it exists while remaining in the possession of its endower even assumingly.

Ibn `Arafah rejected the definition given by Ibn `Abd al-Salam who defined it as “endowing utilities forever”, for it does not apply to all cases.

The author of Aqrab al-Masalik defined it as dedicating the utility or product of a property, even for a payment, for someone for a period determined by the granter. [Al-Sharh al-Sagheer li al-Dardeer 4:97]

According to Abu Hanifah, it is to dedicate a property in accordance with the will of the granter of the utility in charity. [See the commentary of Ibn `Abdeen 3:357]

Ibn Qudamah said: it means to dedicate the estate and give the product in charity. [al-Mughny8:184]

This definition is close to the exact wording of the hadith reported by al-Nasa’y in his Sunan on the authority of Ibn `Umar that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to `Umar about the share he was given from Khaybr “Dedicate the estate and give the product in charity.” [Reported by al-Daraqutny and al-Bayhaqy and authenticated by al-Albany in Irwa’ al-ghaleel]

Endowment is a great institution that manifests the wisdom of this divine and eternal shari`ah with regard to establishing the bases of cooperation between the individuals of the community and taking care of the people of need and poverty even before they come to existence. It is a credit for the coming generations and a running charity of a running reward for the endowers to receive the return in their graves and on the day of resurrection.

Therefore, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) listed it among the three deeds of constant rewards that do not cease with death. The authentic hadith reads “When a human being dies, all his deeds come to end with the exception of three: a running charity, beneficial knowledge, or a pious child who prays for him.” [Reported by Muslim]

The running charity was interpreted as the endowment. Al-Shafi`y (may Allah be pleased with him) said that endowment is one of the peculiarities of this nation and was not known before Islam.

One of the characteristics of endowment is the perpetuity of the estate while spending the product on charity avenues. Therefore, there are many rulings related to endowments which form one complete system that acts as a shield to block the ways to intervene with the endowment in the face of the governors and administrators who may attempt to change or even waste it.

Hence, issues such as exchanging, substituting, transferring, compensating, restoring, and dividing the endowment have all gained the interest of Muslim jurists and sometimes led to juristic differences. This gave rise to three juristic schools that have different points of view: one school is conservative with regard to the estate of the endowment to the extent of strict abiding by words; another one manages the estate freely to preserve the perpetuity of the utility not the perpetuity of the estate; and third one takes a middle course between the two sides and inclines to the preponderant benefit in a rigid flexibility – if it is possible to combine between two opposites.

The first group includes the Malikites and the Shafi`ites. They do not allow exchanging or compensation in endowments except to very narrow limits in certain cases, which we will mention later.

The second group is represented by the Hanbilites and some Malikite scholars; particularly the Andalusians.

The third group which goes with the preponderant interests consists of some Hanifite scholars, such as Abu Yousof, and late Hanbilite scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah, in addition to some late Malikite scholars.

Here we adopt the opinion of the school that goes with the interest with regard to endowment and thus allows transferring it and compensating for it. This school adopts the Malikite definition of endowment we quoted from Aqrab al-Masalik because the endowed property does not have to be immoveable. It should be just a property or even a utility during the period of lease. Also, this school does not disallow timing in endowment.

One important issue related to endowment is its administration. Revising scholars’ opinions and the positions of the schools of Islamic law, the administration is for the endower, the appointed administrator, the judge, the Muslim ruler, the beneficiaries, and Muslim community. (See our book I`mal al-Maslahah fi al-Waqf and the paper we presented to this forum about the administration of endowment)

The administrator could be one or more persons as explicitly stated by the author of al-Tawdeeh al-Jami` bayna al-Muqni` wa al-Tanqeeh who belongs to the Hanbalite school.

Therefore, the association administers the endowment and so does the foundation in the new French system in which a government commissioner joins.

The permissibility of dedicating an endowment to non-Muslims relies on the case when Safiyyah, mother of the believers, (may Allah be pleased with her) dedicated an endowment fund to her Jewish brother.

It is also permissible to dedicate an endowment fund for a church to spend on those who pass by it (see al-Mughny and other references). This is of course when the endowment functions as a social institution from which both Muslims and non-Muslims benefit. So is the case when the endowment is an educational institution that receives Muslim and non-Muslim children; because the interest of Muslims is the most important criterion in this regard.

As for the case in the West, there are various forms: to register an association for public utility that has legal personality. This association administers the properties according to the institutional system to which it submitted in order to get the license. It can raise funds from the public and can also receive aid from authorities as well as grants and wills.

There is the form of foundation which does not differ much from the system of the associations of public utility with regard to their resources. But there is one big difference in the French law which is that the grants given to the foundation needs an administrative license to receive donations.

