Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:46:41.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Mālikī Family Waqf According to Wills and Waqfiyyāt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Aharon Layish
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Islamic system of succession is destructive of family property in that it causes its division among a great number of heirs and into uneconomic units. Succession involves a great number of participants; qur'ānic and agnatic heirs participate simultaneously (not successively)—subject, of course, to the rules of priorities and exclusions—and this increases the fragmentation of the property and the shrinking of the shares of the participants ad infinitum. Islamic law does not know the principle of primogeniture. Succession is not limited to direct descendants but includes relatives of different parentelas and different degrees of kinship to the deceased.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , February 1983 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Les habous de Tanqer. Registre officiel d'actes et de documents. Texte arabe. Archives Marocaines, XXII. Paris, 1914. A short French summary of these documents (hereinafter referred to as F.) appeared in Vol. XXIII of the same year.Google Scholar

2 1 wish to thank the late Professor Baer for encouraging me to examine the family waqf in the context of the law of succession according to the Ḥanafī and Mālikī schools and aiding me in various ways. Professor Baer and Professor David Powers read the manuscript and made valuable comments. Dr. Miriam Hoexter placed at my disposal legal documents and other material, collected by her, on the family waqf in Algeria and rendered me useful help, for all of which I am greatly indebted to her. I also thank Dr. Aviva Schussman for her assistance in the early stages of the work. It goes without saying that I alone am responsible for any errors which may have remained. The article is based on a paper submitted to the Workshop on Economic and Social Aspects of the Muslim Waqf, held under the auspices of the Institute for Advanced Studies, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, on 1–20 February 1981.

3 1 am indebted to Professor Albert Hourani of St. Antony's College, Oxford, for kindly inviting me to inspect Joseph Schacht's Papers (now at the Bodleian Library, Oxford) and extending warm hospitality to me.

4 Coulson, N. J.. Succession in the Muslim family. Cambridge, 1971, 49, 91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 ibid., p. 243; idem, ‘Bayt al-Māl’, El (second ed.), 1142.

6 Tanger, 428–9 (F., 201–2).

7 ibid., 409 (F., 189).

8 ibid., 252 (F., 103–4).

9 ibid., 258 (F., 106); Brunschvig, R., ‘'Abd’, El (second ed.), 31.Google Scholar

10 Tanger, 165 (F., 85). See also ibid., 166 (F., 85).

11 Layish, A.. Women and Islamic Law in a non-Muslim state, Jerusalem and New York, 1975. 311Google Scholar.

12 Mercier, E.,Le code du hobous ou onakf selon la législation musulmane, Constantine, 1899, 81.Google ScholarOn a modern substitute for bayt al-māl see J.N.D., Anderson, islamic Law in Africa, new impression, London, 1970, 95Google ScholarSee also Coulson, ‘Bayt al-māl’, EI(second ed.). 1141 ff.

13 Mercier. 9–11;Milliot, L., Introduction ā létude du droil musulman. Paris, 1953. 555 §652. 50.Google Scholar

14 Heffening, W. ‘Wakf’, Shorter encyclopaedia Islaw, Leiden and London, 1953,Google Scholar 1096 and the reference to Sīl indicated there, J.P., Charnay, La vie musulmane en Aagérie d'apr ćs la jursprudence de la premiére moitiére moitié du XXe siécle Paris, 1965, 106Google Scholar f.

15 Heffening, ‘Wakf’, 1097; Schacht, J., An introduction to Islamic Law, Oxford, 1964, 125–6, 134–5.Google Scholar

16 Mercier, 43

17 Tanger, f., 12.

18 See, e.g., ibid., 350(F.,154), 454–5(F.,211); Pesle, O., La théorie et la pratique des habous dans le rite malékite, Casablanca, n.d., 66.Google Scholar

19 See, e.g., Tanger, 2 (F.,33–4. 32 (F.,43). 33 (F., 43). 288 (F.,118). 294 (F.,123), 290 (F., 121), 294 (F., 122–3). (F.,137).320(F.,138). 363 (F.,160), 418 (F.,194–5). In all these cases. The reference is to a khayrī waqf. It is not always stated that the testamentary waqf was within the limits of one-third of the estate.

