Wa-kam siqÄyatin wa-madrasa
qad aá¹£baḥat awqÄfuhÄ muná¹amisa1
How many a sabīl and school
have lost their waqfs [or have no proof]
al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AlÄ« b. SÄliḥ b. AbÄ« l-RijÄl (d. 1135/1722 or 23)
⸪
In this chapter I provide background information about the central waqf administration in Yemen. The chapter consists of two parts: The first and shorter part elaborates on what has been published about waqf in Yemen and how this literature has struggled with defining what âpublicâ waqf is. The second and longer part is a historical presentation of what is known about the development of central, public waqf administration in Yemen from the time of the first Ottoman occupation (ca. 957/1550) until today. The bulk of this historical presentation focuses on the period from Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs (r. 1161â89/1748â75) until today. Throughout this period there was a striking degree of continuity in the forms of administration and also in terms of how the central government cooperated with local elites without giving away the potential benefit that can arise from administration of waqf. In periods with a strong central government, parts of the waqf administration were further centralized and, for example, under Imam YaḥyÄ (r. 1911â1948) âunusedâ public waqfs were re-grouped to form the basis of income for the newly founded ministry of education. This chapter mainly focuses on the centralized public waqf administration. Much waqf was managed locally or even by the family of the founder, a fact that is difficult to quantify with the available sources, but one that is problematized throughout the chapter.
1 Types of Waqf in Yemen
A description of which types of waqf existed, or exist, in Yemen depends on the criteria of the âtypes.â Three such criteria are commonly used to classify waqfs:
-
According to type of expenditure/beneficiary (mosques, water supply, etc.)
-
According to types of administration (degrees and types of private and public administration)
-
According to type of income-producing asset (agricultural land, shops, etc.)
I do not address the third type here. Suffice it to say that by far the most important type of object made into waqf is agricultural land. In the cities there are also a significant number of houses and shops for rent, and waqf rental building plots.2
It is common to divide the waqf beneficiary into two types: private (ahlÄ«, khÄṣṣ, dhurrÄ«) and public (or charitable khayrÄ«, Ê¿Ämm). However, this distinction is not as clear-cut as it may seem. The rest of this chapter shows that the distinction between private and public beneficiaries does not correspond to the distinction of private and public administration, although this simple fact is often overlooked in academic representations of âtypesâ of waqf in Yemen. As I argue in several places in this book, the distinction between private and public waqf is an ideal and problematic distinction. In practice, it is just as important to distinguish between the state administered waqfs and the privately administered waqfs. First, I briefly review established typologies of waqf beneficiaries in Yemen; this is followed by a similar review of types of waqf administration. In modern western and Yemeni academic works there are several such typologies; I present them chronologically, according to when they were published:
1.1 Types of Beneficiaries of Waqf in Yemen: Types of Waqf Services
Serjeantâs typology from 1983 seems to be based on a quotation of Ḥusayn al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, who in turn quotes the minister of awqÄf at the time, al-QÄá¸Ä« Muḥammad b. Luá¹f al-á¹¢abÄḥī.3 In short it gives these beneficiaries as:
-
Mosques
-
Ê¿UlamÄʾ and religious education
-
The sick
-
Oneâs descendants [i.e., family waqf]
-
Water supply and shelter for travellers
-
Public baths
-
Animals
In 1987 the ministry and Ê¿Abd al-MÄlik Manṣūr published an official book about the ministry of awqÄf; al-AwqÄf wa-l-irshÄd fÄ« mawkib al-thawra.4 At the time, he was the deputy minister. In his book (hereafter called al-Mawkib), the list is increased to eight types.5 The types are presented without a specific historical context.
-
Mosques
-
Education
-
Descendants
-
Disabled persons (dawÅ« l-Ê¿ÄhÄt)
-
Feeding the poor
-
Expenses of the poor related to marriage6
-
Village reception halls [for hospitality towards guests]
-
Sick animals
In his book on waqf in Yemen Ḥasan ʿAlī Mijallī presents a typology that he claims was given to him by the ministry.7 This typology is much more elaborate than the previous ones and consists of the main types with a further division into sub-types:
Main types
-
Mosques
-
Education, Ê¿ulamÄʾ and the learned (al-mutaÊ¿allimÅ«n)
-
Health; support for the sick
-
Graveyards in general and graves of saints and dignitaries
-
Religious festivals of different types
-
Water services
-
Housing, roads, and travellers
-
âSocialâ; the poor, orphans, and food support
-
Animals
-
Public waqfs where the beneficiary has become unknown.
For example, âtype F, water servicesâ includes the following sub-types:8
a See Ê¿Abd al-WahhÄb Muḥammad Ê¿AslÄn, GhuyÅ«l á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: DirÄsa tÄrÄ«khiyya ÄthÄriyya wathÄʾiqiyya (Damascus and Beirut: Dar al-Fikr al-MuÊ¿Äá¹£ir, 2000).
b I have photocopies of two waqf document register entries from Zabid that specify such a beneficiary.
A typology made by Ê¿AlÄ« Muḥammad al-FarrÄn in his unpublished manuscript al-AwqÄf wa-l-tanmÄ«ya fÄ« l-Yaman9 is very similar to the one of MijallÄ« above and was probably made by the same person(s), or taken from the same sources in the ministry of awqÄf. Al-FarrÄnâs typology is the most comprehensive one available and he mentions more than a hundred types of beneficiaries.10 Unfortunately, many of these types are not, historically speaking, âprovenâ to exist at all. For instance, few, if any, waqf documents related to health services have been edited and published until now. Thus the whole field of âhealth waqfâ may very well be an important type, but we do not know much about it and how common it actually was. Al-FarrÄnâs typology is also completely ahistorical and sometimes gives the impression that it covers types of waqf outside Yemen as well. As for the focus on âYemen,â it is also problematic to mix types of waqfs from Hadramawt with types of waqfs from Sanaa for example. For instance, waqfs for Sufi lodges may be quite widespread in the ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« regions, but rare in the ZaydÄ« regions. A ânational history of waqfâ has its own logic, for example, it portrays the institution of waqf as a very important part of the national history of Yemen by including as many types of waqf as possible. The book of al-FarrÄn is by far the most detailed to date, and he does provide new historical information about waqf administration. Some of the types he mentions are indeed documented by examples of waqf documents, not to mention many types of administrative documents related to waqf.
One problem in making such typologies of waqf is that some of the âservicesâ may, in part, overlap. A mosque can, for instance, be used as a community hall, a village school, it can have a water supply facility attached to it, which in turn is important for the local inhabitants and so forth. In this case, these âextraâ services attached to the mosque âdisappearâ if any actual waqf is listed only under the type âmosques.â
So far, there is too little information available to create sound typologies of what types of waqf services existed and still exist in Yemen. Waqf for mosques, religious education, help for the poor and sick, water supply, and village community houses were certainly all important and indeed fundamental to local economic, political, and social life. Yet research has yet to establish how important each type was, in which geographical area, in which social context, and in which historical period.
1.2 Types of Waqf Administration: Public Waqf and Private Waá¹£ÄyÄ
If we look at the present-day Yemeni ministry of awqÄf and religious guidance, hereafter called the âministry,â we immediately notice a lack of transparency in their organisational structure and mode of operation. We see a ministry that has obviously inherited a structure from the pre-Republican, premodern past, but exact information is difficult to obtain and even controversial. Looking at the official information available and relying on the knowledge of various types of informants, we are quickly confused and must ask; what is the ministry actually in charge of? What is actually taking place in the ministry? And what other waqf structures and practices are there in addition to those managed by the ministry? What happened to all the individual waqfs, since what appears to remain today only relates to medium-sized and important mosques? To define waqf from the present waqf law and the present state public waqf administration as they present themselves in governmental decrees produces an opaque and even contradictory picture.
On the other hand, by looking at the historical background of todayâs public waqf administration, we can see fairly stable modes of administration, which can further help us to understand what to look for in the field and why exact information can be controversial. It is important to point out that a waqf for a public purpose does not have to be publicly managed, according to local customs and ZaydÄ« fiqh rules. Yet, what we do see over time is a clear attempt by state actors to try to draw the administration of ever more types of waqf into state structures and state controlled forms. But contrary to these state forces, we also see in waqf documents that the founder very often stipulates that he himself will have the right of administration or guardianship (naáºar, wilÄya), and subsequently, that this right passes to the âbest among his descendants,â which practically means the leading member of his family and clan. Thus many waqfs have been formed with the explicit intention that the waqf not be passed on to the government to control. In this, we can therefore see forces working the opposite way, trying to keep waqfs out of reach of the government and even outside of full public/state knowledge, in order to ensure that the waqf, in practical terms, continues to be available and useful to the descendants of the founder.
We must also remember that the construction of the state was and is highly porous. Traditionally, the state leader, the imam, delegated administrative responsibility and thereby rights and positions to local, powerful actors and families; this also often included the right to administer âclustersâ or âportfoliosâ of public waqfs. These individuals represented both the imam and the state, but also themselves and their family and clan. Furthermore, we see that these individuals often privatized the very administration by keeping administrative knowledge and even the accounts, registers, and documents to themselves. Some families and clans have administered public waqfs for centuries while states and dynasties have come and gone.11
A typology of forms of waqf administration is a very different issue from that of a typology of beneficiaries. The main divide is between what is controlled and administered by the central government through a more or less coherent structure and those waqfs that are not controlled by the government, but are privately managed. There are also several grey areas between these two. These in-between types that exist in the grey areas are mentioned and discussed below and also in chapter 7. The most well-known published historical representation of public waqf administration is part of a chapter found in Serjeant and Lewcockâs edited book á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City12 called âAdministrative Organisationâ.13
1.3 Waqf in the Chapter âAdministrative Organisationâ
After a short introductory passage, this section presents five types of waqf based on the work of al-Ṭayyib Zayn al-Ê¿ÄbidÄ«n (al-Tayib Zein al-Abdin).14 The typology presents five types of waqf, or rather, separate types of waqf that each has its own separate public administration office:
-
al-waqf al-dÄkhilÄ« (the internal waqf) and waqf al-á¹£awÄfÄ«15
-
al-waqf al-khÄrijÄ« (the external waqf)16
-
waqf al-waṣīyy (the trusteeâs waqf)17
-
al-waqf al-muthallath (the three-[tenths] waqf)
-
muthallath al-Ḥaramayn (the three-[tenths] of the holy cities)
Some clarification is necessary. First, the last two types of waqf can easily be omitted, since they do not seem to have been very important in Sanaa or Yemen. We know that there was a nÄáºir al-Ḥaramayn supervising the Ḥaramayn waqfs, and he sent funds and grain to various recipients in Mecca and Medina.18 A common narrative told by informants today is that Yemen used to send waqf grain to Mecca and Medina and also specifically to the pigeons of Mecca. Yet little if any information exists concerning the quantity of this type of waqf.
Types 1, 2, and 3 are, on the other hand, very important: Serjeant has used the commentaries of al-Abdin, who in turn refers to the so-called âTesco-report,â19 a survey of the agricultural potential around Zabid from 1971. There are two problems in this: First, Serjeant quotes al-Abdin stating that the administration of waqf al-khÄrijÄ« is controlled by a member of the founderâs family. This is not the essence of the dÄkhilÄ«/khÄrijÄ« division and was perhaps even misunderstood: As Messick states in his PhD thesis (five years before the book á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ was published), the dÄkhilÄ« administration was the administration of the waqfs related to Sanaa. The khÄrijÄ« administration was also located in Sanaa, but dealt with public waqfs elsewhere in Yemen. Thus the khÄrijÄ« administration also had sub-offices in other cities in Yemen, for example in Ibb.20 The khÄrijÄ« waqf administration is thus a parallel to the dÄkhilÄ«, and as we shall see below, it is a fairly new term introduced around 1890. The khÄrijÄ« refers to âwhat goes on out there,â from the perspective of Sanaa. Both the dÄkhilÄ« and the khÄrijÄ« administrations dealt with the same type of waqf; mainly waqfs for maintaining and funding mosques and mosque-related expenses and activities.
A second problem relates to the type âwaqf al-waá¹£iyyâ (hereafter called the waá¹£ÄyÄ). In terms of beneficiaries, this type can be both fully private, as in a family waqf, or partly or even fully public. The essence, however, is that they are administered by a descendant of the founder. Some of them were and are registered by the state and inspected by the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ, and thus they probably pay a certain percentage of the income to him. However, many such waá¹£ÄyÄ are not registered by the state at all and simply remain under private administration. This typology found in the aforementioned section of Serjeantâs book (151â152) has later been quoted uncritically by Mermier21 and Ḥusayn al-Ê¿AmrÄ«.22
In addition to Sanaa, each of the major villages and cities had its own al-waqf in definite form, or sometimes called al-waqf al-kabÄ«r. It could also be called al-awqÄf al-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ«yya, al-awqÄf al-DhamÄriyya, ThulÄʾiyya, Sharafiyya, and so on. Both the dÄkhilÄ« and the khÄrijÄ« waqf were of the same type in that they were controlled and administrated by local Ê¿ulamÄʾ and/or government appointed administrators (Ê¿Ämil, pl. Ê¿ÄmilÅ«n, or Ê¿ummÄl23). The difference between this type and that of the third type above (the waá¹£ÄyÄ), is that the third type is administered by a private individual from the family of the founder, regardless of whether the beneficiary is private or public.
1.4 The Four-Field Model of Waqf Administration
Even though the distinction between private and public beneficiaries and between private and public management is unclear, some tendencies can be seen better in a four-field model. Waqf administration is then, theoretically, broken down into four ideal types, A, B, C, and D:
Types of waqf according to type of administration and type of beneficiary.
Type A would be a typical public waqf and today these waqfs are the bulk of those administered by the ministry. The type belonging to the ministry is usually called, colloquially, waqf or awqÄf. Most of this type is agricultural land which was originally made waqf for specific mosques, but that today (should) enter into a common, national, central waqf budget.
Type B is a type of public waqf that is managed by a private individual, often a descendant of the founder. In Yemen both this type and type D (family waqf) are usually referred to as waá¹£ÄyÄ,24 not waqf (although no one with knowledge of fiqh would deny its close relation to waqf in a legal sense). Types B and D can also be combined, as is the case when there are two simultaneous beneficiaries, one private and one public. A pure family waqf (D)âprivately administered and with a private beneficiaryâis also called, colloquially, a waṣīya, pl. waá¹£ÄyÄ. The term waqf dhurrÄ« is a more formal and academic term. Chapters 5 and 7 clarify how and why the term waṣīya came into use, and why the right to private administration and guardianship is highly important.
Type C is a theoretical oddity in the table above, but in reality it exists. In the early twentieth century, some family waqfs were brought under a public inspector called nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ. Such waqfs could be, at least theoretically, placed in this type, and they are also called waá¹£ÄyÄ.25
In all of the types above, the state has always sought to maximise its control. The waqf (type A) was always under the direct control of the imam or the state, through local waqf representatives and administrators (Ê¿Ämil); at various stages the waá¹£ÄyÄ types were also registered and âinspected.â These reforms of registration and inspection (to the extent that we can call them reforms) were not very successful, and there are still some legal grey areas between types A and B, particularly regarding the exact role of the state and the role of the private administrator. Both types B and D were, and still are inspected by the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ, though his exact role is not very clear. In the theoretical usage of the table above, we should therefore make the line between private and public administration less clear, and include between the private and public a zone with varying degrees of government control. The terms âprivateâ and âpublicâ are problematic since they carry connotations of western modernity; here âpublicâ simply means that the service of the waqf was open to all (Muslims, in the case of mosques).
We must also distinguish between what ministry officials claim they control, what the state law allows them to control, what the fiqh allows them to control, and what they actually control. Not all mosques are controlled by the ministry, even in Sanaa or the larger cities. We must also realize that certain families had the right to the positions as public administrators and kept these positions for centuries, and sometimes occupied small âfiefsâ of the administration. Thus a certain family may have administered a certain mosque for generations, and still does so within the structure of the ministry of awqÄf. A very important methodological point here is that only type A would be counted as âwaqfâ in public waqf registers. The rest would often (but not always) in official surveys26 be considered âprivateâ land. The legal status of the types B and C is not considered as strong as a âpure, absoluteâ waqf (A). As I demonstrate in several places in the book, the waqf status of these waá¹£ÄyÄ is often unclear and open for interpretation, something the ideal (normative) waqf model and definitions cannot fully capture. In other words they are not âfullâ (absolute, muá¹laq) waqfs, even if this is somewhat controversial in ZaydÄ« fiqh, as we see below.
Furthermore, a waqf may have more than one administrator (mutawallÄ«). The mutawallÄ« of type A tends to be the ZaydÄ« imam and his appointed deputies, or today, the ministry of awqÄf. Yet attempts to control the waá¹£ÄyÄ saw the insertion of a second level of guardianship, the âinspectorâ (nÄáºir)27 above the mutawallÄ«s. Ideally, the imam,28 or the judiciary was the ultimate guardian of all waqf. The ministry today claims such a role, though in reality its legitimacy and powers are much more limited. The fiqh only regulates the âoldâ constellation of authority and naturally does not mention the republican state. The fiqh clearly states that the founder is free to appoint a member of his family as an administrator and that this position can remain in his family, also in the case of âpublicâ waqfs. The judiciary and the imam can only take over his position if the administrator does something illegal and leaves no descendants or appointed deputy. Or, if for some reason, the private administrator disappears.
Creating a waqf does not necessitate a state approval or registration according to ZaydÄ« fiqh, thus, the ministry and the lawmakers of today face challenges when trying to limit these private rights, by using fiqh arguments. The terms wilÄya and naáºÄra cover terms such as âguardianship,â âadministration,â âauthority,â while the meaning depends on the context. The term mutawallÄ« tends to be used for the administrator of private individual waqfs, while the term nÄáºir29 refers to the level of the minister. Naáºar, however, is often used synonymously with wilÄya as is found in many waqf documents: ishtaraá¹a al-naáºar ilÄ awlÄdihiâ¦. (âhe stipulated the authority to his sons â¦â). In this book, I use the terms âadministrationâ and mutawallÄ« wherever possible.
In practice however, many public waqfs, including mosques that are outside the control of the ministry still exist. As the state and the ministry are seen as inefficient, partly corrupt and partly illegitimate, few waqfs are now âgiven awayâ voluntarily to state administration. The waqfs that were completely taken over by the state (type A) were those in which the original founder and administrator and the related documents were lost or forgotten and thus in need of public administration. Some founders also donated waqfs to the public waqf (A) by giving away the right to their administration (wilÄya).
Because of the religious status of the institution of waqf and because of the pious character of the activities it funds, such as mosques, schools, and salaries for scholars and students, it is natural that the scholars, the Ê¿ulamÄʾ had a central role. The Ê¿ulamÄʾ tended to emphasize their independent role as neutral, apolitical guardians of society and religion, and as self-made, intellectual men. In reality, many were part of the political elite and wealthy families or supported by wealthy patrons. This adds to the grey area between public and private as the state appointed waqf administrators often came from certain privileged families (bayt, buyÅ«t) of the sayyid and qÄá¸Ä« classes.
Over time, we can expect that waqf types B, C, and D gravitate towards A as they may âloseâ connection with their original administrators and beneficiaries. In this sense, type A is, theoretically, cumulative over time. An important aspect that works counter to this accumulation is the ever-present problem of mismanagement and corruption.
We can expect an equally strong gravitation out of the table; many waqfs of types B and D revert to private property. Indeed ZaydÄ« waqf doctrine, contrary to ḤanafÄ« waqf doctrine for example, states that waqf can revert to the founderâs descendants if the designated goal of the waqf ceases to exist. In ḤanafÄ« waqf, the ultimate goal for any waqf must be type A. While in ZaydÄ« waqf, it can revert to type D.30 Type D is often considered a private matter and not as âholyâ as the other forms of waqf. Since this type was partly abolished by Imam YaḥyÄ in the 1920s, many waqfs âdisappearedâ and were dissolved and privatized.31 Martha Mundy also states that many such smaller waqfs only lasted for a generation or two.32
Before focusing on the empirical historical presentation of central waqf administration, a summary of the above reflections gives us a hypothesis to look for in the empirical presentation: The crux of validity and legality lies in the actual process of registration. If a waqf is not registered in a public register, it can more easily be reverted to private property. It should also be noted that while types B, C, and D tend to be called waá¹£ÄyÄ, type A is also at times called waá¹£ÄyÄ,33 although today this is rare. Type A is most commonly called waqf or awqÄf. In this book the terms waqf or awqÄf are used wherever possible and the term waá¹£ÄyÄ is only used when necessary. In a legal sense, they are all waqf and they are usually called waqf in the fiqh.
Over time we see that the public waqf (A) is fairly stable in terms of modes of administration. Each city or major village or hijra34 had its so-called al-waqf al-kabÄ«r: the âmain waqfâ or âthe waqfâ (al-waqf). Thus while administered as a unit, each mosque could have its own assets registered and there could be great differences in income from mosque to mosque. Often, the âmain waqfâ was conceptually attached to the main mosque, the Friday mosque or congregational mosque (al-jÄmiÊ¿), of which there was usually only one.