Moreover, the acknowledgement of the foundation needs a decree from the State Council which is the highest judicial body in France.

In conclusion:

There must be a comprehensive outlook to the status quo of endowments in the West and the future horizons to find a suitable form that allows the promotion of endowments in the Western circles while sticking at the same time to the basic principles of endowments in the Islamic shari`ah.

Finally, there are many fields of Islamic endowment in the West; the most important of which are: the field of calling to the way of Allah; the educational field; the social field; and the field of scientific researches, as elaborately explained by Dr. `Abd al-Majeed al-Najjar in his paper “Maqasid al-Waqf fi al-Gharb“.

It is probably right to make a list of Muslims’ needs in these fields.

Allah is the One who grants success.

Abdullah ibn al-Sheikh Mahfudh ibn Bayyah

Jeddah 23 Rabi` al-Awwal 1426 AH.

Lutfi `Abdullatif – Riadh: The prominent jurist, Sheikh `Abdullad Al-Mahfudh bin Bayyah, emphasised that the participation of Muslims living in the West in political activity, whether via nomination or election, is not by any means tantamount to devotion to disbelief or coming out the fold of Islam. Rather, such participation is a requirement of residence in the concerned lands. It is one of the legal rights of citizenship which does not contradict Islam, as many incidents in the biography of the Prophet confirm.

Undoubtedly, permitting Muslims to participate in the concerned political activity promotes their interests and protects them against being isolated in their Western societies. In addition, Sheikh Bin Bayyah stated that it is permissible for Muslims living in the West to work with existent political parties in a manner that conforms to interests of the Muslim community. The fact that leaders of such parties are non-Muslims does not change the situation as the majority of Westerners are non-Muslims.

Muslims living in the West are only a minority but they have their own interests and issues. Sheikh `Abdullah bin Bayyah added: “Muslim youth in the West face great challenges. The future of such challenges will determine the final conditions of Islam and Muslims in Western lands. This is because if the youth oppose their loyalty to Islam and abandon their religion entirely, Islam will no longer exist in the West and Muslims will melt away in the Western society. On the contrary, if youth stick to Islam; the outcome will be pleasant.” Besides, the Sheikh pointed out: “The so-called issue of “minorities’ rights” is a false one.” He proceeded: “There should not be any terminological disagreement. Minorities’ jurisprudence is not separated from general Islamic fiqh. It is part of it and it is based on Qur’an, Sunnah, ijma`(consensus of scholars), and qiyas (analogy) i.e. the four origins of shari`ah (Islamic law).

On the other hand, Muslims living in the West have their own problems and difficult conditions that range between strong juristic necessity and need. Therefore, such conditions have to be dealt with according to jurisprudence of ‘facilitation objectives’. This does not mean innovating new fiqh. Rather, it signifies considering real conditions.” Sheikh Bin Bayyah then elaborated: “Reality as well as Muslims’ issues in the West prompts us to discuss jurisprudence of minorities. The European Council for Fatwa is a league of scholars, du`ah ‘callers to Islam’, and jurists. It gives fatwas ‘Islamic legal opinions’ on issues of Muslim minority in the West while abiding by principles of shar` (Islamic law).

Source: Al Madinah newspaper

In the aftermath of the Cairo-based Court of Administrative Justice’s decision clearing the way for Egyptian Baha’is to obtain proper identification papers, Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, Vice-President of the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) and professor at King Abdulaziz University (KAU) in Jeddah, told Al-Watan newspaper, “I cannot criticize the Egyptian court ruling, as the court has its own considerations”.

“However, it is widely known that Baha’is contravene a lot of the principles of Islamic Shari`ah, and I will not change my conviction in this respect,” Sheikh Bin Bayyah confirmed.

He stated that he has never heard from them anything that can be in line with Islamic Shari`ah and that many of their beliefs and practices are plain violations of the methodology of Islam.

“Perhaps the decision was taken just for regulatory reasons,” the Sheikh concluded.

Sheikh Dr. Abdullah Bin Bayyah, Vice-President of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), stated that there is nothing wrong with declaring Saturday as an official weekend in Muslim countries, noting that this is not an “imitation” of Jews as long as there is some “interest” pursued and it is not meant to follow the Jewish holiday system.

The eminent Sheikh told Saudi Arabia’s Okaz newspaper, “Holidays and weekends are subject to the exclusive discretion of competent authorities in each country, depending on the perceived benefits”.

“It is just a coincidence, which is different from imitation,” Bin Bayyah explained, adding that weighing benefits and warding off evils in people’s lives are the determinant here, provided that there is no intention to adopt the holiday and weekend system of Jews.