20 Schacht, J., ‘Early doctrines on Waqf’, Mélanges Fund K&präiilä, Istanbul, 1953, 445,Google Scholar450 and the sources indicated there, Cf.Fyzee, A. A. A., Outlines of Muhammadan Law, (third ed.)Oxford, 1964, 277Google Scholar and the source indicated in note (u).

21 See e.g., Tanger, 60 (F.,57), 167(F,,86).

22 See e.g., ibid., 292(F., 121–2), 312(F.132).

23 See e.g., ibid., 426–9 (F., 199–202). 426(F.198); Mercier, 118–19. CF Layish, A., ‘The Druze testamentary waqf’.in Baer, G. (ed.), Social and economic aspects of the Muslim waqf, (forthcoming)Google Scholar

24 Schacht, Early foctrines, 445, 450 and the sources indicated there; Schacht's papers, Waqf File. extracts from al-Mudawwana al-kubrā (ed.) SaḤnīn), , XV, 98. 99; Kitāb aḥkām al-waqf (ed.Hilāl, ) 8.106, 171; Heffening, 1097Google Scholar; Abū, Bakr Aḥmad, ‘Amr al-Shaybāni al-ma’ rūf bi'l-Khaṣṣāf, kitāb aḥkām al-waqf, [Cairo], 1904,259.Google Scholar

25 Tanger, 368 (F.161).

26 See e.g. ibid., 505 (F.234); Pesle, 74, 77, 78: Mercier, 21; Zeys, E.el, Mohammed QuidSidi, Said, Recueil d' actes et de jugements arabes avec la traducitonfranÇaise des notes juridiques, 2c ed., Alger, 1946, 23; Milliot. 556§654Google Scholar.

27 See e.g. Tanger, 48(F.,49), 398(F.,183); Pesle, 76;

28 Anderson, Africa, 77, 164.

29 Pesle, 73–4.

30 Schacht, Early doctrines, 446–7, 449 and the reference to al-Mudawwana indicated there; Anderson, J. N. D.,‘The religious clement in waqf endowments’. Journal of the Royal Central Asian Society, XXXVIII, 1951, 293; Africa, 379.Google Scholar

31 For more detail see Pesle, 61–4; Tanger, F., 12–13.

32 Pesle. 73–4.

33 ibid., 16–17.

34 Heffening, 1097; Sabatery, A., Eläments de droit musulman. Alger, 1867, 59Google Scholar 28 octobre 1865—Ben Haddon c. Kheroufa.

35 Mercier, 39; Schacht's Papers. Waqf File, extract from al-Mudawwann, XV, 102. Cf. Anderson, Africa, 77; P.Lienhart, ‘Family waqf in Zanzibar’, a paper submitted to the conference held at the East African Institute of Social Research, Makerere College, June 1958, p. 17.

36 Layish, A., ‘The family waqf and the Shar'i law of Succession accoriding to Waqfiyyāt in the Sijill of Shari'a Courts’, in BAER, G. (ed.), Social and economic aspects of the Muslim waqf, § 1A; Anderson, ‘Religious element’ 292; al-khaṣṣāf, 21.Google Scholar

37 Heffening, 1096: Sabatery, p. 55.4 novembre 1863—Ben Hammed c. Ben Mohammed: Charnay. 106: Schacht,Introduction 98. For the attitude of the Shāf'i and other schools on this question see Anderson,Africa, 54.77: Lienhart. 4: Mercier, 159.

38 See. e.g., Tanger, 408(F.189).

39 ibid..176(F..89)and 376(F.166), respectively.