We see a development over time, where funds are taken from rich mosques and given to poorer mosques, but first only within the cityâs own main waqf. The funds were not shared with other cities. It is only the QÄsimÄ« imams, and certainly later under Imam YaḥyÄ, that we have clear evidence that the surplus of the main waqf was seen as a potential income for the waqfs of other cities, and this legal and administrative innovation also made it possible to control the economic surplus of the mosques. Not all mosques, and waqfs in favour of mosques, were forced equally into the main waqf; some important mosque waqfs remained fairly independent and were administered by certain families.
The main expenditure of the waqf (A) was the upkeep of the city mosques, and payments to imams, caretakers (sadana), scholars, teachers, and even students. The services that the mosques provided were not restricted to religious services only. Often the mosque had a sabÄ«l attached to it, in which case the sabÄ«l was administered as a part of the mosque. Most services other than mosques and the larger religious schools seem to have belonged to the waá¹£ÄyÄ types B or B/D which remained outside state waqf administration and supervision at least until the period of Imam YaḥyÄ.
Before the administration was centralized, any surplus could be spent locally. During periods of centralisation, it was naturally the surplus, the funds left after salaries and maintenance were paid, that the central administration wanted to take. The normal local expenses for maintenance and salaries were allowed to continue, while any surpluses were sent to Sanaa. The exact account of this history is unknown and more historical research is needed to see how much surplus was extracted in different historical periods.
2 Historical Overview of Centralized State Waqf Administration
Most of the information in the following part of the chapter, especially for the period before Imam YaḥyÄ (r. 1911â48), is taken from the most readily available Yemeni chronicles and biographical dictionaries. These were thoroughly read and quoted by Serjeant in his authoritative work á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City, but topics related to waqf are spread out and appear sporadically throughout the book. I have re-read these passages in the chronicles that Serjeant refers to, and found some additional mention of this type of information.35
In ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« fiqh, the role of administration of waqf is mainly given to the local judge. In ZaydÄ« Yemen, however, the doctrine of state polity was, at least in theory, more centralized. It was ultimately the imamâs responsibility to appoint administrators of waqfs in the event that no other person held the right to administration (wilÄya) (type A). To what extent the imam was actually able to freely appoint and dismiss tax collectors and waqf administrators was highly dependent on his power.
2.1 The Islamic Schools of Lower Yemen and the Waqfs
This book focuses on the ZaydÄ« areas of Yemen and the ZaydÄ« law school and its relation to society. The ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« areas are generally not included in this study before the ZaydÄ« military expansion to Lower Yemen and the Tihama in the mid seventeenth century. Thus the SunnÄ« sultanates like the RasÅ«lids and Tahirids are not included, that is, I do not examine waqfs in Lower and Coastal Yemen before 1636 when the Ottomans were expelled and when the ZaydÄ« QÄsimÄ« state took over these areas. In general the eastern sultanates and the Hadramawt are also not included here.36 However, a few points regarding these areas must be mentioned. The sultanate and dynasty of the RasÅ«lids centred mainly around the cities of Zabid and Taâizz. Concerning the many Islamic schools in the area, the work of IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-AkwaÊ¿, al-MadÄris al-Islamiyya37 stands as an authoritative work. It is an encyclopaedia of the Islamic schools, many of which were founded under this dynasty; several of the entries end with âand this school had plenty of waqfs attached to it.â For a study of waqfs from this period from Taâizz, see Muḥammad Ê¿Abd al-Raḥīm JÄzimâs forthcoming work.38 Many of these waqfs were later regrouped as the schools themselves disappeared or ceased operating. In Zabid, many of the waqfs for the schools were included in large clusters, such as the KawÄʾin (Zabid), and the waqf al-kabÄ«r,39 where the waqf administration of the city of Zabid was allowed to keep a part of the income and the rest was sent to Sanaa. Today these waqf clusters are partly privatized. To reconstruct what happened to the individual waqfs is an important historical task, but also a problematic one from the point of view of the new owners.
2.2 The Register of the Forgotten Mosques
In his introduction to the book MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾâ40 from 1942, al-ḤajarÄ« states that a large re-structuring of the waqfs took place in the city of Sanaa after the plague in 933/1526â27. The plague left a large number of properties without inheritors. Imam al-Mutawakkil Sharaf al-DÄ«n YaḥyÄ (d. 965/1558) took these properties and made them into new waqfs and distributed them to one mosque in every quarter of the city and made sure that each of the mosques were properly equipped and supplied with water, including basins for public domestic water supply (muttakhidhÄt). The water in the ablution pools (maá¹Ähir) was changed daily by professional water lifters (sÄnÄ«, sunÄh) using inclined well-ramps (mirnÄÊ¿, marÄniÊ¿), and the wastewater was used to irrigate the mosque gardens41 (maqshama, maqÄshim). As the inhabitants now had access to a proper mosque, they stopped using the many small, unfurnished mosques that had no water supply or lighting, and over time these mosques fell into decay, and eventually ruin; many of these disappeared completely and were built over. As for the historicity of this account, there is little evidence available, but this narrative is an example of a way to conceptualize âthe beginningâ of todayâs structure of waqf administration in Sanaa, that is, it originated from a major re-structuring after a crisis. The âforgotten mosquesâ are registered in the so-called the âregister of forgotten mosquesâ (Miswaddat al-masÄjid al-mansiyya). This register, or miswadda, is quoted numerous times in al-ḤajarÄ«âs book. Together with al-Miswadda al-sinÄniyya, these are the most quoted sources in his encyclopaedia-like work of the mosques of Sanaa. Al-ḤajarÄ« is the only historian(!) to ever have had access to these two most important documentary sources.
2.3 The First Ottoman Occupation (ca. 957â1045/1550â1636)
The Ottomans undoubtedly brought with them knowledge of centralized waqf administration from elsewhere in the Islamicate world, but there are few sources from this period that explicitly mention the organisation of waqf management. One of the documentary sources is al-Miswadda al-sinÄniyya as mentioned above; Serjeant himself was very interested in gaining access to this unique source:
[that there â¦] is one major omission in that, because of its virtual inaccessibility, we were unable to make a direct study of the Miswaddah of SinÄn PÄshÄ,42 preserved in the Chancellery of the JÄmiÊ¿ Mosque. The authorities had not, as yet, permitted it to be photographed for reference and study at leisure. During our all too brief stays in á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, with many fundamental data to establish, it was out of the question to copy out passages by hand. An edition of the Miswaddah with professional identification of places, families, etcetera, is an indispensable preliminary to anything near a comprehensive history of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ.43
Al-Miswadda al-sinÄniyya is the oldest major register of waqfs known to exist in Sanaa. The reason for focusing on this type of document in historical studies is clear; such documents give us insight into the ownership structures of the time and if subsequent registers are found and made available, changes over time can be traced. In his chapter âAdministrative Organisation,â Serjeant states,
The JÄmiÊ¿ Mosque contains a document of the highest importance for the history of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, the register, usually called Miswaddat SinÄn, of the Turkish Pasha of the first Ottoman occupation (1604â07). âHe it was,â says YaḥyÄ b. al-Ḥusayn, âWho compiled a comprehensive roll (daftar jÄmiÊ¿) of the waqfs of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, and commanded the qÄá¸Ä«s to rule on its validityâwhich they did. He appointed a number of the ulema to bear witness to this roll, including the very learned Sayyid Muḥammad b. Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n al-MuʾayyadÄ« and othersâ [â¦] In December 1973 I saw the Miswaddat SinÄn in the Chancellery of the JÄmiÊ¿, the Qubbah which contains only modern furniture and steel cupboards. It is a long, narrow but thick volume nicely bound in probably contemporary plum-coloured leather with embossed design in the middle of the covers. The paper is polished yellow-brown or buff colour and the writing is beautiful and clear to read.44
Further, he speculates on the reason he was not allowed to copy it:
Unfortunately, requests to photocopy this book have, in the past, not met with response, whether it be for some vaguely religious reason, or because so much of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ being waqf and parts of this possibly appropriated to private families there is reluctance to publish its contents. This would be a valuable source for the history of the mosques until the beginning of the 11th/17th century.45
Until today, no one has copied the register of SinÄn BÄshÄ and Serjeantâs frustration is still very much felt by western and Yemeni historians alike. The mention of al-Miswadda al-sinÄniyya marks the beginning of the chronological, historical presentation in this chapter. Throughout the periods and incidents discussed below, and until today, this register has remained in the âKaÊ¿ba-likeâ structure with a dome, called al-Qubba,46 in the middle of the courtyard of the Great Mosque in Sanaa, built by the same SinÄn BÄshÄ. The qubba and the Miswadda symbolize the very geographical and physical nexus of waqf administration in Yemen. The source Serjeant quotes above is from the chronicle by YaḥyÄ b. al-Ḥusayn, GhÄyat al-amÄnÄ«.47 The same chronicle states that in the year [1016/]1607â08 SinÄn PÄshÄ was exchanged with BÄshÄ JaÊ¿far. At the end of the description of the happenings of that year, the author remarks dryly: âIn these days BÄshÄ JaÊ¿far killed Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-BawnÄ«, NÄáºir al-Waqf in Sanaa, because of the complaints from the inhabitants of the city of his confiscation of their properties and including them into the waqf.â48 This passage is the first account, according to the sources available and used in this study, of the position of nÄáºir al-waqf, a public waqf minister or âinspector.â In the forthcoming work of Muḥammad JÄzim on waqfs in Taâizz, we know that in 1595 there was an Ottoman naÌzÌ£ir al-nuzÌ£zÌ£aÌr by the name BahÄʾ al-DiÌn b. QaÌsim; he served under the vizier of Yemen, HÌ£asan BÄshÄ.49 Thus we may assume that the Ottomans brought with them new ideas of forms of centralized waqf administration and supervision, but we do not know much about this from historical sources. They certainly sought to coordinate the waqf administration over geographical areas that the ZaydÄ«s had not held before, as it was from this period and onwards that Lower Yemen50 and the TihÄma were also, in theory, controlled from Sanaa. In practice, in terms of actual control over waqf administration, we cannot expect the Ottomans to have achieved much outside the major cities and towns they occupied.
3 Waqf Administration Under the QÄsimÄ« Dynasty (1045â1289/1636â1872)
Starting with the Ottoman notion of a state waqf inspector, nÄáºir al-waqf, we see that from this point on in history, the state tried to increase its role in waqf administration and even interfered and included individual waqfs and types of waqf that originally were not related to the state at all. The ZaydÄ« Imam al-QÄsim b. Muḥammad (d. 1029/1620), also called al-QÄsim the Great, led the wars against the Ottomans for several years and his son al-Muʾayyad Muḥammad (d. 1054/1644) finally evicted them in 1045/1636. The following imams were his descendants (hence the QÄsimÄ« dynasty)51 and during their reign, the state quickly expanded to include the fertile western mountains and Lower Yemen as well as the coastal plain, TihÄma. For a short while they also held Hadramawt and Aden. The QÄsimÄ« state sustained itself to a large extent on the tax income from the rich agricultural areas south and west of Sanaa. During much of the seventeenth century and into the eighteenth century, they held a monopoly of production of coffee for the world, an income that mainly came from Lower Yemen.
The QÄsimÄ« state mainly ruled over ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« areas and especially towards the end of their rule, they were ZaydÄ« imams and rulers in name, but only loosely controlled the tribal and ZaydÄ« areas north of Sanaa. The later QÄsimÄ« imams separated the office of the imam into a political leader called the imam and a religious and legal leader, called the chief qÄá¸Ä« or the shaykh al-Islam, of which Muḥammad al-ShawkÄnÄ« (1760â1834) was the most famous. In doctrinal matters, the state made use of SunnÄ«-oriented scholars, creating a grey area between HÄdawÄ«-ZaydÄ«s and traditionists,52 or neo-SunnÄ« doctrines in theology and law.
The QÄsimÄ« state did not remain intact until 1872. In the very beginning of the nineteenth century they started losing control over the coastal areas, which were first taken by the WahhÄbÄ«s and later by the Egyptians. It is doubtful that they ever directly controlled the tribal areas of the north, and the various regional governors could have quite independent powers, at times even branching off into separate states (dawlas). In the mid nineteenth century the QÄsimÄ« state was dissolving and local elites ruled the fertile south and west. The Ottomans gradually took over the coastal areas and subsequently the southern highlands (Lower Yemen) until they took Sanaa permanently in 1872.53
During the period of the QÄsimÄ« dynasty we see a development of state-like structures. The QÄsimÄ«s developed a system of ministers and governors.54 Taxation, especially from the fertile western mountains and lower Yemen, was crucial for the income for the state. The tax system was complicated, and involved several types of taxes. It was often collected from the areas of relative political stability such as the western mountains and Lower Yemen, while the strong tribes in the north paid less tax and their shaykhs were allowed to keep a large part for themselves. A dual system of harvest estimators (khurrÄá¹£) and tax collectors was at times employed,55 and the tribal system became part of the structure of tax collection, in the sense that the tribes were collectively responsible for the tax burden. The powerful shaykhs of the north were given a portion of the taxes for themselves; this was done to enhance their loyalty and to discourage tribal attacks on the state. The northern tribes were used as auxiliary armies and were commissioned to subdue the population in the fertile Lower Yemen.
Perhaps the most important sources of the history of state waqf administration can be found in the many biographical dictionaries, encyclopaedia, and chronicles that exist from this period. Below I review quotations from these sources in order to assess the tools that the state used in their attempt to take control of an increasing number of and types of waqf.
As an example of the many small mentions in the biographical dictionaries, we can read that a certain Muḥammad b. MahdÄ« l-ShabÄ«bÄ« l-DhamÄrÄ« was in charge of (tawallÄ) the waqf of Jibla and the areas of Ibb. He died in 1729 or 1730.56 Below we follow the references to several such persons and incidents. By paying attention to their titles, the areas they controlled, and their relationship to the political power, we can learn how the public, central administration of waqf developed over time.
3.1 Aḥmad QÄá¹in al-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ« (d. 1199/1785)57
Al-QÄá¸Ä« Aḥmad QÄá¹in al-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ« was born in ḤabÄba in 1118/1706. He studied in nearby ShibÄm and KawkabÄn. ZabÄra quotes al-ShawkÄnÄ« who states that QÄá¹in was administrator of the awqÄf in ThulÄʾ58 (walÄ« l-awqÄf al-thullÄʾiyya) for a period. Later Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs (d. 1189/1775) made him administrator of the awqÄf of Sanaa (wallÄhu al-awqÄf al-á¹¢anÊ¿Äniyya).
ZabÄra quotes different historiansâ views of QÄá¹inâs life and biography; these often give slightly diverging stories, for example, in the details of the many disputes he was involved in and the speculations about the reasons he fell from favour with the imam.
Al-ShawkÄnÄ« states in his Badr that QÄá¹in was a student of the then chief qÄá¸Ä« in Sanaa, al-Sayyid Aḥmad al-ShÄmÄ«. For some reason, and al-ShawkÄnÄ« states exactly âfor some reasonâ (ḥÄditha kÄna bi-sabbabihÄ Ê¿uzila á¹£Äḥib al-tarjama) QÄá¹in was dismissed as a waqf administrator: Under Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs he was also appointed judge of ThulÄʾ and built a great house there. He fell out with the scholar QÄsim al-KibsÄ«. Apparently, QÄá¹in managed to convince the imam to give him a third of the waqf administrator position and salary (Ê¿amÄla) from ThulÄʾ.59 Al-KibsÄ« went to the imam and claimed that a crime had been committed (iḥtaá¹£aba Ê¿alayhi) when QÄá¹in built his house (illegally) on top of a graveyard. It is not clear if this was the real reason for his imprisonment. This may be the first source mentioning that the imam delegated the position as public waqf administrator for an area outside Sanaa and that with this position also came the right to take percentages of the whole income (as will be shown below, usually 10 per cent). Further, al-ShawkÄnÄ« states: âWhen he administered the awqÄf, the income of the awqÄf increased significantly.â60
There was a strong disagreement between QÄá¹in and the chief qÄá¸Ä« YaḥyÄ l-SaḥūlÄ«. QÄá¹in was jailed in the fortress of Sanaa for two years by Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs because of this quarrel. Positions turned around âin matters too long to discuss hereâ and he was later pardoned again. Al-SaḥūlÄ« himself was imprisoned in 1758â59 while QÄá¹in was given the role as inspector (al-nÄáºir) over the awqÄf of âLower Yemen and ThulÄʾ and other areasâ and he was made head of the imamic dÄ«wÄn, or something like prime minister (wa-jaÊ¿alahu raÊ¿Ä«s al-qaá¸Äʾ bi-l-dÄ«wÄn al-imÄm). He was then jailed for a second time in 1774â75; Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs died shortly after and al-MahdÄ«âs son, Imam al-Manṣūr Ê¿AlÄ«, pardoned QÄá¹in.61 As for the reason he was imprisoned, QÄá¹in himselfâ62 produced a rather lengthy and complicated story around his legal position in the question of the imamâs right to take and decide over the zakÄt of waqf lands:63 âSÄ«dÄ« l-MawlÄ [al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs] May God grant him mercy, said to me relating to the issue of zakÄt of the waqf; it was indeed to be paid (tuqbaá¸)â¦. Al-FaqÄ«h Aḥmad al-NihmÄ« pressured me because of this and MawlÄna al-MahdÄ« [al-Ê¿AbbÄs] did the same.â64 QÄá¹in himself continues and explains:
In the waqf of Sanaa, there are stipends (muqarrarÄt) for the poor. I showed him, by opening the books,65 the way the zakÄt had been used. And I said to them, âthis is the usage! And to change this is injustice! (áºulm).â Then al-MahdÄ« became quiet for some days and observed the management of the waqf and its incomes and left the issue. Instead he decided to take some of the administratorâs salary (Ê¿amÄla). The imam gave to the waqf administrator, shaykh Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ«, two thirds only â¦66
Here we gain some insight into the intrigues between âcivil servants.â We can see that the imam had power, but that he was at the same time dependent on the knowledge and loyalty of his civil servants. As a state waqf administrator, Aḥmad QÄá¹in had several secretaries; one of them was Muḥammad Aḥmad al-SharafÄ« (d. ca. 1800). QÄá¹in states âhe was my secretary the days I worked in the waqfâ (kataba maÊ¿Ä« ayyÄm Ê¿amÄlatÄ« fÄ«-l-waqf).67 Another secretary was Zayd b. Muḥammad al-ShÄmÄ«.68 The term Ê¿amÄla is important here: It seems to mean both the position as a waqf inspector and the salary itself. Aḥmad QÄá¹in died in 1785.69
3.2 Al-QÄá¸Ä« l-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« (d. 1187/1773)
Al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AbdallÄh MuḥyÄ« l-DÄ«n al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« was appointed to be public waqf administrator when Aḥmad QÄá¹in was dismissed, as mentioned above. ZabÄra quotes al-Sayyid IbrÄhÄ«m b. Muḥammad al-AmÄ«r who states about al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« that: â⦠he was the walÄ« of the awqÄf of Sanaa and later for all of Yemen. He improved the income and gave to the poor. He took control (á¸abaá¹a) of all awqÄf in Yemen by setting up waqf registers (miswaddÄt) and this had never been done by anyone before him.â70 QÄtin states: âAl-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« was walÄ« l-awqÄf after me. And Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs gave him only two-thirds of an Ê¿ushr whereas my Ê¿amÄla used to be a full Ê¿ushr [10 per cent], which is the usual Ê¿amÄla.â71 Here the size of the salary of the public waqf administrator is confirmed. This is no small sum. As we shall see, this tenth seems to be a norm that was kept until today. Al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« died in 1773.72 Around 1750, al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs appointed Aḥmad b. á¹¢Äliḥ b. AbÄ« l-RijÄl to be a secretary of the awqÄf (kitÄbat al-awqÄf). AbÄ« l-RijÄl worked under the mutawallÄ« l-awqÄf, Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« and âthey met every week to discuss the matters related to the interests of the awqÄf.â73 The role of the secretaryship was kept in the family of (bayt) AbÄ« l-RijÄl from about 1750 until 1938â39!74
3.3 Al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad Ê¿Ämir (d. 1196/1782 or 83)
When al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ« died, Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad Ê¿Ämir was appointed by Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs in 1773 to be nÄáºir al-awqÄf. He and Imam MahdÄ« quarrelled over his salary; Ê¿Ämir wanted a full tenth (Ê¿ushr), and after some days of negotiations, the imam gave in.75
Apparently, Ê¿Ämir was skilled in waqf administration and knew how to extract the most of the potential income. Before the appointment, he had worked for QÄá¹in as his assistant (muÊ¿ayyan). This is a clear example of how the imam was dependent on knowledgeable administrators. It is also an example of how the inspection or administration of public waqf was âoutsourcedâ to scholars in a way similar to that of tax fiefs, which were given to local shaykhs.