40 ibid..317(f.,136).

41 Heffening, 1097; Schacht, Early doctrines, 451.

42 Tanger. 397(F., 182–3). al-hizb is either special prayers composed by the founders of orders or a sixtieth part of the Qurān. I am obliged to Professor Gabriel Bacr for pointing this out to me. See also Wehr, H., A dictionary of modern written Arabic, Beirut. 1974, 173.Google Scholar

43 Pesle, 65, 74, 78.

44 Sabatery, p. 62. 9 mai 1866—Mestoul c. Ben Melek.

45 Tanger, 426 ff. (F., 199 ff.); Coulson Succession, 41.

46 Charnay, 103–4, 108.

47 Tanger, 95(F., 68)and 424 (F. 198), respectively; Charnay, 99‘101;

48 Mercier, 131; Pesle, 62. Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’,§ IB (The spouse relict).

49 Mercier, 159; Pesle, 77; Zeys, 22. Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § IB (Children).

50 Mercier, 131.

51 Mercier, 55–6; Tanger, 398 (F.183), 400 (f., 184).

52 Coulson, Succession, 41–2.

53 Mercier, 28, 56, 64. The Ḥanbalī school extends this prohibition to any heir.See Anderson, ‘Religious element’,298; Sabatery, p.53, 23 mars 1863— Naaman Bey c.Housse; Charnay, 106.

54 See, e.g., Tanger, 48(F., 49), 398(F.,183), 400(F., 184); Pesle, 73, 74, 77.

55 Mercier, 141 ff.; Charnay, 102,105.

56 Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession ’, § IB (children) and the sources indicated in notes 34–6.

57 Pesle, 75; Mercier, 131. Cf. Milliot, p. 550§645.

58 Mercier, 159–61.

59 Milliot, p. 550§645: Sabatery, pp. 55–6, 24 däcember 1863—Ben Bouzekri c.Ben Youssef: pp.60–1, 9 janvier—Ben Brahim c. El Arabi; pp.61–2, 12 février 1866—Zeleikha c. Mohammed Cherif; pp.62.9 mai 1866—Ei Mestoul c. Ben Malek.

60 Zeys, p. 43; Sabatery, p. 63, 28 juin 1866—Ben Heussein c. Boukhalem.

61 Tanger, 426 (F., 199); Coulson, Succession, 43 f.; Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’ § IB, (Parents).

62 Coulson, Succession, 52ff., 144.

63 Tanger, 100(F., P. 70, n.6). It is not certain that the reference is to a testamentary waqf. On the ‘obligatory will’ as a remedy to the exclusion of orphaned grandsons from the succession see Coulson, Succesion, 143 f. On the Egyptian Waqf Law of 1946 which adopts the principle of representation in entitlement see Anderson, J. N. D., ‘Recent developments in Sharī’a law IX. The waqf system’, The Muslim World, XLII, 1952, 269.Google Scholar

64 Tanger, 95(F.,68) and 426 (F.199), respectively. See also Tanger, F., 12.

65 Coulson, Succession, 39, 67 ff.

66 Tanger, 71 (F., 62–3). Cf. Sabatery, p. 58. 20 mars 1865—Ben Mohammed c. Bent Mohammed.

67 Tanger, 408 (F., 488–9). See also ibid., 59 (F., P. 57, n.4)—a will in favour of nieces and a sister.

68 ibid., 371 (F., 163–4) and 168(F., p. 87, n.1), respectively. Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’,§IB (Siblings).

69 Tanger, 503 (F.232) and 494(F.228), respectively. Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § IB (Poor family members).

70 Tanger, 424 (F.198). Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and sucesion ’, §IB (Dedication to others than legal heirs).

71 Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’§ 2A.