ZabÄra quotes Aḥmad QÄá¹in, who says that he was a close friend of al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad Ê¿Ämir. QÄá¹in gives us important information about the waqf administration of Ê¿Ämir:
Ê¿Ämir was a waqf walÄ« in the areas of Taâizz for a period. He took back lands that had been illegally taken from the waqf and he revived the mosques and there were no complaints. Then later, a delegation of some of those who had taken waqf lands went to Sanaa and complained about him, and they continued to do so until al-Badr [Muḥammad b. IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l] al-AmÄ«r and QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿Abd al-JabbÄr believed them and gave in.76
Here QÄá¹in explains the essence of the problem:
In waqf there is a something called âwaqf paymentâ (á¸arÄʾib) which is the âmother of problemsâ (umm al-á¹£awÄʾib). QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿Abd al-JabbÄr told me himself that Ê¿Ämir was the walÄ« of the waqf of Yemen and that some of the waqf tenants (shurakÄʾ al-waqf) came to him and they agreed to pay a fixed rent for the waqf and further, to pay a fixed rent for the waqf land every year, whether there was a harvest or not (sawaʾan kÄna hunÄka thamara aw lÄ). And this situation is now continuing. So even if al-Ê¿Ämir is removed, another Ê¿Ämil waqf would take his place and the same people will complain to him about the size of the waqf rent. Subsequently, and over time, they will pay a rent a little lower than before.77
Here QÄá¹in criticises the problem inherent in fixed rents, as opposed to a sharecropping agreement. A fixed rent payment is easier to complain about, especially during years of drought when such a payment could be presented as âunfair.â What we do not know is whether this was a practice that existed under Ê¿Ämir only or if it was more common. In fiqh, as we see in chapter 6, the sharecropping type of leases seem to be the most prevalent and considered more âsafeâ for the waqf. Fixed leases would, however, be cheaper to administer since it is not necessary to assess the harvest every year in order to estimate the rent, thus the episode described above could be an example of an âadministrative shortcutâ made by Ê¿Ämir. The term á¸arÄʾib in waqf leases reappears in al-ShijnÄ«âs (d. 1201/1786 or 87) fatwÄ translated in chapter 7, which indicates that the á¸arÄʾib type of payment was common around the time of the fatwÄ.78 These lease practices are an important part of waqf and more research is needed in order to draw conclusions.
When Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs died and his son Imam al-Manṣūr Ê¿AlÄ« took over in 1776, the new imam dismissed (Ê¿azalahu) Ê¿Ämir and Sayyid Muḥammad al-Ḥaá¹aba was appointed (Ê¿ayyanahu) to the position as waqf administrator. The reason for this, according to JaḥḥÄf,79 was Ê¿Ämirâs protest when the minister Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥasan al-AkwaÊ¿ built a mosque (Masjid ḤurqÄn) and did not establish, simultaneously, any waqfs for the mosque. When al-AkwaÊ¿ wanted to register it in the general waqf register (al-miswadda al-Ê¿Ämma), Ê¿Ämir refused to do this since it would have provided the mosque with âfreeâ income from the main Sanaa waqf. The quarrel resulted in Ê¿Ämirâs dismissal. Ê¿Ämir died in 1196 or 97/1782 or 83. Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥasan al-AkwaÊ¿ was appointed nÄáºir al-waqf, though probably not for long; Muḥammad al-Ḥaá¹aba took the position after him.80
3.4 Al-Sayyid Muḥammad b. Ḥasan al-Ḥaá¹aba (d. 1205/1791)
Al-Sayyid Muḥammad b. Ḥasan al-Ḥaá¹aba took over the position as the public waqf inspector (tawallÄ naáºÄrat al-awqÄf). He lowered the wages for some of the employees (ahl al-waáºaʾif wa-aÊ¿mÄl al-waqf) and sent the resulting surplus to the public treasury (bayt al-mÄl). He became highly unpopular81 and died in 1206/1791.82 As for regional waqf administrators in this period, there are, for example, references to a certain Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« b. Aḥmad b. Ê¿AlÄ« (d. 1198/1784) who was mutawallÄ« waqf DhamÄr.83 This indicates that other cities had their own âmain waqf,â but we do not know the nature of their relationship to the government in Sanaa; nor do we know to what extent these regional waqf administrations were required to send the surplus to the capital.
3.5 Al-KhafanjÄ«âs (d. 1180/1766 or 67) Poem
Al-KhafanjÄ«âs poem, translated in Serjeantâs á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,84 is a qaṣīda85 that portrays a comic drama in rhyme. In the poem, the various mosques of Sanaa are each given personalities. The drama is about a poor little mosque, the Ê¿Addil Mosque, which feels sorry for itself and dreams of becoming something more important and grandiose. The mosque complains about his state and looks to other, richer mosques, and asks them for support. The JÄmiÊ¿ (the JÄmiÊ¿ al-KabÄ«r) is portrayed as very rich. Several of the other mosques present their case for the JÄmiÊ¿ and the JÄmiÊ¿ replies, after some time, that he unfortunately cannot help them since the waqf documents86 seem to have been lost. The Ê¿Addil Mosque is poor, has no waqf lands of his own, and dreams of becoming a rich mosque with a garden, a waqf shop to provide rental income; it dreams of being well-supplied with lamp oil and water, having a paid imam and a muʾadhdhin, and being a place where the âAzhÄr,87 the BayÄn,88 and the Mulḥaâ89 are taught. The poem is full of humour that is difficult to reproduce; one example is the small mosqueâs dream to perform the call to prayer so loud that the jinn would fart when they heard it. The political and legal problem that this poem raises is the issue of distributing waqf income from rich mosques to poorer ones; that is, the inter-beneficiary transfer of funds (called inter-beneficiary because both waqfs have the same type of beneficiary, in this case, mosques). There were certainly rich and poor mosques at this time. Opening the legal possibility of transferring income between them leads to the problem of potentially disrespecting the foundersâ will. But, if this will is no longer present in the form of public memory or documentation, then it is clearly tempting to take a more flexible stand on these questions. As I point out below, the tendency to allow transfers between waqfs within the public waqf administration has increased over time until today.
3.6 An Open Letter from Muḥammad b. IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-AmÄ«r to Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs (1180/1767)
In what became an important and well-known incident in the history of the waqf in Sanaa, the great scholar al-Badr Muḥammad b. IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-AmÄ«r (d. 1183/1769)90 (hereafter called Ibn al-AmÄ«r) wrote a letter in 1181/1767 in which he publicly criticised Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄsâs effort to exchange the waqf lands of ShuÊ¿Å«b, outside Sanaa, for those of other areas. The imam would have benefited from this because he had repaired the irrigation system called Ghayl al-BarmakÄ« and Ghayl al-Aswad91 that conducted water to the ShuÊ¿Å«b area just north of Sanaa, outside the city walls, and he wanted the waqf land as his own private property, now more fertile because of the repaired irrigation system. To do this, he needed to âmoveâ the waqf lands92 somewhere else. His attempt was criticized and the episode became an example of how independent, free speaking Ê¿ulamÄʾ tried to correct what was perceived as corrupt government behaviour in waqf management.
Ibn al-AmÄ«r was born in 1688 and was a well-known and respected scholar with neo-traditionist leanings, that is, a SunnÄ«-oriented ZaydÄ« scholar of Yemen. He studied in several cities in Yemen and several times went to the holy cities (Mecca and Medina) for hajj and to study. He was a judge and a preacher in the Great Mosque (al-JamÄ«Ê¿ al-KabÄ«r). In 174893 Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs made him waqf administrator of Sanaa (wallÄhu awqÄf á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ wa-bilÄdihÄ), but shortly after he withdrew from the position. Ibn al-AmÄ«r became unpopular in the eyes of the ZaydÄ« imam and his family, in particular for not mentioning the name of the imam during the Friday sermon (this practice was customary as a way of recognizing the hierarchy of power) in the Great Mosque of Sanaa where he was a preacher. He was imprisoned, but his biographer says he turned the prison into a place of study; scholars came to discuss and learn from him, especially the ḥadÄ«th sciences.94
In ZaydÄ« fiqh exchanging (istibdÄl)95 a waqf asset is fully legal, in fact there are few arguments against it. The validity hinges upon the interests of the waqf in question, and indeed, if it is in the interest of the waqf to do so, then changing the asset is required. In practice, however, waqf assets are often ascribed a special âholyâ status, and changes of waqf are often viewed with suspicion.96 The question here is more complicated, because Imam al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs wanted to âmoveâ the waqf properties out of ShuÊ¿Å«b to somewhere else, so that he could benefit from the land value, which increased after he repaired the irrigation system. And the argument against such an exchange in the letter from Ibn al-AmÄ«r to Imam al-MahdÄ« does not address this very particular fact, but rather criticizes the more general idea of âselling and buying waqf.â Further, it builds on the notion that a waqf asset has a more âholyâ status than other forms of property. In his argument in favor of this, he mentions several details about which types of waqfs existed at the time and important details about the waqf type called waá¹£ÄyÄ as we see below. The edited letter, dated 1767, is found under the entry of âal-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄsâ in the biographical encyclopaedia Nashr al-Ê¿arf. The main part is translated below, and divided into sections. After a long and eloquent introduction, Ibn al-AmÄ«r directly criticizes the waqf transactions:
[⦠A]nd the worst of sins is that of the purchase (shirÄʾ) of the awqÄf and its exchange from waqf into private property. Our Lord [the imam] did, after all, invalidate the sale undertaken by the former waqf administrator (Ê¿Ämil), the one who was administrator before al-Shaykh al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ«, and took it back according to what is right, and so be it.97
Here, Ibn al-AmÄ«r refers to the waqf administrator âbefore al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ«,â which was Aḥmad QÄá¹in, mentioned earlier in this chapter. It seems that QÄá¹in also sold some of the waqf lands, but that these sales were later invalidated by the Imam and al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ«. Ibn al-AmÄ«r gives the Imam MahdÄ« credit for this corrective action. Then comes a long section in which Ibn al-AmÄ«r claims that privatizing waqf is illegal in principle because of its âholy status.â It is a peculiar argument since we are presumably talking about an âexchangeâ (istibdÄl), which is legal when it is done in the interest of the waqf; however, Ibn al-AmÄ«r focuses on the aspect of privatization in isolation, that is, on the fact that the imam wanted to buy the waqf lands personally.
You know the statements of the Ê¿ulamÄʾ of your time and your judges; that selling waqf is ḥarÄm! I have attached a list with their signatures, and my signature is the first one. You surely know that the first waqf in Islam was the waqf of Ê¿Umar b. al-Khaá¹á¹Äb, may God be pleased with him, and according to him, the Prophet, peace be upon him and his descendants, came and he [Ê¿Umar] said; Oh Prophet of God, I have acquired land [of quality or quantity] that I have never acquired before, and I want to undertake an act of charity with it, in order to become closer to God (an ataqarraba bihi ilÄ AllÄh taÊ¿ÄlÄ). The Prophet said: âRetain the asset and give away its fruitsâ (ḥabbis al-aá¹£l wa-sabbil al-thamara). And [according to] the wording of al-BukhÄrÄ«, the Prophet said: âNot to be sold, not to be given away, but its fruits are to be enjoyed,â and in an account by al-DhahabÄ«: âGive away its fruits and retain the asset, not to be sold and not to be inherited.â And he [Ê¿Umar] did so, and therefore the restriction of sale is in the essence of waqf. The jurists therefore say that Godâs property is not to be taken out of the state of waqf (lÄ yukhraj Ê¿an al-waqfiyya) under any circumstances. And Our Lord [al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs] is the best among living men created by God to execute the orders of his grandfather [the Prophet].98
These ḥadÄ«ths are often quoted in fiqh as the foundation of the institution of waqf, and they are widely used and known. The wording ânot to be sold, not to be given awayâ is a phrase that is very often found in individual waqf documents. Following this is a section that is very important to understanding the difference between waqf and waá¹£ÄyÄ in ZaydÄ« Yemen (the issue is also further elaborated in chapter 7):
So, the sale of waqf is prohibited as are other types of transactional dispositions of waqf (munÄqala bihi). Yes, it is legal (ḥalÄl) to sell a waṣīya that has been donated [in exchange] for reading the QurʾÄn and the waṣīya for charities, and also to exchange them (ibdÄluhÄ) with something that is better and more useful. These are not waqf (hÄdhihi laysat awqÄfan)99 and therefore it is also legal to sell what the administrators (Ê¿ummÄl) [of this type of waqf] have acquired from the surplus of the waqf since it is not waqf [in the first place]. Property cannot be owned by [something] inanimate (al-jamÄd) and the acquired [object obtained by the] surplus is not the property of the administrator, because he has not paid anything for it from his own pocket, but with income from the waqf; thus this surplus [and the land or objects bought from this surplus] is not the property of anyone and if there is a preponderant interest, then it can be legally sold, but it is not a true purchase (bayÊ¿ ḥaqÄ«qÄ«), but more of a bilateral transaction (muÊ¿Äwaá¸a), because it is not the property of the administrator. Few have proper knowledge about these issues.100
He is quite explicit in stating that waá¹£ÄyÄ is not awqÄf and that the restrictions on the sale of waqf do not concern waá¹£ÄyÄ. He ascribes the right of istibdÄl to the waá¹£ÄyÄ type and thereby he implicitly101 claims that it might not be legal in awqÄf. He seems to bolster the notion of restricting the sale of waqf and upgrading it to be considered ḥarÄm. Again, to the vast majority of jurists, a sale is indeed valid if it is part of an istibdÄl (a waqf asset exchange), so making the sale absolutely invalid, as Ibn al-AmÄ«r does, is a peculiar argument. He seems rather to construct a new difference between awqÄf and waá¹£ÄyÄ: awqÄf cannot be sold, while waá¹£ÄyÄ can.
The second half of the paragraph above refers to another topic in waqf fiqh; whether or not a thing bought from the surplus of the waqf automatically becomes waqf, or if it remains private property (milk), and thereby âfree,â and âsaleable.â This is a matter discussed in detail in the waqf chapter of the Sharḥ al-azhÄr and the madhhab favours102 the view that such objects do not acquire waqf status.103 So again, Ibn al-AmÄ«r argues in an unconventional way, though he was probably using arguments that were more or less known among his intended readers. We should not see the section above as mainly a jurisprudential argument with the aim of affirming law or fiqh, but rather as an argument against contemporary âhumanâ political interference in the specific awqÄf cases of Sanaa. It is thus more a political critique, or one framed in populist terms, and this is probably the reason his arguments are more polemical than logical extracts of ZaydÄ« fiqh debate. He continues:
Note Our Lord, that the best [agricultural] properties in Sanaa are those at ShuÊ¿Å«b since they are so close to the city. They are useful for the mosques in terms of herbs (qaá¸b), tamarisk trees (athl), [they] supply grain continuously, and [because of] their proximity, therefore, there is nothing that can replace these lands. It is hoped and indeed also expected that with your good intention, which God will hopefully reward, the water tunnel that was buried for so long will be re-excavated to irrigate the waqf lands at ShuÊ¿Å«b in order to provide grain for those on the pay lists of the waqf (ahl al-waáºÄʾif).104 Indeed, every year since the first waqf administrator they have been deprived of four months of salary.105 By God, look to your grandfather, al-MahdÄ« Aḥmad b. al-Ḥasan,106 may God show him mercy, how he excavated his water tunnel in al-Rawá¸a107 and made it available for the people, and [he] made the grapes for the people,108 without taking any of the surplus, so God blessed him. And the grapes that he irrigated became the best grapes in al-Rawá¸a and are sold for a high price because of his pious intention and deed. This ghayl (water channel) belongs to the public treasury (buyÅ«t amwÄl) and was constructed by dirhams from the public treasury and therefore it was not for him to take the surplus privately, and because of his pious intention, God passed on his rule (khilÄfa) to his descendants for more than eighty years.109
In this section of the letter, Ibn al-AmÄ«r describes the importance of the waqf lands at ShuÊ¿Å«b for the mosques and for those on the pay lists (ahl al-waáºÄʾif), be they mosque caretakers, preachers, teachers, students or worthy poor. He points out that he expects the imam to proceed with the restoration of the water supply system, but that he should do it for the awqÄf like his (great-) grandfather did, not for himself.
In the last paragraph of the letter, not included in the translation above, Ibn al-AmÄ«r points out to al-MahdÄ« that he has become one of the richest imams in the history of Yemen, and receives private income even from distant southern areas such as Qaá¹aÊ¿ba and RadÄÊ¿, and he reminds him that he should show gratitude towards God for this wealth.
ZabÄra states in the end (presumably still quoting QÄá¹in) that this advice from Ibn al-AmÄ«r made an impression on the imam, and the imam left the waqf lands at ShuÊ¿Å«b as they had been in the past.
3.7 Other Waqf Administrators
Ibn al-AmÄ«râs son, IbrÄhÄ«m b. Muḥammad b. IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-AmÄ«r (d. 1213/1799) was also a waqf administrator: âHis father helped him in the naáºÄrat al-waqf.â110 In 1802 we know that Sayyid IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l b. al-Ḥasan al-ShÄmÄ« was Ê¿Ämil al-awqÄf111 (1741 or 1742â1819). He was a deputy of al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad Ê¿Ämir (kÄna yanÅ«bu Ê¿anhu fÄ« kathÄ«r min al-aÊ¿mÄl112) and later worked for the waqf of the city of ThulÄʾ. After that, he took over the waqf of Sanaa and settled into that position (istaqarra fÄ« wilÄyat waqf á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ).113 Some time after this, the position was given to SÄlim Muḥammad al-ṬashshÄ«. In 1816 the chief qÄá¸Ä« al-ShawkÄnÄ« advised Imam al-MahdÄ« Ê¿AbdallÄh to replace the Ê¿Ämil al-awqÄf al-ṬashshÄ« with the aforementioned IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l b. Ḥasan al-ShÄmÄ«114 When al-ShawkÄnÄ« was writing the Badr, al-ShÄmÄ« was still in charge of the awqÄf of Sanaa.115
A few months later, in the beginning of 1817, Imam al-MahdÄ« Ê¿AbdallÄh again changed ministers and IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-ShÄmÄ«âs position was given to YaḥyÄ b. Muḥammad Ḥaá¹aba,116 who was probably the son of Muḥammad b. Ḥasan al-Ḥaá¹aba (d. 1205/1791) mentioned above, who took over after Ê¿Ämir. From 1795 until his death in 1834, Muḥammad b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-ShawkÄnÄ« was the chief qÄá¸Ä« and a central political figure. Al-ShawkÄnÄ« was also an administrator of local waqf clusters in areas outside Sanaa; he was granted âcharitiesâ (á¹£adaqÄt) and waá¹£ÄyÄ by the imam (aqá¹aÊ¿ahu al-imÄm). This mention of the âgranting of fiefsâ together with waqf-like âcharitiesâ and waá¹£ÄyÄ indicates that being given the right to administer waqf was lucrative, and comparable to being given tax fiefs.117 And as we know from QÄá¹in, the common salary of a waqf administrator of a specific area was 10 per cent of the income. While we cannot discuss taxation policies and the tax collection system here, we can note that the similarity between it and the waqf administration system is striking; tax collectors took percentages and it was thus a potentially very lucrative position.118 After the death of al-ShawkÄnÄ« in 1834, the following period was characterized by increasing unrest and state disintegration. Already some years before that, the QÄsimÄ«s had begun to lose some parts of the TihÄma. The following decades are often referred to as the âperiod of chaos.â The power of the elites in Sanaa over Lower Yemen diminished, as did their control over waqf in these areas. Waqf was probably administered by local elites.
3.8 Waqf Administration Under the Second Ottoman Occupation (1872â1911)
The Ottomans arrived in 1849 for what was to be their second period of occupation. It was, however, only in the 1870s that they took more direct control over Sanaa, the TihÄma, the western mountains, and Lower Yemen. We know little about their ideas and actions in waqf administration reforms in Yemen. They would have had knowledge about a wide range of types of waqf administration from areas they had previously ruled. They would also have been very aware of the pragmatic benefits of leaving existing structures and elites in place, despite their aims of reforming and âcivilizingâ governmental structures.119 There are only a few references in the biographical dictionaries to waqf administration from this period; most are referred to by Serjeant in his book on á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ. Indeed, the administration of the judiciary and the state in general in this period has not yet been studied in detail, although Ottoman policies have been the subject of some research.120 In general, despite the Ottoman intervention, most waqf administration seems to have continued along the same lines as before and in close cooperation with the same scholarly Yemeni elites.
3.9 The Division of the Waqf Administration into DÄkilÄ« and KhÄrijÄ«
As noted early in this chapter, in this period one new aspect emerges, at least to the extent that we can judge by the few sources available. This is the division of the waqf administration into the âinternal waqfâ (al-awqÄf al-dÄkhiliyya) and the external waqf (al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya). The internal (dÄkhilÄ«) were the waqfs of Sanaa, most likely only the city of Sanaa and âitsâ waqfs.121 The external (khÄrijÄ«) consisted of all other similar urban waqf clusters in other cities, such as DhamÄr, Ibb, etc., which all had their own waqf cluster(s) for the great mosque and/or separate sub-clusters, like waqf for religious education.122 Both sections had their own nÄáºir, perhaps best translated as minister, or âinspector.â123
The fact that the waqfs outside Sanaa were to be inspected and overseen by the central government in Sanaa was not new during the Ottoman period. As we saw, the QÄsimÄ«s had appointed walÄ«s for the waqf of Yemen, but the term al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya seems to be new from the second Ottoman period onwards. We can expect an attempt of renewal of state control over the peripheries in this period after several decades of disintegration. This was especially so in the densely populated and fertile Lower Yemen.
In 1849, we know that the nÄáºir al-awqÄf was al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿Abd al-RaḥmÄn al-Ê¿AmrÄnÄ«.124 The last Ê¿Ämil waqf before the Ottomans took Sanaa was al-Sayyid Ḥusayn GhumdÄn al-KibsÄ«.125 These titles probably only refer to the waqfs of Sanaa. Toward the end of the QÄsimÄ« dynasty and into the âperiod of unrestâ we must expect that waqfs (that is, the city mosque waqf clusters) were administered locally and that Sanaa lost control to local elites.