72 For exception within the outer family circle see Coulson, Succession,92–8; Milliot, p.481§548.

73 Milliot, pp. 551–2§§646–7.

74 Mercier, 64–5. Ṫabaqa here means degree, See Mercier, 160.

75 See. e.g., ibid., 159; Tanger, 426(F., 199); Pesle, 77; Zeys, 2.

76 Mercier, 142; Tanger, 400 (F.,184); and Zeys, 22, respectivey.

77 Mercier, 160. See also ibid., 55. Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 2A (representation).

78 Tanger, 398(F.,183), 426(F., 199); Mercier, 142,160; Pesle, 77; Zeys, 22. Cf. Lienhart, 4.

79 Anderson, ‘Waqf system’, 273; Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’. §2A.

80 Mercier, 141‘9; Charnay, 105.

81 Layish, ‘Family wawf and succession’, § 2B.

82 See. e.g., Tanger, 398 (F. 183): Zeys, 22.

83 See. e.g., Tanger, 48 (F.49). 424 (F.198): Mercier, 58–9.

84 See. e.g., Tanger, 48 (F.49). 398 (F.183). 400 (F., 184); Pesle, 77.

85 Mercier, 58–9.

86 ibid., 59–62. and the Mālikī sources indicated there; Milliot, p. 553§649. Cf. Lienhart, 4.

87 Layish. ‘Family waqf and succession ’, § 2B (awlād al-ẓuhūr).

88 Pesle, 78–9 and 81, respectively, Cf. Lienhart, 17.

89 Charnay, 105. and Sabatery, p. 59. 15 septembre 1865—Boukaīb c.Roure, respectively.

90 See, e.g., Tanger, 48 (F.,49), 398(F.,183). 400 (f., 184). Cf. Pesle, 77.

91 See, e.g., Tanger, 426 (F.199), 424 (F.198); Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession ’, § 2B.

92 G.Baer, ‘The Waqf as a prop for the social system (16th-20th centuries)’, in his(ed.).Social and economic aspects of the Muslim waqf (free slaves).

93 Tanger, 408(F., 188–9) and 168(F., P. 87, n.i), respectively.

94 ibid., 95 (F., 68) and 100 (F., p. 87, n.1). respectively.

95 Such a waqfiyya see in Pesle, 74.

96 Pesle, 73.

97 Mercier,131.

98 ibid., 62–4; Pesle, 79.

99 According to Mercier, the term dhuriyya includes all the descendants of both the agnatic and cognatic branches and all of them participate in entitlement on a per capita basos; see Mercier, 64.

100 Layish. ‘Family waqf and succession ’, §2B (Cognatic relatives), See also Mercier, 57.

101 Mericier, 64.

102 Lienhart. 15.17

103 Mercier.64. Cf. Lienhart, 5;Coulson, Succession, 34–5.

104 Mercier. 64.

105 ibid., 141ff.

106 ibid., 28,64.

107 ibid., 159–62. See there for the full text of the waqfiyya, its translation into French and the author's notes.

108 For more detail see below. §III.3. Cf. Lyish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 2B (compromise between patrilineal and matrilineal system).

109 ibid., § 3A.

110 Mercier, 141 ff. Cf. Zeys, 22–3: ChRNAY, 102,105.

111 Sabatery, pp. 57–8, 8 mars 1865—Ben Aīssa. Cf. Lienhart, 3.

112 Milliot, p. 553§650; Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’ §3A. Cf. Zeys, 23.

113 Pesle, 75; Anderson, Africa, 77; Lienhart, 4.

111 Mercier, 28 (and the Malik! source indicated there), 43–4.

115 See, e.g., Tanger, 398 (F., 183), 505 (F., 234); Pesle, 74.

116 Mercier, 56; Milliot, p. 553, § 650.

117 Tanger, 426 (F., 199). Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 3B.

118 Milliot, pp. 652–3 §§ 648 and 650; Mercier, 65, 159–61.

119 See above, pp. 20–21.

120 Mercier, 65, 159–60.

121 ibid., 160.

122 ibid.

123 3Pesle, 81.