We know that there was a âwaqf office council,â (majlis qamsiyÅ«n al-awqÄf), in Sanaa in 1890, when Aḥsan b. Aḥsan al-AkwaÊ¿126 was the raʾīs. He died that year.127 We also know that al-QÄá¸Ä« Ḥusayn b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-Ê¿AmrÄ«128 was nÄáºir al-waqf129 and that he was âin authority of the waqfâ (wilÄya),130 but in 1894 he was removed (Ê¿uzila) from the position, which then was given to Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿.131 Judging by al-Ê¿AmrÄ«âs title, this must have been just before the division of the waqf administration. The position of al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿ as mentioned by al-WÄsiÊ¿Ä«, was called naáºÄrat al-waqf al-dÄkhilÄ«. Further, he states:
The awqÄf were neglected and the tribes (al-qabÄʾil) took the harvest because the government did not exercise power. When the new nÄáºir [al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿] took over the position with the help from the [Ottoman] governor, they took back the control over the awqÄf and punished those who had taken the waqfs.132
Al-WÄsiÊ¿Ä« adds that with the newly acquired funds they revived many mosques. Naturally, one must examine the historicity of such claims critically, but it is interesting to see how a central government is seen as necessary to enforce the correct flow of revenues. Henceforth, the division of the waqf administration is reflected in the titles: nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-dÄkhiliyya and nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya. In 1898â99 the Ottoman governor ordered the aforementioned nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-dÄkhiliyya, al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« l-Muá¹ÄÊ¿ al-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ« to step down and the Ê¿ulamÄʾ to choose another to fill the position.133 Zayd [b. Aḥmad] al-KibsÄ«134 was nÄáºir al-waqf al-khÄrijÄ«, but was dismissed by the Ottoman governor Aḥmad FaydÄ«. Al-KibsÄ« died in 1898â99.135 Ê¿AlÄ« Aḥmad al-MujÄhid al-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ«136 (d. 1910) was a secretary (kÄtib) of al-waqf al-khÄrijÄ«, while the secretaryship of the dÄkhilÄ« waqf was held by the AbÅ« l-RijÄl family for the whole period.137 Serjeant mentions that the nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya attended the bi-weekly âvilayet-councilâ held by the Ottoman governor and that this indicates the political importance of that role.138 What power the nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya actually held, and over which geographical areas, is not known. For instance, could he demand to take the surplus of the mosques and religious schools? Or were these more visions and plans than reality? Perhaps the goal of the Ottomans was to âcivilizeâ and standardize the waqf administration rather than to exploit it economically; however, according to the few sources reviewed here, it does not seem as if the Ottomans managed to change the system significantly.
3.10 The Third Waqf Administration: NÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ
There is a third type of administration, which is important, yet seldom mentioned during this period. In 1913â14 Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ b. Muḥammad al-Manṣūr died; ZabÄra states that he was nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ in Sanaa, and that later he was nÄáºir al-waqf al-dÄkhilÄ« in Sanaa, though ZabÄra does not state exactly when he held these positions.139 Sayyid Muá¹£tafÄ SÄlim quotes a document from late 1899 with Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ l-Manṣūrâs signature as nÄáºir waá¹£ÄyÄ.140 In July 1912, shortly after the DaÊ¿Ê¿Än treaty, there was a nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ under ImÄm YaḥyÄ by the name Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ l-YadÅ«mÄ«.141 The house (bayt) of al-Manṣūr is one of the scholarly sayyid houses and has held the position of nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ for several subsequent periods and does so until today.
As already discussed, the term waá¹£ÄyÄ has many meanings. In the 1930s, as we see below, Imam YaḥyÄ further clarified this administrative category and it became equivalent to those waqfs that are administered by private administrators. (Thus type B in addition to type D in the four-field model at the beginning of this chapter.) At a certain point the idea arose that all waqfs with private mutawallÄ«s (B/D) should be publicly supervised so that if the mutawallÄ«s did not perform their task satisfactorily, the nÄáºir, and here it is absolutely correct to use the term âinspector,â could discover the mismanagement and take corrective action. We do not know whether or not this supervision actually involved following up and reviewing the accounts or merely the registration of assets. In addition, some of these waqfs were also without a beneficiary, or the beneficiary (such as that for a water cistern), disappeared or âceased to exist.â In such cases it is possible to argue that the public component of such waqfs could not be taken back by the founderâs family. Thus there was a need to administer âlostâ public waqfs, be it âlostâ on the side of the founder, the administrator, or the beneficiary.
Many of the family waqfs (D) were very large and the important sayyid and qÄá¸Ä« houses of Sanaa usually had extensive family waqfs. These were subject to much conflict as the rules for how the waqfs are to be shared follow genealogy and descent, which after a few generations of intermarriage become very complicated. Many of the beneficiaries, including the women, were well educated and knew their legal rights and how to use legal arguments in the court system. There was therefore a need for someone in authority to register oneâs family waqf somewhere, and to ensure that everyone received the correct share. Much later, Messick refers to informants who note that Aḥmad al-SayÄghÄ«, the local governor in Ibb in the 1940s, tried to force people to register their family waqfs under the supervision of the local branch of the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration.142 Again, it must be pointed out that our estimate of the relative amount of the waá¹£ÄyÄ that was âsupervisedâ is speculative; we only know of the existence of the term and the office itself. In fact, in the late Ottoman period, we do not know whether both of these tasks (supervising B or D) were actually ascribed to the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ, nor do we know if it was first something local to Sanaa only, or if the geographical administrative jurisdiction was larger.
4 The Waqf Administration of Imam YaḥyÄ and Imam Aḥmad (1911â62)
From the early twentieth century, we have access to more sources than in earlier periods. The following presentation of the waqf administration under Imam YaḥyÄâs rule is divided chronologically and thematically.
Imam YaḥyÄ claimed the imamate in 1904 when his father Imam al-Manṣūr bi-LlÄh Muḥammad ḤamÄ«d al-DÄ«n died. Al-Manṣūr gathered support from the tribes in the northern areas in order to lead military campaigns against the Ottomans. He used the rhetoric of jihÄd and Zaydism to portray the Ottomans as unlawful occupants. At the time, the Ottomans mainly held Sanaa and the areas south and west of Sanaa. As early as 1906 Imam YaḥyÄ suggested a compromise on how to divide the political power between him and the Ottomans.143 The compromise was rejected, but the wording of one of the clauses in the compromise indicates the importance of the matter of the awqÄf: Condition five concerns the transfer of the awqÄf, âto our custody, so as to revive the education in this country.â144 Imam YaḥyÄ also demanded the right to remove and appoint judges and the right to take the zakÄt and to appoint local shaykhs to collect it. These conditions were also meant to include Lower Yemen. The Ottomans refused. The next compromise, in 1911, was agreed upon and called the Treaty of DaÊ¿Ê¿Än after the village in which it was signed. Article nine145 states: âThe matters of awqÄf and waá¹£ÄyÄ are to be under the authority of the imam.â146 Both versions of the conditions indicate the political importance of the public waqf administration. In the following year, Imam YaḥyÄ ordered the establishment of an appeal court (maḥkamat al-istiʾnÄf) to be headed by Ḥusayn b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-Ê¿AmrÄ«. For the administration of the awqÄf, Imam YaḥyÄ appointed al-Sayyid QÄsim b. Ḥusayn al-Ê¿IzzÄ« AbÅ« ṬÄlib147 as nÄáºir li-awqÄf á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ al-dÄkhiliyya, al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AbdallÄh b. QÄsim al-GhisÄlÄ« l-á¹¢anÊ¿ÄnÄ« as wakÄ«l li-naáºÄrat al-awqÄf al-khÄrijiyya,148 and al-QÄá¸Ä« Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-YamÄnÄ« as a nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ bi-á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ.149 From the period of the late QÄsimÄ« dynasty through the second Ottoman period, and well into the reign of Imam YaḥyÄ until 1938â39, the secretaryship of the waqf dÄkhilÄ« was kept in the AbÄ« l-RijÄl family.150
As seen above, the court apparatus and the waqf administration began before the Ottomans pulled out in 1918, and it was only after their withdrawal that Imam YaḥyÄ himself settled fully in Sanaa. In the course of the next decade, Imam YaḥyÄ gained political control over Yemen in a way the Ottomans never did. He initiated reforms of the waqf administration in an effort to take control of poorly managed waqfs or those that had been taken over by private individuals. He also sought to control the surplus of several types of waqf and redirect these funds to other waqfs and indirectly, to other parts of the state budget. But in order to do this, he had to make new laws, and these were, in part, contrary to the ZaydÄ« madhhab. The major changes did not come until the late 1920s and 1930s. Around this time, he ordered a much tighter grip on waqf administration, and demanded that waqfs be registered and accounted for; indeed, the surplus of entire types of waqfs was to be diverted to the state budget in Sanaa, more specifically so they could be âredirectedâ into other waqfs for education. He founded al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, an Azhar-inspired and Ottoman-inspired state sharÄ«Ê¿a college that employed Ê¿ulamÄʾ as teachers, and produced judges, jurists, and administrators in a formalized school setting. In the following sections, we return to these questions in more detail.
4.1 Taking Control Over Usurped, Unused, and âLostâ Public Waqfs
Below is an entry (maktab) from a public waqf register (miswadda) that describes the legal process of âtaking backâ a sabÄ«l waqf. The text describes a legal incident in which it was discovered that two private individuals, a man and a woman, had used waqf land without taking care of the sabÄ«l, a duty entailed by that specific agricultural field. The governmental representatives gave them the choice between continuing to till the land and pay the full waqf rent, or taking the harvest themselves, but promising to maintain the sabÄ«l. The fact that they were given this choice indicates that this practice was not considered a major crime, rather it was something that required a change in behaviour.
Waqf for the SabÄ«l of the Qubba in Ê¿AyshÄn151
Thanks be to God, Him alone,
[line 1] The two came to me: á¹¢Äliḥ Aḥmad á¹¢irÄrÄ« and the free woman TaqwÄ, daughter of á¹¢Äliḥ Ê¿AlÄ« HÄdÄ«, and they acknowledged (aqarrÄ) by themselves, a true, sharÊ¿Ä« acknowledgement (iqrÄr), that they are in possession of, [2] belonging to the sabÄ«l of the qubba,152 two pieces of land [4 â¦] Then, after their acknowledgement of [possessing] the two aforementioned pieces of land, they rented them from the local public waqf administrator (Ê¿Ämil al-waqf) al-QÄá¸Ä« l-Ê¿AllÄma al-ḤusÄm153 al-Muḥsin [5] b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-GhÄshm, [â¦] It is conditioned upon them [the tenants] that they either provide the full payment of the share154 (qisÄm) of the harvest [⦠6 â¦] or, they can choose to take care of the sabÄ«l with the provided income. [⦠7 â¦] This was witnessed by al-Sayyid Zayd b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-ḤūthÄ« and á¹¢Äliḥ Ê¿AbdallÄh ṬawÄ«l and was written in November/December 1927.155
The entry is only one of a list. By re-documenting such waqfs, or waá¹£ÄyÄ, the state ensured that local individuals could not take over waqfs and privatize them in the future. By creating these registers, the state had a way to âseizeâ the waqfs and take control of (dabaá¹a) them.
We do not know if such reforms were carried out systematically, and if so, to what extent, in which areas, and which types of waqfs were registered. Unfortunately these documentary sources are not available today. The opening of such archives would undoubtedly give us a more comprehensive picture of what happened and provide a picture of the power dynamics of the imamic government and its strategy in these questions. In the case above, a key point would be that the waqf in question was perhaps not a waṣīya, in the sense that the tenants may not have had a right to the position as the mutawallÄ« did, or they may not have had rights to parts of the rent.156 In any case it is truly an act of âinspectionâ and systematic public correction of local waqf (mis)management.
Serjeant refers to another example of how Imam YaḥyÄ sought to increase the income for the waqf in Sanaa. In 1918 the lease agreement between the waqf and the Jews for plots in the Jewish quarter, QÄÊ¿ al-YahÅ«d, was re-negotiated. The old registers were taken out to confirm previous rental agreements, since these had not been kept up recently. In the process, the waqf administrators used legal arguments based on ZaydÄ« fiqh to claim that since many of the assets in the form of plots of urban land were not properly delimited, and the distinction between waqf and private property had become blurred, the whole area should become public property (al-maá¹£Äliḥ). This decision was enforced, whereupon the Imam sold back to the Jews the right to use the properties in the Jewish quarter.157
4.2 Legal Changes
Around the same time, legal changes started to take place: by invoking the ZaydÄ« institution of ikhtiyÄrÄt (lit., âchoicesâ) ZaydÄ« doctrine allows and indeed expects the imam to produce laws in areas where fiqh remains open, and where the ZaydÄ« HÄdawÄ« madhhab does not provide a strong consensus or where no âclear textual proofâ (nÄṣṣ, á¹£arīḥ, qaá¹Ê¿Ä«) exists in the revealed texts. The legal changes he made can be categorised into two related fields: one restricts the use of family waqf to prevent families from circumventing the inheritance rules, and a second empowers the state to re-group waqf beneficiaries158 according to âpublic interest.â The first was regarded as a part of his official ikhtiyÄrÄt and the courts were ordered to follow them.159 The second was not related to the judiciary in the same way, but were simply given as orders to the waqf administration. Imam YaḥyÄâs legal innovations in this field have not been categorized as ikhtiyÄrÄt as such,160 yet they do appear as footnotes in al-TÄj al-mudhhab, the same way the ikhtiyÄrÄt do.161 Another related legal view condemned, on moral grounds, most overt aspects of saint worship; this served to support the legal decision whereby income from waqfs to maintain saintsâ graves and pay for festivals for saints could be taken by the state.
4.3 The Creation of the Fourth Waqf Administration: AwqÄf al-Turab
Once Imam YaḥyÄ had given himself the power to reorganize and take control of waqfs he also established a fourth waqf administration (dÄʾira) parallel to the other three, namely the turab. Turab literally means âsoilâ and usually it refers to cemeteries and graveyards, but in Yemeni waqf administration the term refers to turab al-awliyÄʾ, tomb complexes for saints and holy men. The cult of saints is mostly found in ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« areas; it is common for a village to have one or more whitewashed domes in which a saint is buried and where local festivals and rituals are performed. Some of these are regionally famous, like that of Aḥmad b. Ê¿AlwÄn near Taâizz. Imam YaḥyÄ made a decision that because worship of saints is religiously immoral, most of the waqfs for the maintenance of such tombs of saints should be registered by the state and the funds from these waqfs should be taken and diverted to other public purposes. The practice of saint worship generally occurs in ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« areas and various other religious movements have opposed and condemned this as idolatry. The idea that waqfs for saintsâ graves were invalid was not new at Imam YaḥyÄâs time, but it is the first time we know that administrative reform was implemented.162 Thus a fourth parallel waqf administration was formed: naáºÄrat awqÄf al-turab. Most of this seems to have been done in the name of âeducation,â as the funds were mainly spent on the Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya. As for the turab administration itself, there is fairly little information. Most of its funds came from Lower Yemen and it is unclear to what extent there was an Ê¿Ämil al-turab in every district (nÄḥiya at the time), or if the administrators of the turab were only present in certain areas. The job of Ê¿Ämil al-turab was likely done simultaneously by whoever held the job of Ê¿Ämil al-waqf.
4.4 Al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, Waqf Education in Transition to Modernity
In 1926, Imam YaḥyÄ opened al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya and a school for ophans in Sanaa. Al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya was used to train bureaucrats and judges.163 This school was to be the main beneficiary of the diverted turab waqf funds. Ever since, the ministry of education and the turab waqf have been connected. The ministry of education, the turab waqf, and the institutionalization of the Ê¿ulamÄʾ through al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya hereafter formed a new âtriangleâ of power that merged waqf management with state finances and the reproduction of judicial knowledge. Imam YaḥyÄ and his son Imam Aḥmad also built schools elsewhere in Yemen, for example in Taâizz and Zabid, but their exact administrative relationship with al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya is not known, though they probably also received their funding from the ministry of education. Al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya was considered to be the highest state academy.
IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l al-AkwaÊ¿ states that the annual income for al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya was about 50,000 riyÄls (Maria Theresa silver thalers). The school paid the salaries of the teachers and many of the students (there were approximately 550 students) were given food and lodging.164 Still, there was a considerable surplus and this was used to buy new agricultural land in the areas around Sanaa, which thereafter belonged to the turab waqf.165 In addition, al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya also possessed a good bit of land confiscated from the IsmaÊ¿Ä«lÄ«s in the ḤarÄz Mountains west of Sanaa,166 probably also organized through the turab waqf. The first director of the al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya was Luá¹f b. GhÄlib al-Ê¿AmrÄ« who later became mudÄ«r (director) of awqÄf DhamÄr and later also of awqÄf Taâizz.167
The systematization and centralisation of religious and judicial education had consequences; Vom Bruck quotes Ê¿AbdallÄh al-IryÄnÄ« who states that the waqf168 in their village, Hijrat al-IryÄn (between YarÄ«m and Ibb), was originally controlled by a member of his family. Then, Imam YaḥyÄ took over the waqf administration whereby the local mosque, which previously had teachers and students, was now left without a budget for these services and the local sharÄ«Ê¿a students had to go to Sanaa, to the al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya. Further, he indicates that this was the case for other hijras169 as well and that Ê¿ulamÄʾ in many hijras complained that they had to abandon their teaching. The flight of students was not only because of the lack of funds left in the hijras, but also because of the reputation and the high quality of al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya.170
Not much is known about the actual local consequences of the centralisation of waqf funds and how this differed in other areas of Yemen. Most schools in the hijras and the mosques in the rural areas were very small and informal; often the mosque itself was used as a school (miÊ¿lama), or a simple room adjacent to it served the purpose. The teaching positions were rarely full-time or even formalized. It is simply not known to what extent these registration and centralisation reforms were actually carried out and in what geographical areas. In addition, we do not know who may have been able to resist the reforms.171 By quoting travel accounts from the mid 1900s, Würth suggests that literacy had been much higher in the past, but that after the centralisation of the waqf it dropped to a minimum because the many local schools had to close.172 This is probably an overstatement of the effect of the waqf reforms. We simply do not know if these reforms were applied consistently in all geographical areas or to what extent they were applied. Further, she argues that the change in state control over the production of judicial knowledge (as in the Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya) did not mark a fundamental break with the past in terms of knowledge; clearly, when examining the curriculums, we see that the content remained quite similar to what was taught in sharÄ«Ê¿a schools before the Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya was founded.173 We can reasonably conclude that along with the transfer of waqf funds to Sanaa, some power over education, both primary and advanced legal education, was transferred along with it. But the transfer was certainly not enough to extinguish private sharÄ«Ê¿a schools and non-state practices of transferring and reproducing judicial knowledge. Far more research is needed in order to say anything more accurate. Other societal changes during the period of Imam YaḥyÄ, including the growth in population and historical change in the rural economy, make it difficult to construct a contra-factual history of what might have happened if Imam YaḥyÄâs reforms had not been enacted. Additional studies are needed to understand the importance of these local education waqfs, what role they played in general literacy rates, for advanced education, in intellectual life, and how they were actually affected by the waqf reforms. More general but related questions could be raised about the role of the hijras and local Islamic schools and what role the waqf still has in the management of these, especially in the core ZaydÄ« areas.
4.5 A Decree Organising the AwqÄf Administration, 1937
The Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya opened in 1926 and was, presumably, in immediate need of financial income. Exactly when the first turab waqf reforms were initiated is not known. The first âministriesâ were created in 1937 and first minister of education was Imam YaḥyÄâs son, prince174 (Sayf al-IslÄm) Ê¿AbdallÄh. In a decree175 dated 1937 addressed to the inspectors of the khÄrijÄ«, the turab, and the waá¹£ÄyÄ administrations, the three inspectors were requested to identify certain types of waqf, to register them, to initiate plans to supervise them, and also to present all accountancies for the imamâs review, or literally, âthe noble gazeâ or âscrutinyâ (al-naáºar al-sharÄ«f). The decree orders the registration of all waqfs, regardless of type. It mentions three categories of inspectors, with their own separate administrations and accounting, but with some revenue shared among them. The dÄkhilÄ« administration is not mentioned, probably because it was already fairly organised and not in need of reform. The three other separate, parallel administrations mentioned in the decree are khÄrijÄ« waqfs, turab waqfs, and the waá¹£ÄyÄ waqfs.
4.6 The KhÄrijÄ« Waqfs
This refers to the waqfs of individual mosques or larger clusters of mosques in areas outside Sanaa. The decree states that the surplus from such waqfs is to be taken by the khÄrijÄ« administration after the needs of the mosque are taken care of. What we know from other sources is that from this time and until today, the local caretaker of the mosque must present requests to the waqf administration in order to cover his expenses.176 It is important to remember that in practice, mosques could also have local private mutawallÄ«s (contrary to the decree), and many smaller village mosques tend to be of this type.177 It is not known to what degree these smaller and more private mosque waqfs were brought under imamic supervision, either before or after this reform. There may have been geographical differences in this as well. Even when mosques were registered and included under the khÄrijÄ« administration, local elites administering them could still have under-reported the surpluses or over-reported the actual expenditures. The power to define the âneedsâ of a certain mosque was, to a large extent, dependent on the local political context.