124 Mercier, 64.

125 Lienhart, 16; Charnay, 102.

126 Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 3B.

127 Cf. ibid., § 3C.

128 See, e.g., Tanger, 33 (F., 43); A. Layish, Marriage, divorce, and succession in the Druzefamily, Leiden, 1982, 320–2.

129 Charnay, 103; Sabatery, p. 54, 27 juillet 1863—Bent Sliman c. Ben el Serir. Cf. Layish,1 ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 4B(2); Pesle, 15.

130 Tanger, 48 f., 49.

131 Schacht's Papers, Waqf File; Schacht comments on an extract from al-Mudawwana, xv,

132 Lienhart, 11. See there on devices to circumvent this prohibition of the founder.

133 Milliot, p. 550 § 645; Charnay, 101;Layish, , ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 4A..Cf.Omer, Hilmi Effendi, The laws of Evqaf, trans. Tyser, C. R. and Demetriades, D. G.(second ed.),Nicosia, 1922, p. 43, art 176.Google Scholar

134 Tanger, 408 (F., 188–9). Cf. Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § IB (Poor familymembers) and the source indicated in n. 57.

135 Merrier, 56 and the source indicated there.

136 Al-Khassaf, 65; Hilmi, p. 37, art. 158; Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 4B(2).

137 Anderson, ‘Waqf system’, 268.

138 Layish, Women and Islamic law, p. 302, n. 159.

139 Coulson, Succession, 35.

140 ibid., 97. Cf.Baer, G.,Population and society in the Arab East, London,1964, 65 ff.VOLXLVI. PART 1.Google Scholar

141 Coulson, Succession, 2.

142 Mercier, 129–31.

143 Heffening, 1100; Mercier, 25–7, 4 4; Schacht, Introduction, 19; Anderson, ‘Waqfsystem ’, 257; Lienhart, 3; Baer, ‘The Waqf as a prop ’.

144 For more detail see Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession ’, Introduction.

145 Sabatery, p. 61, 12 fevrier 1866—Zeleikha c. Mohammed Cherif; Morand, M.,Études de droit musulman algerien, Alger,1910.258;Milliot, p. 550–645.Google Scholar

146 Schacht, J. and Layish, A., ‘Mahkama’, El (second ed.), Leiden and London, 1960 ff.(forthcoming).Google Scholar

147 Sabatery, p. 61, 12 fevrier 1866—Zeleikha c. Mohammed Cherif; Charnay, 106 ff.

148 Charnay, 101; Zeys, 28–30 and 30–1, respectively.

149 Sabatery, p. 58, 31 mars 1865—Ben Abd el Ouahed c. Ben Mohammed; p. 61, 12 fevrier 166—Zeleikha c. Mohammed Cherif; Schaeht. Introduction, 98–9.

150 Sabatery, p. 56, 2 mai 1864—Bent ben Chohra c. ben Chohra.

151 Zeys, 35.

152 Merrier, 56, 64, 131; Pesle, 62, 74–5; Schacht, J.,‘Law and justice’, in Holt, P. M., Lambton, A. K. S. and Lewis, B. (ed.), The Cambridge history of Islam, n, Cambridge, 1970,561.Google Scholar

153 Mercier, 131. Cf. Heffening, 1100.

154 See, e.g., Tanger, 168 (F., p. 87, n. 1); 71 (F., 62–3); and 303 (F., 126), respectively.

155 Mercier,121, 134–5.

156 Schacht, ‘Law and justice’, 561. For more detail see Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 5.

157 Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 5; Mercier, 27.

158 On this question see Layish, ‘Family waqf and succession’, § 5.

159 Pesle. 73. Cf. Charnay. 109.

160 Mercier. 44. 131; Heffening, 1100; Schacht, ‘Law and justice’, 561.

161 Merrier, 131. Cf. Charnay. 99, 105, 109.

162 Cf. Charnay, 109.