4.7 The Turab Waqfs
The turab waqfs were a new category created by Imam YaḥyÄ; they still exist under a separate administration today. According to the decree, the turab consists of the following types: (1) khÄliá¹£a, or âabsoluteâ: This refers to tomb complexes with tombs only. In these, all the income of the waqfs is to be taken. (2) Mukhtalaá¹a refers to mixed tomb/mosque complexes: in these, the mosque is to be maintained according to local tradition (but not more than half of the income of the waqf), and the rest is to go to the turab administration budget. Expenses for the mosques are to be clarified by the khÄrijÄ« waqf accountancy, and also clarified by the turab waqf accountancy.178 (3) Waqf mundaris, munqatiÊ¿ al-maá¹£rif179 refers to all types of unused waqfs with a public purpose, or unused waqfs for which no one makes a legal claim. The income of these waqfs was redirected to the âpublic goodâ (al-maá¹£Äliḥ). It would not be valid to take funds out of the waqf realm and enter them into the treasury (bayt al-mÄl). Imam YaḥyÄ therefore established the ministry of education as the main recipient of the turab waqfs generally, and al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya in particular, since public education could be defined as a new beneficiary. Thus he redirected the waqf income while the waqf assets remained waqfs (as before), separate from other state revenue sources.180
4.8 The Waá¹£ÄyÄ Waqfs
The concept of the waá¹£ÄyÄ was very clearly defined in the decree of 1937. These consist of waqfs with private mutawallÄ«s and can be of two main types: Public non-mosque beneficiaries such as sabÄ«ls, village reception rooms (dawÄwÄ«n), food for the poor, etc. (type B). Or, they could be private, such as family waqfs (type D). Both were allowed to remain in effect if they were made for a specific beneficiary and with a valid legal purpose, but they were all required to be registered âwhenever they became knownâ to the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration, and they were to be inspected by the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ. Actually, the word mutawallÄ« is not mentioned in the decree at all, and the decree leaves the reader with the sense that private guardianship is simply irrelevant. In practice, however, the waá¹£ÄyÄ meant any waqf in which there could exist a private mutawallÄ«. If no mutawallÄ« existed, the waqf belonged to the turab in cases of âconfiscatedâ waqfs. Other non-mosque waqfs that were still allowed to operate were to be under the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration. Thus all types of waqf would belong to one of the aforementioned categories, and be supervised by the imam and his appointed inspectors according to the decree.
If the decree is interpreted correctly, the latter of the two types of waá¹£ÄyÄ mentioned, the family waqfs, or perhaps even all the waá¹£ÄyÄ are to surrender one-third of their income to the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration. Perhaps the ministry of education was in need of more income than it could get from the turab. The appropriation of this third from the waá¹£ÄyÄ is not mentioned anywhere else and we do not know if this part of the decree was ever executed. It is even harder to believe that this third referred to all types of waá¹£ÄyÄ.181 It is unlikely that this would have been accepted; rather the third that was to be taken likely became much smaller.182 Even the registration reform of the waá¹£ÄyÄ does not seem to have taken place completely. More investigation is necessary in order to reveal this, and access to the waá¹£ÄyÄ archives is required. Many of the powerful families refused to register their waqfs altogether and until today continue to administer them themselves.183 The legal restrictions on family waqfs made by Imam YaḥyÄ also led to the invalidation and privatization of a large part of such waqfs.184 Thus the number of such waqfs greatly declined from the late 1930s.
According to this decree the office of the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration is different from the others (the khÄrijÄ« and the turab administration), in that it had few or small waqfs of its own,185 it inspected the management and revenue flows of non-mosque waqfs. Again, it is important to point out that little is known about the actual implementation of this decree.
4.9 Administration in Practice
During the reign of Imam YaḥyÄ, we see a definite change in policy, as exemplified by the decree, which clearly illustrates the statesâ aspirations to take more direct control over waqf by taking potential surplus, redirecting certain waqf funds, and confiscating unused waqfs or those being used for activities considered unorthodox. All this was undertaken by the administrative instruments of registers (miswaddÄt, dafÄtir) and by the creation of new administrations parallel to the existing one(s). All waqfs had to be inspected and presented for the âimamic gazeâ al-naáºar al-sharÄ«f. An all-inclusive register of several volumes was made, called the comprehensive register (al-miswadda al-shÄmila).186
Each nÄáºir had local representatives, usually at the district level (nÄḥiya) called Ê¿Ämil (pl. Ê¿ÄmilÅ«n or Ê¿ummÄl), who in turn sent their accounts to their respective nÄáºirs in Sanaa every year.187 In rich agricultural areas there were sometimes several Ê¿Ämils, and they in turn may have had several assistants and secretaries or even agents (wakÄ«l, wukalÄʾ) under them.188 This system does not seem to have been fully and consistently applied, but rather was applied in those areas where there were many waqfs that were productive, and where opposition to the government did not destroy the larger project of collecting taxes and waqf fundsâmainly Lower Yemen (areas around the cities of Ibb and Taâizz), the western mountains, the TihÄma, and the highland plains around Sanaa and south of Sanaa. The populations in areas north and east of Sanaa were more rebellious and we do not have much information about the waqf administration there. Local hijras (sayyid enclaves) probably had their own local waqf administration in these areas. The city of Saʽda is known to have many waqfs, but it is unlikely that the state in Sanaa was able to interfere in these the way it did in the areas further south. In some areas, the Ê¿Ämils systematically sent out crop assessors (khurrÄá¹£, qubbÄl, á¹uwwÄf) to estimate (khará¹£, á¹iyÄfa) the size of the crop before the harvest. This was similar to what was done in the zakÄt collection system, which was in many ways parallel to the waqf revenue. The zakÄt collection system also consisted of local Ê¿Ämils (not Ê¿Ämil waqf, but Ê¿Ämil zakÄt) who also typically received one-tenth of the income, much like the waqf Ê¿Ämils.189 These positions were assigned or taken away by the imam and his closest ministers, although often the local elites were in the best position to extract the full potential from both the waqf and from the zakÄt.
In the early years of Imam YaḥyÄâs reign it seems that each mosque in Sanaa still had a specified amount of income. In al-ḤajarÄ«âs book about the mosques of Sanaa, he mentions that the well-known mosque called Qubbat Ṭalḥa was one of the best-equipped mosques in Sanaa, with beautiful carpets and furnishing, and plenty of running water.190 This was written about a time before the more systematic and centrally controlled administration began to take control of the waqfs. We know that around 1930 Crown Prince Aḥmad (later imam) finished the waqf reforms in Zabid and took control over the âAyyÅ«bÄ« and RasÅ«lÄ«â waqfs and ordered them to be spent on schools and mosques.191 In 1933 Imam YaḥyÄ finished the restoration of the important public water supply basin (siqÄya Ê¿Ämma) outside the Abhar Mosque in Sanaa and attached waqfs to the water basin for its maintenance.192 He also established the waqf library in Sanaa, collected manuscripts and books, made the waqf for various mosques, and placed them in a new storey above the south wing of the JÄmiÊ¿ al-KabÄ«r, which then became a public library.193
4.10 The Waqf Administration Under Imam Aḥmad (1948â62)
The creation of the first ministry of awqÄf was initiated in 1948 when Imam Aḥmad took over after his father, Imam YaḥyÄ, was assassinated. Shelagh Weir refers to an interesting document described as a âpledge of allegiance,â dated 1948 from Jabal RÄziḥ in the very northwest of Yemen. It was written by the local shaykhs and notables and included a list of conditions that the local shaykhs optimistically hoped the new imam would accept. For instance, they suggest that the shaykhs keep one-fifth of the zakÄt revenue themselves (twice as much as before), and more importantly, that âheirs should control the proceeds of family waqfs.â194 The mere mention of this topic implies that state control over family waqfs had been an issue under Imam YaḥyÄ, even in areas as distant as RÄziḥ. We do not know whether or not this was accepted for Jabal RÄziḥ, but Messick states that in Ibb, in the period under Imam Aḥmad the governor Aḥmad al-SayÄghÄ« forcibly registered family waqfs under the waá¹£ÄyÄ administration.195 Such measures were probably easier to carry out in the areas under the strongest direct state control, such as in the major cites and Lower Yemen.
The first minister of awqÄf after the ministry was established in 1948 was al-Sayyid Ê¿Abd al-QÄdir b. Ê¿AbdallÄh b. Ê¿Abd al-QÄdir (1908â2004). Ê¿Abd al-QÄdir was first nÄáºir al-awqÄf al-ḥaramayn during Imam YaḥyÄâs time and held this position until 1962.196 However, immediately after 1948, he was given the position as a minister of awqÄf.197
In general the period of Imam Aḥmad saw a continuation of the policy of his father. Imam Aḥmad moved the capital to Taâizz and Lower Yemen became the focus of new, minor waqf reforms. Aḥmad al-SayÄghÄ«,198 the governor of Ibb, initiated local administrative reforms and opened âofficesâ (maktabÄt al-awqÄf) in Ibb, Taâizz, and Zabid to serve as sub-branches of the ministry. The local waqf administration was reorganized into one administration (dÄʾira) merged under one mudÄ«r waqf, and the separate accountancies of the three previously separate administrations were retained. At this time and well into the 1970s, much of the local waqf economy was still taken, stored, and paid in sorghum grain.199
In Zabid, two informants related to the present-day waqf administration claimed that it was in this period and under the orders of Ḥusayn al-SayÄghÄ« that the old waqf registers were taken to Sanaa, among them the miswadda al-RasÅ«liyya, miswadda al-Manṣūriyya, and one miswadda from the period of al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs (d. 1189/1775).200 The waá¹£ÄyÄ registers were taken to Sanaa shortly after the revolution in 1962 and only copies were left in Zabid.201 With regard to the many waqfs in Zabid, other informants there also claimed that the city was given the amount of 100,000 riyÄls to maintain the mosques and schools and anything in excess of this was sent to Sanaa.202
Because this period is closer to the present, it is much more controversial to research and write about because âwhat actually happenedâ to specific waqf assets and areas of land many not coincide with âwhat should have happened.â Compared to the number of sources that should be available, few sources can be found. Legal documents from this period could still be valid in court. Little has been published about the history of waqf from this period, despite the presence of living informants. From this point on, the politics of information of what actually happened is part of contemporary politics, and many actors are reluctant to speak, much less provide documents. Memories and documents from this period are still binding and valid evidence in court.
At this time the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ was Muḥammad b. Muḥammad al-Manṣūr (d. 2016),203 a position he has held more or less continuously until today.204 In 1949 Imam Aḥmad visited Bayt al-FaqÄ«h north of Zabid and âtook control overâ awqÄf there (kharaja, á¸abaá¹a) and built a school.205 The year after, the awqÄf in RadÄÊ¿, southeast of DhamÄr, were âtaken back from the localsâ (ikhrÄj) by its governor al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« l-Muá¹ÄÊ¿.206 These types of statements are typical of the historical narratives often found in the biographical encyclopaedia that describe the pious and just notables as agents acting against corrupt local elites and on behalf of religion and the common good; for these reasons they âtook backâ the waqf properties and ârevivedâ the waqf. The counter narratives, namely that such and such person usurped waqf land also circulate as common knowledge, but only in more confined, personal settings.
5 The Ministry of AwqÄf After the Revolution (1962â)
5.1 The 1962 Revolution and the Following Civil War
During the 1962 revolution and the years of civil war that followed, the waqf administration lost much of its legitimacy and power. The war mainly took place in the northern areas, while the western mountains, DhamÄr and Lower Yemen, were not affected as much as the tribal north. When the new governments in the late 1960s and in the beginning of the 1970s sought to resume and reform administration, many documents and registers were lost. Many of the former employees, or rather those with the right to a percentage of waqfs, wanted to retain their positions and rights. If we imagine the creation of the new republican ministry as the top of a pyramid, we must bear in mind that only the top part of the pyramid was new. The base of the pyramid, the hundreds of local public waqf administrators, continued to a large extent in their positions, although the overall position of the waqf institution was weaker and much waqf land was usurped. The areas immediately around the cities saw a very fast urban development and agricultural fields were a source for building plots. When the revolution started in 1962 it was much influenced by and based on Egyptian Arab socialism. Many saw the awqÄf, its practices and administration, as something connected to the oppressive, primitive past.
The previous state waqf administration before the revolution had been strongest in areas where the state had a significant control, especially Lower Yemen, and the state had used the waqf institution to channel funds from rural areas towards Sanaa. When the new ministry of awqÄf was established, it had to determine its responsibilities. Would it be right to continue to transfer waqf funds from Lower ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« Yemen? Some tentative decrees and laws were made, but it took many years after the civil war ended (around 1968) before the ministry grew to become what it is today. The first minster was al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿Abd al-SalÄm Muḥammad ZabÄra, who was also a member of the Majlis qiyÄdat al-thawra (âthe leadership committee of the revolutionâ). The ministry was named, first, the ministry of awqÄf and social affairs (WizÄrat al-awqÄf wa-l-shuʾūn al-ijtimÄÊ¿iyya). Then after a month, the last part was substituted for âtribal affairsâ (Shuʾūn al-qabÄʾil), which was soon removed, leaving only WizÄrat al-awqÄf. The term irshÄd, âguidance,â was not added until 1978: WizÄrat al-awqÄf wa-l-irshÄd.
5.2 The Early Formative Years (1968â78)
From 1968 onwards several decrees and laws were issued regarding the organisation of the ministry. However, no new waqf law (as a contractual law regulating the legal phenomenon as such) was issued until 1976; so until that point the 68 qarÄrÄt that the appeal court had issued in 1970 remained in effect.207
The first decree organising the new ministry was the republican decree no. 26 of 1968 which was issued to structure the administration in the ministry; it was made at the request of the then minister al-QÄá¸Ä« Muḥammad b. Luá¹f al-á¹¢abÄḥī. Article 3 stated that the ministry was to have authority over the charitable waqfs that were not managed by the descendants of founders and over waqfs in which the beneficiaries were no longer known.208
Ministerial decree no. 20 of 1968 concerns the formation of a judiciary committee for the administration of guardianship in questions of waqf, presented by the same minister of awqÄf. The republican decree no. 73 of 1969 gave the ministry an administrative structure, though this was not very detailed: the minister, his deputy (wakÄ«l), and the administrations (idÄrÄt):
-
a common administration for awqÄf matters,
-
an administration for waqf al-waá¹£ÄyÄ (subul, wa-l-qirÄʾa, wa-duwar al-á¸iyÄfa), and
-
an administration for the administration and economy.209
Later, additional administrative sections were added, among them, an administration for religious matters and guidance (irshÄd), a general administration for the identification and registration of waqf assets (ḥaá¹£r), and a general administration for investments and technical issues. Ministerial decree no. 100 of 1969 further specified some of the responsibilities of the ministry.210
The first waqf law was the âleading councilâs decree no. 78 of 1976 concerning waqfââ; this was almost identical to the one in place today. It is the product of the codification committee and its language and content follow ZaydÄ« fiqh quite closely. This was followed by the âleading councilâs decree no. 63 of 1977 concerning the organisation of the ministry of awqÄf and definition of its field of responsibility.â It was made by Muḥammad Luá¹f al-á¹¢abÄḥī, and it elaborates on the organisational structure and strategies for the future. After these decrees, many years passed without new decrees, until law no. 7 of 1987 concerning the reorganisation of the ministry of awqÄf and irshÄd and the definition of its responsibilities.211
Historically, the judges held the power to decide waqf questions, outside those limits that the validated fiqh212 gives to any mutawallÄ«. Early on, in 1968 with decree no. 26, a committee was formed. Members included the minister of awqÄf, the president of the appeal court, and various other ministers.213 This committee gave the ministry the power that had previously been in the hands of a sharÄ«Ê¿a judge (ḥÄkim sharÊ¿Ä«). This committee was to discuss and decide upon matters relating to waqf asset exchanges (badal, istibdÄl), matters related to the definition of worthy beneficiaries, matters of record keeping (istidÄna), and the approval of leases of waqf assets longer than three years. The committee could decide on these matters without relying on a court or a judge.214 The committee was the theoretical, conceptual bridge between the ministry, the state, and the sharÄ«Ê¿a-based judiciary and it also constitutes the political leadership of the ministry. It was given the powers of a sharÄ«Ê¿a judge, as it was essentially a mutawallÄ« and a judge at the same time. After 1986 it was called al-majlis al-aÊ¿lÄ li-l-awqÄf wa-l-irshÄd and the list of its members expanded.215
The decree no. 26 of 1968 article 13b ordered an end to the former dÄkhilÄ« and khÄrijÄ« division.216 Since then, there have been several decrees regulating the administration of the two other types, the turab and the waá¹£ÄyÄ,217 but until today, they have remained separate from the waqf administration per se. Thus in general, what remained for the ministry were the mosques and their waqfs.
Until the 1980s, much of the âcurrencyâ in the waqf economy was still sorghum grain stored in the traditional way in local grain storage pits (madÄfin); the first waqf decrees after the revolution also refer to grain.218 After that, grain was sold on the market by the Ê¿Ämils and the accountancies later mostly refer to monetary currency. However, even today, the electronic registers and accountancies mention buckets of grain or baskets of grapes, because the yearly payments by the tenants have not been re-negotiated and converted to monetary currency. The old estimates are kept as indications of the value of the rights that are taken as income from the waqfs.219 Much waqf land has never been measured in terms of physical area and therefore the only information about the assets is the name of the assets and the value of the estimated or average expected harvest, not the size or borders of the asset, even though almost every waqf law and decree from 1968 until today has ordered waqf assets to be properly registered and defined.
The early years of the ministry were characterised by a high turnover of ministers. In just 13 years, between 1962 and 1975, more than 25 ministers were appointed, many of whom served several times. In some years there were more than three new appointments. The author of al-Mawkib, Ê¿Abd al-MÄlik Manṣūr, states that this undoubtedly had a negative effect.220 He also admits that the actual administrative structure varied a great deal from those planned in the decrees above.221 This is also the overall picture that is described by most informants.
In the 1970s, al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and YaḥyÄ b. Ê¿AbdallÄh al-á¸aḥyÄnÄ« both held the position of minister several times. Muḥammad b. Muḥammad al-Manṣūr held the position a short while in 1978; there were a few others between them (among them Muḥammad b. Luá¹f al-á¹¢abÄḥī again). From 1978 until 1990, the position was held by al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-SammÄn.
5.3 The Turab, Waá¹£ÄyÄ and al-AwqÄf al-á¹¢iḥḥiyya After the Revolution
Since its creation the turab administration has funded state education. The dÄkhilÄ« and the khÄrijÄ« waqf administrations and account books were merged together, but the turab and the waá¹£ÄyÄ remained separate administrations, only part of the ministry in name. As mentioned above, some of the income from the turab waqfs was also used to acquire new waqf land in the areas around Sanaa. After the revolution, the funds from the turab waqf were directed to the ministry of education (WizÄrat al-tarbÄ«ya wa-l-taÊ¿lÄ«m). In 1987, the administration of the turab waqfs was in theory given back to the ministry of awqÄf.222 In real terms, it was never actually included as part of the ministry of awqÄf and until today the funds go to the ministry of education via the ministry of finance.223
Today the turab waqf are special in that they do not fund services in the local areas where the income is taken, rather the income goes to the central budget for state education.224 On the other hand, the (mosque) waqf income is mainly spent for local mosques and local salaries, and only the surplus effectively goes to the ministry in Sanaa. The law of 1977 article 2e states that the ministry is to oversee (ishrÄf) the awqÄf al-turab wa-l-á¹£iḥḥiyya.225 Law no. 7 of 1987 (art. 3 sub. 7) states that the ministry is to administer the turab, but in special books and registers (sijillÄt khÄṣṣa) and to present the accountancy to the ministry of finance and the funds are to enter the public state treasury (al-khizÄna al-Ê¿Ämma). The same applies to health waqf (al-awqÄf al-á¹£iḥḥiyya).226 As for the awqÄf al-á¹£iḥḥiyya, even less is known.227 It is likely that this is a remnant from the hospital set up by Imam YaḥyÄ; it was probably given its own waqfs like the ministry of education was, and it remained a separate administrative unit since then. Until today, the old registers for these waqfs are kept at the ministry of health and not handed over to the ministry of awqÄf.228
There is now a section (qiá¹ÄÊ¿) in the ministry especially for waá¹£ÄyÄ and turab, headed by a ministerial secretary (wakÄ«l li-shuʾūn al-waá¹£ÄyÄ wa-l-turab),229 but in practice his responsibilities do not include the waá¹£ÄyÄ, which is still held by the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ, the famous scholar al-Sayyid Muḥammad al-Manṣūr (b. 1915). The nÄáºÄrat al-waá¹£ÄyÄ is located directly under the office of the president, and was affirmed by a presidential decree, thus it bypasses the whole ministry.230 Al-QirshÄ« writes (in a footnote) that both he and his predecessor as waqf ministers had written requests to the present day nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ to hand over the administration of these waqfs, in accordance with the law made in 1987 and to order the Ê¿Ämils under him to come to the ministry for training and resume their work under it, â⦠but no such thing happened.â231
In articles 88 and 89 the waqf law states that any public waqf is to be supervised by the ministry, even if there are private mutawallÄ«s. This also includes the turab, á¹£iḥḥiyya, and waá¹£ÄyÄ. Article 89 also states that in waá¹£ÄyÄ (or any waqf) with a public purpose, âthe ministry is to receive what the founder stipulated for the mutawallÄ«, and if it is not defined, the ministry is to take 5 per cent of the income of the waqf.â232 However, this is only the case if there is no other legally valid mutawallÄ« present.233 The right to private guardianship or administration (wilÄya) is undisputed in the waqf fiqh. This relates to the doctrinal concept of respecting the founderâs will and the idea that the institution of waqf is a private initiative and not a part of the state. In the context of a weak state, people are resistant to the idea that the ministry has supreme power over all waqfs and can invalidate private guardianship altogether. Ministerial decree no. 18 of 2001 (bi-shaʾn ilghÄʾ al-naáºarÄt al-khÄṣṣÄ) finally abolished the right to private guardianship. However, the decree caused so much resistance that a new decree was issued (ministerial decree no. 51 of 2002) abolishing the former decree.234 Thus private guardianship is again legally valid. Since the law gives the ministry the right to register, âsupervise,â and review the accountancy of the waá¹£ÄyÄ type of waqf, the mutawallÄ« is reduced to being a paid manager and is no longer the ultimate âguardian.â But this is a fairly theoretical discussion and in fact we must expect legal norms and practices to diverge in diverse ways.
5.4 The Iá¹£lÄḥī Years (1993â97)
After the unification between North Yemen and the Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen (previous South Yemen, PDRY), the Islamist Iá¹£lÄḥ party was allowed a more prominent place in politics. In the 1980s, the ministry was fairly traditional, weak, and in a phase of development, struggling to find its role in a modernizing state bureaucracy. The ministry did not have a politically important role. With the Islamization of the late 1980s and the 1990s control over the mosques and what took place in the mosques became much more important. Since that time the irshÄd part of the ministry, which is little mentioned in this book, has grown steadily and is now far more important in terms of state support than the waqf part of the ministry.
In 1990 Muḥsin Muḥammad al-Ê¿UlufÄ« from the GPC (the General Peopleâs Congress, the presidentâs ruling party) became minister. In April 1993 GhÄlib Ê¿Abd al-KÄfÄ« l-QirshÄ«, from the Iá¹£lÄḥ party took the position and held it until May 1997, when the position went to Aḥmad Muḥammad al-ShÄmÄ« from the ZaydÄ« l-Ḥaqq party. Al-ShÄmÄ« only held the position for a year until 1998 when he resigned because of the chaotic state of the ministry and lack of real power. There was simply not much he could do.235 The many reforms in the administrative structure and techniques seem hardly to have been effectuated at all, and in many districts it seems as if the Ê¿Ämils managed to retain their positions and ways of administration.
In Upper Yemen, which is ZaydÄ«, these years saw the build up to the open sectarian conflict that resulted in the so-called ḤūthÄ« rebellions centred on the areas around Saʽda. The power of the WahhÄbÄ« and SalafÄ« oriented forces grew. WahhÄbÄ« schools, institutes, and mosques were built, and the ministry of awqÄf became an arena where this power struggle was very much felt. Many of the new mosques and schools were not subjected to the authority of the ministry, but many mosques were still registered under the ministry as waqf, and thus had the right to maintenance and salaries from the central waqf budget. These new mosques should have been built with their own waqfs attached to them, but they were established and registered in such a way that their maintenance and the salaries associated with them is paid from the ministry.
In addition, traditionally ShÄfÄ«Ê¿Ä« areas have resisted government attempts at centralisation, and in the newly incorporated territories in the south and east, such as Hadramawt, people felt that it was better to keep what was left of their awqÄf hidden, rather than submit them to Sanaa.
5.5 The Ministry Today
The Iá¹£lÄḥī leaders in the ministry did not manage to control the Ê¿Ämils in the traditional ZaydÄ« areas who refused to fund WahhÄbÄ« or SalafÄ« projects. The ministry was left in a state of chaos that affected the way it was perceived by the population. In addition to this there were other challenges related to internal corruption in the ministry and the openly illegal seizure of waqf lands by powerful private individuals and state institutions. Today, many tenants refuse to pay full rent and see themselves as worthy recipients of access to low priced rent of urban land and cheap rental flats and shops. Looking back at these challenges, which to a large extent still exist today, it has been a formidable task simply to keep the ministry functioning. Its very existence today can be attributed to loyal administrators and tenants both inside and outside the official structure. It is the notion of community, tradition, and religious piety that makes it possible for the waqf ministry to operate under these circumstances.
In May 2003 the minister ḤamÅ«d Muḥammad Ê¿UbÄd took over. In the years from 2007 until March 2011, al-QÄá¸Ä« ḤamÅ«d Muḥammad al-HittÄr was minister. He is known to have prioritized the ever more important irshÄd section and has become famous in the western media for his ârehabilitation programsâ of radical Islamists. On 13 March 2011, after the street protests, a presidential decree no. 64 was issued giving ḤamÅ«d Muḥammad Ê¿UbÄd the position of minister of awqÄf and irshÄd. Al-HittÄr stated that he had not been dismissed, but had withdrawn in protest to the violent response of the government towards the demonstrators.
5.6 The Project of Registration and Mapping of Waqf Assets
Perhaps the most important reform program that is presently under way relates to the registration and mapping of waqf assets in electronic databases by using GPS and GIS, and even scanning and digitizing important documents and old waqf registers (mashrūʿ al-ḥaṣr). It is not yet clear what the outcome of this project may be and there are frequent delays in the project.
Many conflicting interests emerge in the process of transferring information from the old registers into the new ones. An informant working in the registration project told me that with the new electronic waqf registers, the old registers are not accessible anymore and people are âprohibitedâ from consulting them. Obviously, discrepancies between the old registers and the new ones are problematic and every change in waqf asset that is not properly documented, witnessed, and attested by the proper authorities will continue to pose a threat to the legitimacy of the ministry.
Many districts (mudÄ«riyyÄt)236 have no Ê¿Ämils (Ê¿ÄmilÅ«n,237 Ê¿ummÄl) today,238 though in some districts there are several. In some areas the local waqf office is located directly under the ministry, while in others the local Ê¿Ämils have other regional offices or there are Ê¿Ämils that work between them and the ministry. Sometimes, the titles nÄáºir or walÄ« are also used. The ministry is in a process of creating offices (maktab, makÄtib, maktabÄt) in every district (mudÄ«riyya), headed by a director (mudÄ«r al-waqf) over that district. This reform has still not reached all districts. The administrative map is therefore complicated and there are areas in which several layers of older reforms have not yet been implemented. In practice, the system works almost as it always has; it is very much dependent on local elites. Some areas are able to retain the local waqf funds for local needs, while others are under the control of the ministry in such a way that the ministry is able to take the unused surplus, or even most of the income.
To a large extent, the local Ê¿Ämils still inherit their positions, and may take a quite high percentage of the total waqf income as salary (i.e., local Ê¿Ämils take their salaries from income from the agents under them). The Ê¿Ämils are not state employees, and do not receive benefits in the form of retirement and insurance the way state employees do. Their salary is still made up of percentages of the local income. The percentage varies and depends on the responsibilities included in the job. First, 2.5 per cent is taken for the work of crop estimation (á¹iyÄfa), which can be done by another person; ideally, the estimate should be approved by the ministry (now the district waqf office) before the Ê¿Ämil is given an order to collect the estimated amount of the crop. Then, the Ê¿Ämilsâ personal, local representatives (wakÄ«l, wukalÄʾ) undertake the process of collecting the income or harvest; for this the Ê¿Ämil receives an additional 2.5 to 10 per cent. The Ê¿Ämil can take 10 per cent of the total income for supervising and accounting and for the process of sending the surplus to the district waqf office. The district waqf office takes at most 2.5 per cent for accounting for all the Ê¿Ämils in their district and reviewing their books. Most of this work is concentrated around harvest time, although some crops are not as regular as the sorghum harvest in the autumn.239
In 1995 the ministry of awqÄf issued decree no. 42 regulating the percentages obtained from waqf income. In this decree, the allotted percentages are specified, but vary a great deal according to the type of work and the nature of the assets. If the assets are old, in need of maintenance and are physically distant from each other (therefore entailing time to administer), the percentage granted to the Ê¿Ämil can be higher. If the Ê¿Ämil is an official employee, thus also receiving a state salary, the percentages are lower. The highest percentage allowed for a non-state employee Ê¿Ämil is 25 per cent if he is also doing the crop estimation (á¹iyÄfa), the crop collection, the accountancies (kitÄba) and the administration of local mosques and other beneficiaries (maḥÄsin) that are in his geographical area of responsibility. As for the actual percentages, no reliable studies exist and even the ministryâs own accounts are not easily available to critical research.
From its surplus, the ministry has built new mosques in several cities, new market complexes, and housing complexes. The yearly turnover is difficult to estimate, since most of the income reverts to local administrators and local beneficiaries and is also, partly, paid in kind. Many of the key figures in the accountancy, such as the building of new mosques or investment projects, are listed according to âprogramsâ (khiá¹á¹a) that stretch over several years and are therefore difficult to compare. In 2002 the Central Statistical Authority stated that about 30 per cent of agricultural land is waqf.240 Other estimates tend towards 10 per cent.241 Around the larger cities, this could be significantly higher. Since the ministry does not have exact information themselves, and under-reporting in field studies must be expected, and since the understanding and definition of waqf is not absolute, any estimate must be taken with great caution.
This is verse number 35 in a qaṣīda of 67 verses concerning the mismanagement of waqf in Sanaa, written by al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AlÄ« b. á¹¢Älih AbÄ« l-RijÄl (d. 1135/1722 or 23) for the ruler of Sanaa, Imam al-Muʾayyad Muḥammad b. IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l (r. 1092â97/1681â86). Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf li-nubalÄʾ al-yaman baÊ¿da al-alf (Beirut: Markaz al-DirÄsÄt wa-Buḥūth al-YamanÄ«, DÄr al-ÄdÄb, 1985), 2:198âthe qaṣīda is on 2:214â216. (The word âwa-kamâ is repeated twice, which is a print mistake; the Arabic could read something like wa-kam siqÄya wa-kam madrasa, which would add a syllable and ease the reading). Serjeant has translated verse 22 and 23 of the same qaṣīda: âDonât leave our waqfs to an inspector / Who will spend on the furnishings of (his own) belvedere / And, with concrete, his house will be / Well appointed, despite any qÄá¸Ä«â R. B. Serjeant, âThe Mosques of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: The Yemeni Islamic Setting,â in á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City, ed. R. B. Serjeant and R. Lewcock (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1983), 315.
For waqf shops for rent in the market area of Sanaa, see Walter Dostal, Der Markt von á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ (Vienna: Verlag der Ãsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1979), 15â18. Mermier also addresses this, partly based on Dostal, see Franck Mermier, âLes Souks de Sanaa et la Societe Citadineâ (PhD thesis, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Paris, 1988), 317â323.
Ḥusayn al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and R. B. Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â in á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City, ed. R. B. Serjeant and R. Lewcock (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1983), 152.
Ê¿Abd al-MÄlik Manṣūr, al-Mawkib.
Ibid., 148â152.
See Serjeantâs treatment of this topic. al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 152.
Ḥasan Ê¿AlÄ« MijallÄ«, al-AwqÄf fÄ« l-Yaman: al-ItÄr al-sharÊ¿Ä« wa-l-qÄnÅ«nÄ« li-l-waqf wa-maqÄá¹£idihi al-Ê¿Ämma wa-tÄrÄ«kh al-waqf wa-dawrihi al-iqtiá¹£ÄdÄ« wa-l-ijtimÄÊ¿Ä« (Sanaa: Maktabat KhÄlid b. al-WalÄ«d, 2002), 17â22. His source in the ministry may be Ê¿AlÄ« Muḥammad al-FarrÄn, who has presented a very similar typology, see below.
MijallÄ«, al-AwqÄf fÄ« l-Yaman, 20.
Ê¿AlÄ« b. Muḥammad al-FarrÄn, al-AwqÄf wa-l-tanmÄ«ya fÄ« l-Yaman (unpublished manuscript). Al-FarrÄn kindly provided me with his manuscript in electronic form. A shorter version of the manuscript was published as Athar al-waqf wa-l-mubarrirÄt fÄ« l-takÄful and ijtimÄÊ¿Ä« (Taâizz: Muʾassasat al-SaÊ¿Ä«d li-l-Ê¿UlÅ«m wa-l-ThaqÄfa, 2009).
al-FarrÄn, Athar al-waqf, 69â91.
Examples will be given in the historical presentation in this chapter.
R. B. Serjeant and Ronald Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1983).
Ḥusayn al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and R. B. Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 151â152.
Al-Tayib Zein al-Abdin, âThe Role of Islam in the State, Yemen Arab Republic (1940â72)â (PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 1975), 218â219.
As for the term á¹£ÄfÄ«ya, á¹£awÄfÄ«: Historically, this seems to have been estate land belonging to castles or lords. See Wilferd Madelung, Religious and Ethnic Movements in Medieval Islam (Aldershot, UK: Variorum, 1992), ch. 11: âLand Ownership and Land Tax in Northern Yemen and NajrÄn: 3rdâ4th/9thâ10th Century,â 196. In the QÄsimÄ« period, á¹£awÄfÄ« seems to be close to the concept of state land; we know that the state held á¹£awÄfÄ« land and there was a minister (wazÄ«r) of á¹£awÄfÄ«. Haykel, Revival and Reform, 71. Non-state á¹£awÄfÄ« from the same time is mentioned in Ḥusayn Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, The Yemen in the 18th and 19th Centuries: A Political and Intellectual History (London: Ithaca Press, 1985), 76. The verb istaá¹£fÄ seems mean âto confiscateâ in Ibn Ê¿Abd al-MajÄ«d, Bahjat al-zaman fi tÄrÄ«kh al-Yaman, ed. Ê¿AbdallÄh Muḥammad al-ḤibshÄ« and Muḥammad Aḥmad al-SanabÄnÄ« (Sanaa: DÄr al-Ḥikma al-YamÄniyya, 1988), 97. For a description of the waqf al-dÄkhilÄ«, Serjeant quotes al-Ê¿ÄbidÄ«n: âThe entire income of this category of waqf is devoted to maintaining existing mosques or building new ones, and forms the bulk of the revenue of the present day Ministry of AwqÄf.â al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 151â152.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 151â152. âThis is controlled by a member of the donorâs family, the Ministry nowadays supervising to ensure that the beneficiaries receive their rightful shares. The Ministry receives five per cent and the remainder is distributed among the donorâs relatives in accordance with the distribution laid down by the sharÄ«Ê¿ah for inheritance.â
Ibid.: âNo part is given to the AwqÄf but the donor specifies a particular pious activity, usually a mosque, to be maintained. The rest of the income is distributed among the relatives according to the law of inheritance. The Ministry hardly interferes in this waqf; it is controlled by a trustee, waá¹£iyy, usually the eldest member of the family, named by the donor. The AwqÄf appoints a supervisor to keep a registry of the land and to settle cases of dispute, for which he receives two and a half per cent of the income. Through this and the proceeding waqf some tribes attempt to exclude women from inheritance by dedicating the waqf to their male descendants. ImÄm YaḥyÄ, and the later Ministry of Justice, ruled against the validity of such an arrangement.â
Gabriele Vom Bruck, Islam, Memory, and Mortality in Yemen: Ruling Families in Transition (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), 118.
al-Abdin, âRole of Islam in the State,â 218. This report, published by the UNDP/FAO is well known in Yemeni studies and is called the âTesco-reportâ: Tesco-Viziterv-Vituki, âSurvey of the Agricultural Potential of WÄdÄ« ZabÄ«dâ (Rome and Budapest: UNDP/FAO, 1971).
Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 250.
Mermier, âLes Souks de Sanaa,â 343.
Ḥusayn Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, YamaniyyÄt fi l-tÄrÄ«kh wa-l-thaqÄfa wa-l-siyÄsa II (Damascus: DÄr al-Fikr al-MuÊ¿Äá¹£ir, 2000), 85â98. This publication is a direct translation of chapter 11 of Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, into Arabic.
The plural, Ê¿ummÄl, is not used as often; it refers to the position or the salary of the Ê¿Ämil; Ê¿umÄl, Ê¿ummÄl, Ê¿amÄla.
When talking about the type as such, or even the institution, the term waá¹£ÄyÄ is usually given in plural. Rarely does one see âwaṣīyaâ in singular, unless speaking of a specific waṣīya. This stands in contrast to waqf, which often appears in the singular, especially in its definite form, when it means âwaqf in general.â This is probably because waá¹£ÄyÄ are indeed several individual cases, while waqf are, in practice, often merged together and administered as a whole and so can be referred to more easily in the singular. Although it is not entirely satisfactory, I use the English plural waqfs, since most of the discussions concern individual hypothetical legal cases; waqfs, not awqÄf as in a general category of land, as in the minstry of awqÄf.
This position seems to have existed at least since the late second Ottoman period, around 1890. It could also be older.
Most land surveys seem to totally overlook this point. When estimating the amount of waqf, would the waá¹£ÄyÄ count as well? It was likely under-reported, since many preferred to keep their waá¹£ÄyÄ un-registered.
Even though the public waqf mutawallÄ«, or âministerâ of the past was called nÄáºir al-waqf by some.
In this work, by âimamâ I generally refer to the ZaydÄ« religious leader and not to the leader of the prayers in a mosque. The role of the ZaydÄ« imam is discussed in chapter 4.
The verbal noun related to this usage is naáºÄra.
Of course arguably, and mainly, types that are close to B and B/D to begin with.
Imam YaḥyÄâs decrees concerning this are treated in chapter 5.
Martha Mundy, Domestic Government: Kinship, Community and Polity in North Yemen (London: Tauris, 1995), 232 n61.
The term âabsolute waá¹£ÄyÄâ (waá¹£ÄyÄ muá¹laqa) refers to mosque waqfs that are solely for the mosque, that is, those that do not have any private rights attached, in practice this is type A or B. For an example of this see al-HÄdÄ« Ê¿Izz al-Din b. al-Ḥasan, MajmÅ«Ê¿ rasÄʾil wa fatÄwÄ l-ImÄm al-HÄdÄ« Ê¿Izz al-DÄ«n b. al-Ḥasan b. Ê¿AlÄ« b. al-Muʾayyad: al-Mujallad al-thÄnÄ«: Jumla min al-fatÄwa al-mufÄ«da Ê¿alÄ l-masÄʾil al-fÄdiḥa al-farÄ«da, ed. Ê¿Abd al-RaḥmÄn b. Ḥusayn ShÄʾim al-MuʾayyadÄ« (Sanaa: Muʾassasat al-ImÄm Zayd b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-ThaqÄfiyya, forthcoming), 469.
A hijra is a non-tibal town or village under the protection of surrounding tribes; they are inhabited by sÄda or quá¸Äh and are sometimes centres of learning.
Yemeni historians also provide some references to waqf in these works, but none can be compared to that of Serjeant. Several contemporary Yemeni historians also quote him, including, Ê¿Abd al-MÄlik Manṣūr, the author of al-Mawkib. This would seem to indicate that there has been little new research done on the topic since Serjeantâs time.
A short book dealing with awqÄf in Hadramawt is Ê¿Abd al-RaḥmÄn Ê¿AbdallÄh Ê¿IwaḠBakÄ«r, al-Waqf fÄ« Ḥaá¸ramawt bayna al-Salaf wa-l-Khalaf (n.p.: al-JamaÊ¿iyya al-Khayriyya li-TaÊ¿lÄ«m al-QurʾÄn al-KarÄ«m, farÊ¿ Ḥaá¸ramawt, MukallÄʾ, DÄr Ḥaá¸ramawt li al-DirÄsÄt wa-l-Nashr, 2002).
IsmÄÊ¿Ä«l b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-AkwaÊ¿, al-MadÄris al-islÄmiyya fÄ«-l-Yaman (Sanaa and Beirut: al-JÄ«l al-JadÄ«d, Muʾassasat al-RisÄla, 1986).
Muḥammad Ê¿Abd al-Raḥim JÄzim, âUn nouveau corpus documentaire dâépoque rasÅ«lide: Les actes de waqf de Taâizz,â ChronÃques du ManuscrÃt au Yémen 10 (2010), online: https://cmy.revues.org/1900 (accessed 12 November 2015).
For the history of waqf in Zabid where such waqf clusters are also mentioned, see Ê¿AbdÅ« Ê¿AlÄ« Ê¿AbdallÄh HÄrÅ«n, al-Durr al-naá¸Ä«d fÄ« taḥdÄ«d maÊ¿Älim wa-ÄthÄr madÄ«nat ZabÄ«d (Sanaa: WizÄrat al-ThaqÄfa wa-l-SiyÄḥa, 2004); Ê¿Abd al-RaḥmÄn Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ḥaá¸ramÄ«, ZabÄ«d: MasÄjiduhÄ wa-madÄrisuhÄ l-Ê¿ilmiyya fÄ« l-tÄrÄ«kh (Sanaa: al-Markaz al-FaransÄ« li-DirÄsÄt al-Yamaniyya bi-á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, al-MaÊ¿had al-FaransÄ« li-DirÄsÄt al-Ê¿Arabiyya bi-Dimashq, 2000).
Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-ḤajarÄ«, MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Ä: Ê¿ÄmiruhÄ wa-muwafÄ«hÄ (Sanaa: Maktabat al-IrshÄd, 2007 [1942]). The introduction is translated in the informative article of Tim Macintosh-Smith, âThe Secret Gardens of Sanaâa,â Saudi Aramco World 57, no. 1 (2006). Serjeant and Lewcock also comment on its content: SanÊ¿Äʾ, 321.
The gardens are still partly in use. See Macintosh-Smith, âThe Secret Gardens.â
SinÄn BÄshÄ: There are at least two men by that name, both were governors of Yemen during the first Ottoman occupation: The first is SinÄn BÄshÄ Beylerbeyi (1506â96), who was also a governor of Egypt and an Ottoman grand vizier (in 1580). The second is SinÄn BÄshÄ l-KaykhiyÄ, who was appointed governor of Yemen in 1604â5. There is some information about him and his period as governor in the GhÄyat al-amÄnÄ« and it was he who ordered the famous waqf register to be made and also built the KaÊ¿ba-like building (al-Qubba) in the middle of the courtyard of the Great Mosque, where, until today the old waqf registers are kept. SinÄn is buried in al-MukhÄʾ next to the famous saint al-ShÄdhilÄ«. See R. B. Serjeant, âThe Post-Medieval and Modern History of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ and the Yemen, ca. 953-1382/1515-1962â in á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ: An Arabian Islamic City, ed. R. B. Serjeant and R. Lewcock (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1983), 71â72.
Serjeant and Lewcock, SanÊ¿Äʾ, 11.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153.
Serjeant, âMosques of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,â 321.
For a photograph of the qubba inside the JÄmiÊ¿, see SanÊ¿Äʾ, 205, plate 18.
YaḥyÄ b. al-Ḥusayn b. al-QÄsim b. Muḥammad, GhÄyat al-amÄnÄ«, ed. SaÊ¿Ä«d Ê¿Abd al-FattÄḥ Ê¿ÄshÅ«r and Muḥammad Muá¹£á¹afÄ ZiyÄda (Cairo: DÄr al-KÄtib al-Ê¿ArabÄ« li-l-ṬibÄÊ¿a wa-l-Nashr bi-l-QÄhira, 1968), 2:792â793.
See also Serjeant, âThe Post Medieval and Modern History of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ and the Yemen, ca. 953â1382/1515â1962,â in Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 73.
JÄzim, âUn nouveau corpus documentaire.â
Lower Yemen refers to the areas around Ibb and Taâizz, and sometimes also includes the TihÄma and the western mountains. Upper Yemen is usually defined as the area from the SumÄra pass above Ibb. Often the distinction between Upper and Lower Yemen is said to be the distinction between the ZaydÄ« and ShÄfiÊ¿Ä« areas, but this is not a clear geographical border.
For a useful genealogical map of the different QÄsimÄ« rulers, see the beginning of Haykel, Revival and Reform.
The term traditionist is thoroughly elaborated by Haykel and refers to the view that the ḥadÄ«th sciences (and hence the term âtraditionâ) and the ḥadÄ«ths in general are authoritative primary sources for law. There are several such famous scholars that opposed or âaddedâ to Zaydism by using the authority of the SunnÄ« ḥadÄ«th collections, of which Muḥammad al-ShawkÄnÄ« (d. 1834) is the latest and most famous of them. The term âneo-SunnÄ«â is used similarly, but the term âneoâ refers more specifically to the newer tendency to reject the law schools altogether, something that al-ShawkÄnÄ« also did. See Haykel, Revival and Reform, 10.
For the QÄsimÄ« period in general, see especially Haykel, Revival and Reform and Paul Dresch, Tribes, Government, and History in Yemen (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 198â235.
Haykel, Revival and Reform, 17â18.
For taxation, see al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 154â160.
Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ ZabÄra, Nayl al-waá¹ar min tarÄjÄ«m rijÄl al-Yaman fÄ« l-qarn al-thÄlith Ê¿ashar min hijrat sayyid al-bashar á¹£, ed. Ê¿Adil Ê¿Aḥmad Ê¿AbdallÄh al-MawjÅ«d and Ê¿AlÄ« Muḥammad MuÊ¿awwiá¸, 2 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ê¿Ilmiyya, 1998), 3:213.
In general, see ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:274â285.
The towns ThulÄʾ, ḤabÄba, ShibÄm, and KawkabÄn are located around 40 km northwest of Sanaa.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:279.
Ibid., 1:278; ZabÄra quotes al-ShawkÄnÄ«. See also Muḥammad b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-ShawkÄnÄ«, al-Badr al-á¹ÄliÊ¿ bi-maḥÄsin man baÊ¿da al-qarn al-sÄbiÊ¿ (Damascus and Beirut: DÄr Ibn KathÄ«r, 2006), 144.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:227.
Ibid., 2:143.
Should Godâs property be taxed? The recent historical practices seem to indicate that waqf lands are rented out and that the tenant must pay the zakÄt. However, it is quite easy to see the argument that the zakÄt of waqf, if taken, should go to the waqf beneficiaries themselves, as ZaydÄ« waqf beneficiaries are pious by definition and worthy recipients and taxation of Godâs property seems odd. In any case, most of these waqf beneficiaries were mosques. Thus one could easily argue that such a taxation is unnecessary in the first place. Or, as QÄá¹in himself stated before the imam, this should return to the waqf as stipends for the poor and if the zakÄt was diverted away from the waqf (to the bayt al-mÄl) âthe poor would suffer.â Another reference to the issue of zakÄt from waqf states that in 1817 âthe new imam, al-MahdÄ« Ê¿AbdallÄh decided to follow the practice of his father in the issues of zakÄt of waqf and argued (istaḥajja) that it was to go back to the waqf ⦠however it did not show on the upkeep of the mosques.â Luá¹f AllÄh b. Aḥmad JaḥḥÄf, ḤawliyyÄt al-muʾarrikh jaḥḥÄf, ed. Ḥusayn b. Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ« (Beirut: DÄr al-Fikr al-MuÊ¿Äá¹£ir, 1998), 83. At the time QÄá¹in made his argument, al-ShawkÄnÄ« was supposed to have had a strong influence on legal matters, however, he is not mentioned.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:143.
The verb âto showâ aá¹laÊ¿a is used for bringing forward and opening a book or consulting a book.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:143.
Ibid., 2:411.
Ibid., 1:278.
Ibid., 1:283. al-ShawkÄnÄ«, al-Badr al-á¹ÄliÊ¿, 145.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:143.
Ibid.
Ibid., 2:147. ʿĪd al-fiá¹r, 1187 AH.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:139: âal-QÄá¸Ä« Aḥmad b. á¹¢Äliḥ b. AbÄ« l-RijÄl (1727â77) was given the position of secretary of the awqÄf by al-MaḥdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs. He was also made minister or governor of al-Ḥayma, ḤufÄsh, and Wuá¹£Äb.
Ibid., 1:142.
Ibid., 2:236.
Ibid., 2:235â36.
ZabÄra, Ibid.
á¸arÄʾib waqf rent is also mentioned in MijallÄ«, al-AwqÄf fÄ« l-Yaman, 122â123.
As given by Luá¹f AllÄh JaḥḥÄf in ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:236. See also Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 315 n59.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:236â237.
ZabÄra, Nayl al-waá¹ar, 2:298â301. DallÄl wrote some lines of poetry about him, translated in al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:147; here it states that he died in 1305 AH (i.e., 1887 or 1888), and Serjeant quotes this al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153. The correct year is one hundred hijrÄ« years earlier, 1205/1791 (that is, the year 1305 in the Nashr is a misprint and should be 1205). This is confirmed in ZabÄra, Nayl al-waá¹ar, 2:298â301.
Al-Sayyid Ê¿AlÄ« b. Aḥmad b. Ê¿AlÄ« (d. 1198/1784) was âmutawallÄ« waqf DhamÄr.â He studied under al-QÄá¸Ä« Ahmad b. á¹¢Äliḥ b. AbÅ« l-RijÄl and under al-QÄá¸Ä« Ê¿AlÄ« b. Aḥmad b. NÄá¹£ir al-ShijnÄ« (who issued the fatwÄ in chapter 7) He was in charge of the awqÄf of DhamÄr in the days of Imam al-Manṣūr Ê¿AlÄ« (son of al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs). See ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:170â171.
Serjeant remarks that the poem was also translated by Harald Vocke in 1973 into German and that this translation was based on another source and that his comments are even fuller. Serjeant and Lewcock, SanÊ¿Äʾ, 317â321. The poem was recently published in the newest edition of al-ḤajarÄ«, MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Ä, 79â81.
According to Serjeant, epic dramas in which mosques are the main characters are not uncommon; he claims to have seen one from Hadramawt as well. Serjeant and Lewcock, SanÊ¿Äʾ, 318. For other such dramas see âThe marriage between the Madhhab Mosque and the MurÄdiyya Mosque,â ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:204â216.
Note that the term waṣīya is used.
That is (Ibn MiftÄḥ), Sharḥ al-azhÄr.
The al-BayÄn al-shÄfÄ« is discussed in chapter 4.
That is Mulḥat al-iÊ¿rÄb. Together with al-AjrÅ«miyya, these two are the most commonly used introductory works of Arabic grammar in traditional education. The Mulḥa is mentioned several times as an important part of the curriculum in Arabic grammar, see for instance al-ShawkÄnÄ«âs own âideal-curriculumâ in his work Adab al-á¹alab as translated by Haykel, Revival and Reform, 105 n103. And, for instance Vom Bruck, Islam, Memory, and Mortality, 117.
For his life, see ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 3:29â69.
Al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs repaired the two famous underground water canals, called GhÄyl al-Aswad and Ghayl al-BarmakÄ«. These water tunnels are often called qanÄt elsewhere; in Yemeni dialect they are referred to as âghuyÅ«l.â They start at several wells some distance to the south of the city, pass under the city with several openings for public access and mosque ablutions, and exit on the lower, northern side of the city, called ShuÊ¿Å«b. For these two ghayls in general see R. B. Serjeant, Paolo Costa, and Ronald Lewcock, âThe Ghayls of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,â in á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, ed. Serjeant and Lewcock (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1983); and Ê¿AslÄn, GhuyÅ«l á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ.
Most probably, not all ShuÊ¿Å«b land was waqf, but there were a high number of waqf fields interspersed among private fields. The sales document is edited and analysed in Ḥusayn Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, Miʾat Ê¿Äm min tÄrÄ«kh al-Yaman al-ḥadÄ«th (Damascus: DÄr al-Fikr, 1988), 33â43. And similarly in Ḥusayn Ê¿AbdallÄh al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, âA Document Concerning the Sale of Ghayl al-BarmakÄ« and al-Ghayl al-Aswad by al-MahdÄ« Ê¿AbbÄs, Imam of Yemen, 1131â89/1718â75,â in Arabian and Islamic Studies, ed. R. L. Bidwell and G. R. Smith (London and New York: Longman, 1983). The sale took place in February 1767.
Ramaá¸Än 1161.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 3:32.
There are several terms in use that all mean âexchangeâ: Ê¿iwaá¸, ibdÄl, and istibdÄl. In ḤanafÄ« areas, the term istibdÄl seems to be used more consistently.
In some treatises the question of whether or not it is legal to âsellâ waqfs seems to have reappeared as a legal topic. In order to undertake an istibdÄl it is also necessary to sell the original waqf asset. To sell the waqf, without buying a new waqf asset, would not be an istibdÄl and certainly illegal; it looks as if Ibn al-AmÄ«r speculated about this aspect for his argumentation. The question of selling a waqf, and how to define ânecessity,â is addressed in an unpublished treatise found in the Maktabat al-Waqf called âTaʾkÄ«d al-taʾsÄ«s al-mabnÄ Ê¿alÄ wujÅ«b dawÄm al-taḥbÄ«s,â MajÄmÄ«Ê¿ 23, âFiqh,â folio 28â30. The treatise, from 1654, is signed by al-Ḥusayn b. NÄá¹£ir Ê¿Abd al-ḤafÄ«áº; it is divided into two parts, the second of which is called âal-Baḥth al-nafÄ«s al-muttaá¹£il bi-taʾkÄ«d al-taʾsÄ«s al-mabnÄ Ê¿alÄ â¦â A photocopy is in the authorâs possession.
ZabaÌra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:21â24.
Ibid., 2:23.
He must mean that waqfs of the waṣīya type do not carry the same legal implications as âabsolute waqf.â In this case waṣīya clearly refers to a type of waqf.
ZabaÌra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:23.
Note that in the letter, he never explicitly states that istibdÄl in waqf should be illegal.
The madhhab âfavoursâ this by indicating ijmÄÊ¿ with the use of validation signs; taqrÄ«r and tadhhÄ«b. These indications, which are vital to understanding the Sharḥ al-azhÄr, are explained in chapter 4.
Ê¿AbdallÄh AbÅ« l-Ḥasan Ibn MiftÄḥ, al-MuntaziÊ¿ al-mukhtÄr min al-ghayth al-midrÄr al-maÊ¿rÅ«f bi-Sharḥ al-azhÄr (Sanaa: WizÄrat al-Ê¿Adl / Maktabat al-TurÄth al-IslÄmÄ«, 2003), 8:239.
Probably it can mean both employees and people receiving stipends like students and the worthy poor.
Here he may be referring to QÄá¹in, as he has referred to him above as âthe one before al-Ê¿ArÄsÄ«â?
He reigned from 1676 to 1681; he was a grandson of al-QÄsim and the great great grandfather of al-MahdÄ« l-Ê¿AbbÄs.
It is called Ghayl al-MahdÄ«, see Serjeant, Costa, and Lewcock, âGhayls of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,â 30.
The wording is not entirely clear. The ghayl is well known. Al-Rawá¸a, which is near Sanaa, to the north, is still known for its grapes.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 2:23â24. This text is partly treated by Serjeant, âThe Post Medieval and Modern History of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,â in Serjeant and Lewcock (eds.), á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 85â86.
ZabÄra, Nayl al-waá¹ar, 1:93.
al-ʿAmrī, Yemen in the 18th and 19th Centuries, 117.
The terms Ê¿amÄla and aÊ¿mÄl seem to be used in relation to the granting of rights to public waqf admninistration. See also Muḥammad AbÅ« Zahra, MuḥÄá¸arÄt fÄ« l-waqf (Cairo: Dar al-Fikr al-Ê¿ArabÄ«), 340.
al-ShawkÄnÄ«, al-Badr al-á¹ÄliÊ¿, 178.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ«, Yemen in the 18th and 19th Centuries, 77; Luá¹f AllÄh, ḤawliyyÄt al-muʾarrikh JaḥḥÄf, 29.
al-ShawkÄnÄ«, al-Badr al-á¹ÄliÊ¿, 178.
Luá¹f AllÄh, ḤawliyyÄt al-muʾarrikh JaḥḥÄf, 87.
This is mentioned by Haykel, who quotes the ḤawliyyÄt YamÄnÄ«yya and the Nayl al-waá¹ar. Haykel writes that it was never clear to him what these waá¹£ÄyÄ were. Most probably, they were once local waqfs or clusters of waqfs: Either large landholdings carrying the names of waá¹£ÄyÄ, which indicate that they could just as well have been family controlled waqfs, which were confiscated by the state for some reason. Or, it could be the right to supervise local, ânormalâ public waqfs in these specific local areas. In either case, al-ShawkÄnÄ« would probably have the right to take ten percent of the total income in return for administering the leases and taking care of the local mosques (or other beneficiaries). The actual administrative work could in turn be delegated to someone else, while al-ShawkÄnÄ« could still obtain a sizeable surplus. For instance, from al-Ḥayma alone he received one hundred silver pieces (qirsh) monthly. Al-ShawkÄnÄ« used one of his students, Muḥammad b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-Ê¿AmrÄnÄ«, to manage his âfiefsâ and a conflict between the two led to the imprisonment of his student. Haykel, Revival and Reform, 56â57. ZabÄra, Nayl al-waá¹ar, 2:346. ḤawliyyÄt Yamaniyya: al-Yaman fÄ« l-qarn al-tÄsiÊ¿ Ê¿ashar al-mÄ«lÄdÄ«, ed. Ê¿AbdallÄh b. Muḥammad al-ḤibshÄ« (Sanaa: DÄr al-Ḥikma al-Yamaniyya, 1991), 279.
Tax collection and the waqf administration were mainly occupied by local elites. We must expect that the tax collection system was more dominated by local, tribal shaykhs than the waqf administration, as even tribal areas with little or few waqf institutions still paid taxes. Tax collection was an important part of the tribal system, since powerful tribal shaykhs were allowed to keep a large part of the collected tax for themselves. The waqf administration was in turn more influenced by the scholarly families; waqfs tend to be more concentrated in urban areas and in areas where sayyids and quá¸Äh are found. A fundamental difference between the two systems was that in the waqf administration, most funds presumably reverted to local beneficiaries and in the QÄsimÄ« period we do not know to what extent waqf surplus was sent to Sanaa. There were many types of taxes, but the most important, the zakÄt (Ê¿ushr), was sent, in part, to the central government, although there were many local expenditures as well, which Messick points out, though his focus was on the historical period that follows this. Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 168â173. Shelag Weir writes about the shaykhsâ role in tax practices in RÄziḥ; see Shelagh Weir, A Tribal Order: Politics and Law in the Mountains of Yemen (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007), 251â255.
This point was elaborated by Thomas Kühn in his presentation at the annual meeting of the Middle East Studies Association, Washington, DC (Nov. 2014). He referred to several Ottoman administrative documents and communications that emphasize the conscious pragmatic approach to local elites.
For a study of this period see Thomas Kühn, âShaping Ottoman Rule in Yemen, 1872â1919â (PhD thesis, New York University, 2005); Thomas Kuehn, Empire, Islam, and Politics of Difference: Ottoman Rule in Yemen, 1849â1919 (Leiden: Brill, 2011). Hümeyra Bostan, âInstitutionalizing Justice in a Distant Province: Ottoman Judicial Reform in Yemen (1872â1918)â (MA thesis, Istanbul Sehir University, 2013).
Presumably there could still be waqfs in other nearby areas in favour of certain mosques in Sanaa. For example, informants in Sanaa said that the Qubbat al-MahdÄ« had waqfs in Änis, DhamÄr. I have also seen administrative documents in Rayma (although from the early reign of Imam YaḥyÄ), that there existed waqfs in favour of public beneficiaries in Sanaa called al-maḥÄsin al-mutawakkiliyya (âthe Mutawakkili public works and servicesâ).
Messick writes that in Ibb there was a local waqf administration for the waqfs that support the religious education in the city (waqf darasa). Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 163.
Technically, many of the mosque waqfs did not have private mutawallÄ«s, therefore it was the imam who was the mutawallÄ« for these waqfs. The term âinspectorâ only implies supervision, though in fact the inspector was actually a mutawallÄ«, at least the dÄkhilÄ« one.
Serjeant, âThe Post Medieval and Early Modern History of á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ,â in Serjeant and Lewcock (eds.), á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 90.
Anon., ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 314.
He was also the muftī of al-Ḥanafiyya.
Anon., ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 365.
b. 1848 or 1849, d. 1942 or 1943.
Anon., ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 527. He may be the same person mentioned in ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 364, if not, Aḥsan al-Ê¿AmrÄ« was nÄáºir al-awqÄf in the year 1890.
al-ḤajarÄ«, MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Ä, 65.
Anon., ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 527. Here, the HawliyyÄt refers to a version of the Aʾimma that I do not have, 1:2:143. As for al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿ being a nÄáºir, I have seen references in a contemporary court case to a waqf property at al-Rawá¸a that refers to the âMuá¹ÄÊ¿Ä« waqf register,â al-Miswadda al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿iyya as an authoritative legal source. For his biography see ZabÄra, Nuzhat al-naáºar, 466. There ZabÄra states that he was both the ânaáºÄrat al-awqÄf al-dÄkhiliyya wa-l-khÄrijiyyaâ and that he was member of the administrative council under the Ottomans. BÄsha ḤilmÄ« imprisoned him for a long period until Imam YaḥyÄ took over and set him free. Later al-Muá¹ÄÊ¿ became governor over the qaá¸Äʾ of RadÄÊ¿.
Ê¿Abd al-WÄsiÊ¿ b. YaḥyÄ l-WÄsiÊ¿Ä«, TÄrÄ«kh al-Yaman al-musammÄ Farḥat al-humÅ«m wa-l-ḥuzn fÄ« ḥawÄdith tÄrÄ«kh al-Yaman (Sanaa: Maktabat al-IrshÄd, 2007), 255.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153 n11.
Also mentioned in Anon., ḤawliyÄt Yamaniyya, 314.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153 n11.
ZabÄra states that he was also a judge for the âTurksâ in the area of al-Ḥayma. Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman bi-l-qarn al-rÄbiÊ¿ ashar li-l-hijra (Cairo: al-Maá¹baÊ¿a al-Salafiyya wa-MaktabatuhÄ, n.d.), 2:1:156.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:142.
al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 153. Aʾimma, 1:2:215. (Serjeant refers to AÊ¿imma 2:2:215.).
ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:296; Sayyid Muá¹£tafÄ SÄlim, WathÄʾiq Yamaniyya: DirÄsa wathÄʾiqiyya tÄrÄ«khiyya (N.p.: al-Maá¹baÊ¿a al-Fanniyya, 1985), 138â141. With regard to why this office appeared during the Ottoman occupation, one theory relates to the fact that for ḤanafÄ«s, private waqfs have a much more important official role because, according to ḤanafÄ« law, they are only private while the beneficiaries are alive. If the family line, or any other specific beneficiary die out, the waqf becomes an open, public waqf. Therefore, in ḤanafÄ« areas there was a strong incentive to register all private waqfs, in order to make sure they did revert to public waqfs and were not taken by private individuals. Thus the ideas and the practices of registering private waqfs would have been common administrative knowledge among the Ottomans. There is also a possibility that this practice was begun by Imam YaḥyÄ, since his waqf administrators were appointed in 1911. In this case Muḥammad al-Manṣūr must have occupied these two positions for a very short time.
SÄlim, WathÄʾiq Yamaniyya, 138.
Ibid., 228â231.
Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 252.
For a version of this compromise, see ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:74â76. And al-WÄsiÊ¿Ä«, TÄrÄ«kh al-Yaman, 329.
IḥÄlat al-awqÄf ilÄ Ê¿uhdatinÄ li-iḥyÄʾ al-maÊ¿Ärif fÄ« hÄdhihi al-bilÄd. The suggested compromise (á¹£ulḥ) is dated 4 August 1906. ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:75.
Article 10 as found in Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:205. In other works it seems to be article 9. The wording is the same.
â10âTakÅ«nu masÄʾil al-awqÄf wa-l-waá¹£ÄyÄ manÅ«á¹atan bi-l-imÄm.â Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:205. Interestingly, this time the waá¹£ÄyÄ are explicitly pointed out in addition to waqf.
See also Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 428. Thereby we know that he held that position at least until 1918.
The title indicates that he was not the nÄáºir, but only a deputy of the nÄáºir, or that the position was not officially called nÄáºir, but the somewhat more modern wakÄ«l. Undoubtedly, the Sanaa administration was much older and perhaps even more traditional than the newer khÄrijÄ« administration.
The title indicates that this position had jurisdiction over Sanaa only. ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:1:232.
ZabÄra, Nashr al-Ê¿arf, 1:139â142. This reference is also mentioned by Haykel, Revival and Reform, 70.
Most probably the village Ê¿AyshÄn, 10 km west of the city of DhamÄr.
The word qubba means âdomeâ; often sabÄ«ls have a small dome as a roof and are therefore called qubba.
Here al-ḤusÄm is a poetic title that is used before the name Muḥsin, just as al-Ê¿IzzÄ« before Muḥammad, al-á¹¢afiyy before Aḥmad and so on, cf. Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 428 n262.
Judging by the fatwÄ translated at the end of chapter 7, demanding the âfullâ share is quite strict unless this waqf was originally an âabsoluteâ waqf in which the descendants of the founder did not hold any rights. The two persons mentioned above could also have been unrelated to the founder, i.e., they were tenants who had usurped the waqf. Since no mutawallÄ« is mentioned, the latter is less probable.
The full translation is give in Hovden, âFlowers in Fiqh,â appendix 2, 528â532. A copy of the document was given to the author by Aḥmad al-SiyÄnÄ« (the keeper of the waqf registers, ḥÄfiz al-miswaddÄt in the ministry of awqÄf. It was given as a photocopy on a sheet of A4 paperâthe original format is not known.
This is elaborated further in chapter 7.
Serjeant and Lewcock, á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 427â431.
This is a complicated topic that may be summarized: The principle is that the will of the founder must be respected, thus if this will is known and can be executed, then there is no doubt that this must be done, unless the waqf is invalid for some other reason. However, a multitude of potential problems can arise: for example, if the actual beneficiary ceases to exist, the question arises as to whether or not the family of the founder can take the waqf back, or, if the waqf should go to a similar beneficiary, or even to another type of beneficiary in another location. The basic view expressed in the Sharḥ al-azhÄr allows for the descendants of the founder to take the waqf back (as waqf, not as private property). Thus Imam YaḥyÄâs legal view was clearly a way to limit this more local and flexible way of managing waqf in favour of the state overtaking âlostâ waqfs.
This is elaborated upon in chapter 5.
For instance, they were not included in the list and commented upon by al-ShamÄḥī: Ê¿AbdallÄh b. Ê¿Abd al-WahhÄb al-MujÄhid al-ShamÄḥī, á¹¢irÄá¹ al-Ê¿ÄrifÄ«n ilÄ idrÄk ikhtiyÄrÄt amÄ«r al-muʾminÄ«n (Sanaa: Maá¹baÊ¿at al-MaÊ¿Ärif, 1937).
Aḥmad b. QÄsim al-YamÄnÄ« l-SanÊ¿ÄnÄ« l-Ê¿AnsÄ«, al-TÄj al-mudhhab li-aḥkÄm al-madhhab (Sanaa: Maktabat al-Yaman al-KubrÄ), 309â312. Here, al-QÄá¸Ä« Ḥusayn b. Aḥmad al-SayÄghÄ« (d. 1806) is quoted by al-Ê¿AnsÄ«. It is a short treatise that refers to ḥadÄ«ths and âpublic interestâ in fiqh language; in sum, it validates the concept of âtransferâ or âchangeâ of the beneficiary of waqfs (taḥwÄ«l). Al-Ê¿AnsÄ« states that this legal view âis chosenâ by the Imam (yakhtÄru al-jawÄz). The main argument is that this is a legal question for which no âclear textâ exists and for which all mujtahids are correct, and therefore the question is open to interpretation by the imam.
Al-ShawkÄnÄ« had strong opinions on the issue of the moral status of respecting various forms of graves and practices related to these. Doctrinally, he had to restrict his criticism because the WahhÄbÄ«s, his enemies, were also against grave visitation and in Lower Yemen the custom of grave visitation was a widespread aspect of local religious life. For this and more information concerning this topic in general, see Haykel, Revival and Reform, 127â138. Imam YaḥyÄ and his close political allies may have been inspired by al-ShawkÄnÄ« in this matter; the latter stated: âAnd similarly what exists of awqÄf for graves: Verily they are devilish waqf (ḥubs) and misleading customs. It is has never been allowed (lam yaḥill) to validate anything related to such waqfs, nor to keep quiet about them, indeed, the diverting of these to the public good for the Muslims (maá¹£Äliḥ al-muslimÄ«n) is one of the most important and necessary issues. If such a protest and invalidation is not done, then this is among the greatest sins ⦠leading to a form of shirk.â Muḥammad b. Ê¿AlÄ« l-ShawkÄnÄ«, Adab al-á¹alab wa-muntahÄ l-arab, ed. Ê¿AbdallÄh b. YaḥyÄ l-Surayḥī (Sanaa: Maktabat al-IrshÄd, DÄr Ibn Ḥazm, 1998), 246.
See Messick, Calligraphic State, 108â109.
See also Messick, Calligraphic State, 107â114.
Here al-AkwaÊ¿ mentions âBÄnÄ« BahlÅ«l, BilÄd al-RÅ«s, á¹¢anḥÄn and other areas.â
He uses the term âMakÄrimaâ for the IsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«s. Other terms commonly used are âal-Baá¹iniyya.â Al-AkwaÊ¿, al-MadÄris, 402â403. The issue of land confiscation and converting it to waqf is also mentioned briefly by MijallÄ«, who states that the ZaydÄ« state has several times confiscated property âof the Baá¹iniyya in ḤarÄz.â MijallÄ«, al-AwqÄf fÄ« l-Yaman, 25.
al-AkwaÊ¿, al-MadÄris, 414.
Note the use of the term âtheâ waqf. This is an example of a local âpublicâ waqf cluster similar to that of Sanaa or DhamÄr, but smaller, probably native to the hijra.
Hijra, hijar: sayyid villages/towns where scholarly activities took place, usually enclaves in otherwise tribal territory.
Vom Bruck, Islam, Memory, and Mortality, 285 n25; Vom Bruck, âDisputing Descent-Based Authority in the Idiom of Religion: The Case of the Republic of Yemen,â Social Anthropology 4, no. 2 (1998), 165.
In this context vom Bruck states that Imam YaḥyÄ âstrengthened some favoured ZaydÄ« enclaves, notably Saâda, Huth, Dhamar, Thula, and Shahara,â but she does not give references. Vom Bruck, âDisputing Descent-Based Authority,â 167 n38.
Würth, Ash-sharÄ«Ê¿a fÄ« bÄb al-Yaman, 60â62.
This is a general statement, but still fairly easy to verify by looking at traditional curriculums as portrayed in the biographical dictionaries and comparing them with the curriculum in al-Madrasa al-Ê¿Ilmiyya.
Over the years Imam YaḥyÄ changed the rhetoric from one of a ZaydÄ« imamate more in direction of a kingdom (mamlaka), officially known as the Mutawakkilite Kingdom. The crown prince was called walÄ« l-Ê¿ahd. Haykel, Revival and Reform, 210â212. With regard to the princes being called Sayf al-IslÄm, this seems to be an older tradition going back to the QÄsimÄ«s.
An electronic copy of the letter was kindly provided by a high-ranking official in the ministry of awqÄf; Ê¿AlÄ« Muḥammad al-FarrÄn; it will be published in the appendix of his forthcoming book. Al-FarrÄn, al-AwqÄf wa-l-tanmÄ«ya fÄ« l-Yaman. The decree is edited and translated in Hovden, âFlowers in Fiqh,â appendix 3, 532â540.
According to informants, this is clearly the case today. I have seen mosque employees coming to the ministry to complain that the local mudÄ«r waqf had to sign the requests to buy daily necessities for the mosque. The situation in Imam YaḥyÄâs time is indicated in Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 159.
Even if some of the waqf fields for such a smaller village mosque were registered and entered into the khÄrijÄ« administration, this does not mean that the mosque did not have funding from other, privately managed waqfs, or other sources like gifts. The smaller village mosques, without imams and muʾadhdhins, did not require much regular income.
It is not known whether these mosques are then paid by the general khÄrijÄ« budget and managed by the khÄrijÄ« administration, but this seems logical.
Mundaris means âdisappeared.â Munqaá¹iÊ¿ al-maá¹£rif means that the waqf, for some reason or another, is âcut offâ from its beneficiary, e.g., the beneficiary has âdisappeared.â According to the ZaydÄ« madhhab, waqfs that no longer have beneficiaries revert to the descendants of the founder, but only as waqf, not as property. There is much disagreement around this question and the famous al-Muʾayyad Aḥmad b. al-Ḥusayn (d. 411/1020) states that they should go to the public good âal-maá¹£Äliḥ.â Here, Imam YaḥyÄ takes the ZaydÄ« stand by allowing descendants of the founder to take the waqf back, and by confirming that the rule above only refers to waqfs (or rather waá¹£ÄyÄ) where no such claims exist. In these cases the âsomeoneâ who has taken the waqf is usually the tenant and his descendants. This requires that the existence of the waqfs be âprovenâ either by old registers of by public memory (shuhra).
These three types of turab waqfs are also mentioned in Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 254.
Usually, a family waqf cannot have a surplus because if the harvest increases in a certain year, the beneficiaries simply receive more that year. As stated in the decree, the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ also controlled local charity and food waqfs, and these could potentially have a surplus after local needs were covered. The third to be taken could be from such a surplus, or this third could be the sharecropping fraction of the harvest that was to be submitted to the nÄáºir, while the tenants (who are often the descendants of the founder) are allowed to keep the rest. The term used, al-rÄjiÊ¿, was also the term noted by Dresch as the part a shaykh could keep from the taxes he collected. Dresch, Tribes, 228.
It could be the 2.5 per cent that al-Abdin refers to that was taken by the inspector. Al-Abdin, âThe Role of Islam,â 219.
This is also supported by findings from Ibb, as presented by Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 165â166. There is no doubt that such family waqfs still exist, but we simply do not know how widespread the phenomenon was, and in which areas it was practiced.
This issue is treated in chapter 5.
We do not know to what extent there existed ânon-mosque type Aâ in which no private individual claimed the right to administer it and so it was fully taken over by the nÄáºir al-waá¹£ÄyÄ. However, one should not rule out the possibility that this could be the case in some geographical areas or in some specific cases. In yearly rent registers of recent years (similar to appendix 8 in Hovden, âFlowers of Fiqhâ) I have seen the category âwaá¹£ÄyÄ and turab.â This could indicate that some waqfs do belong to the waá¹£ÄyÄ. Perhaps they were once confiscated. Here it is important to note that many of the non-mosque âpublicâ waqfs were, in practice, combined waqfs in which the family of the founder had significant rights, as elaborated upon in chapter 7. For instance the family of the founder could have the right to the surplus after the mosque has been taken care of.
I could not obtain access to this, I was only told about its existence. So I cannot know how âinclusiveâ it was; it could also be a patchwork of previous registers, but it is fair to expect that the reforms initiated by Imam YaḥyÄ necessitated new, updated inventory registers. Needless to say, such registers are fundamental information for historians, and hopefully one day they will be available.
Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 159. I have seen such books, and have some copies of letters summing up the end of each year, written from the local Ê¿Ämil to the nÄáºir in Sanaa, stating something like âI hereby sendâamount of the income of the waqfs from such and such agricultural fields.â The answer and approval by Sanaa is written on the same page.
An example is that of al-JabÄ«n, Rayma, where there is still one Ê¿Ämil al-waqf and one Ê¿Ämil al-waá¹£ÄyÄ. Or, as they are officially called today, mudÄ«r. Yet, it should be noted that several informants there told me of privately administered waqfs that have no relationship to the state.
Even today waqf Ê¿Ämils receive a similar amount and even far higher if they also administer the upkeep of their local mosques.
al-ḤajarÄ«, MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Ä, 76.
ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:2:332.
Ibid. This was a very large sabÄ«l that supplied water for much of the southern part of the city. For a description of the construction of the sabÄ«l at Abhar see al-ḤajarÄ«, MasÄjid á¹¢anÊ¿Ä, 9â10.
For more information about the library, see Messick, Calligraphic State, 119â123.
Document D1948: âAl-NaáºÄ«r pledge loyalty to ImÄm Aḥmad ḤamÄ«d al-DÄ«n, with conditions,â Weir, Tribal Order, 273.
Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 252.
In WÄdÄ« Zabid there is a particularly sizeable waqf for the two holy cities. However, it does not seem to be common elsewhere. Some informants say that all waqfs that benefit these cities were included in the general waqf budget after the revolution, to be spent inside Yemen, since from this time on Yemen was much poorer than Saudi Arabia, and for some years since 1962 it was also at war with them. It is no surprise that al-Abdin found this type of waqf here, since he bases himself on the Tesco report which focuses on WÄdÄ« Zabid.
Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 185. For a full biography, see Vom Bruck, where he describes his career as a student, Ê¿Älim, and state employee. Vom Bruck, Islam, Memory, and Mortality.
Al-QÄá¸Ä« Aḥmad b. Aḥmad, born in Saâda in 1905â06. He was a governor of Ibb and famous for administering the building of the new road in the SumÄra pass, thus connecting Ibb to Sanaa. He died in Marib fighting during the civil war in 1964. ZabÄra, Nuzhat al-naáºar, 58.
Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 162â168, 246â265.
I could not confirm this in Sanaa, though several other informants claimed that a certain al-SayÄghÄ« did bring all original waqf documents he could find to the capital Taâizz and subsequently to Sanaa. Ḥusayn al-SayÄghÄ« became minister of awqÄf after the revolution in 1962 and continued to hold the post during the civil war years, thus the exact timing is unclear and his work with the waqf administration and reform stretches over a long time period.
I have seen one such handwritten copy of a miswadda in Zabid; it contains the wording of individual waqf documents, in entries one after the other. I have photocopies of four such entries concerning water supply waqfs, mainly waqf for the maintenance of public wells.
Personal communication with historian Ê¿Abduh Ê¿AlÄ« HÄrÅ«n, Zabid, 26 December 2009.
Born in 1915. He was also a minister of justice and held the position as minister of awqÄf in 1978.
Personal communication with Muḥammad al-Manṣūr, Sanaa, January 2010.
ZabÄra, Aʾimmat al-Yaman, 2:2:251.
Ibid., 2:2:269.
These mainly concerned the issue of family waqf and are treated in chapter 5.
Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 186.
Ibid., 285.
These include regulating leases and the dissolution of ḥaqq al-yad in previous leases. See chapter 6.
For the decrees in general see Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 277â309.
Validated fiqh refers to rules that have been chosen by consensus, or âcodified.â
Ibid., 283.
Ibid., 186.
Ibid., 298.
Ibid., 281. The previous dÄkhilÄ« and khÄrijÄ« administrations were merged under the name waqf or awqÄf.
In decree no. 73 from 1969, article 1.4 that organises the new ministry defines the waá¹£ÄyÄ as âsubul, wa-l-qirÄÊ¿a, wa duwar al-á¸ayÄfa.â In practice this refers to public, non-mosque waqfs with private administrators. Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 285.
Such as article 13 in the law from 1968, Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 281. See also Messick, âTransactions in Ibb,â 175â181.
I have copies of several such lists of waqf and turab-waá¹£ÄyÄ income from the districts near Sanaa. See appendix 8 in Hovden, âFlowers in Fiqh.â
Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 186.
Ibid., 190.
As in the above mentioned decree of that year.
MijallÄ«, al-AwqÄf fÄ« l-Yaman, 26.
Some claim that it still funds the state-funded Islamic schools and âinstitutes,â but this has not been investigated in this study.
Manṣūr, al-Mawkib, 289.
Ibid., 297â298.
Al-QirshÄ« states that the ministry of awqÄf has not been given any details about the health waqfs. GhÄlib Ê¿Abd al-KÄfÄ«, al-AwqÄf wa-l-waá¹£ÄyÄ bayna al-sharÄ«Ê¿a wa-l-qÄnÅ«n al-YamanÄ« (Sanaa: IwÄn li-l-KhidmÄt al-IÊ¿lÄmiyya, 2008), 100.
al-FarrÄn, Athar al-waqf, 119 and 189.
This was true until spring 2011; Muḥammad b. YaḥyÄ b. Luá¹f al-FÄṣīl, according to decree no. 284 of 2002.
Al-Manṣūr told me that he had a letter of appointment from the president and that this was still in effect. Personal communication with Muḥammad al-Manṣūr, Sanaa, January 2010.
al-QirshÄ«, al-AwqÄf wa-l-waá¹£ÄyÄ, 101.
Ibid., 100.
But if there is a mutawallÄ«, and the state has registered the waṣīya and supervises it, if we read Serjeant/al-Abdinâs description of the khÄrijÄ« waqf, we see that the inspector is entitled to 2.5 per cent. This seems reasonable, and the difference would be whether or not a registered waṣīya waqf has a legal mutawallÄ« present or not. Al-Ê¿AmrÄ« and Serjeant, âAdministrative Organisation,â 151; al-Abdin, âRole of Islam,â 219.
al-FarrÄn, Athar al-waqf, 181.
Personal communication with al-ShÄmÄ«, January 2010. His letter of resignation is well known and he provided me with a copy.
Administratively, Yemen is divided into governorates (muḥÄfaáºat), districts (mudÄ«riyyÄt), and sub-districts (Ê¿uzla, pl. Ê¿uzal). There are around 300 districts and 2,000 sub-districts.
The plural for Ê¿Ämil is also Ê¿ÄmilÅ«n, not to be confused with âÊ¿umÄlâ which is the same as the contemporary term for the Ê¿amÄla. The term aÊ¿mÄl refers to a geographical administrative area in several historical periods.
al-FarrÄn, Athar al-waqf, 180.
See FarrÄn, Athar al-waqf, 174â190. Some of the information is based on the unpublished manuscript version of the Athar al-waqf called al-Waqf wa-l-tanmÄ«ya fÄ« l-Yaman and on conversations with al-FarrÄn.
Ê¿AlÄ« Muḥammad al-FarrÄn refers to âal-Yaman bi-l-arqÄm 2002,â by al-JihÄz al-MarkazÄ« li-l-IḥṣÄʾ.
Variscoâs unpublished report from 1985, âLand Tenure and Water Rights in the Central Highlands of Yemenâ states that this is 10 to 15 per cent as quoted in Aden Aw-Hassan, Mohammed Alsanabani, and Abdul Rahman Bamatraf, âImpact of Land Tenure and other Socioeconomic Factors on Mountain Terrace Maintenance in Yemen,â CAPRi Working paper 3 (2000), 8. In their 1997 field study they found 20 to 23 per cent waqf. Gerholm quotes Dequin (1975:45), who undertook a field survey in Yemen, and claimed that 15 to 20 per cent waqf was taken. Tomas Gerholm, âMarket, Mosque and Mafraj; Social Inequality in a Yemeni Townâ (PhD thesis, University of Stockholm, 1977), 60. Serjeant (á¹¢anÊ¿Äʾ, 154) quotes al-Abidin (âRole of Islam,â 218) who quotes al-Akhraá¹£, who estimates 15 to 20 per cent waqf. HishÄm al-Akhraá¹£, âA Note on Land Tenure in Yemen,â a report for the Central Statistical Planning Organisation, September 1972 (not consulted here).