it must be for a charitable cause. If it is for a specified individual, however, it is not a condition that it be charitable, but it is a condition that it not be for a sinful purpose. The difference between the two is illustrated by examples.

An example of a general cause is his statement, “such as mosques.” If a person builds a mosque and endows it, this is a charitable cause—unless he builds a mosque over a grave, in which case it is prohibited and invalid, because this is not charitable; rather, it is sinful.

Likewise, if he builds a mosque in order that religious innovations be practiced in it, this too is invalid, because it is not for a charitable cause. What is meant by mosques, then, is those established upon righteousness and piety.

If the endowment is designated for a particular mosque, it must be used for that mosque, and it is not permissible to divert it elsewhere. But if it is for mosques generally, the administrator must give priority to the most deserving, then the next most deserving, whether that greater entitlement relates to the mosque itself or to those who pray in it.

His statement, “and bridges”: this is the plural of a bridge, namely, a structure built over water for people to cross. Thus, if someone builds a bridge over a river, it is valid for him to endow it, because it is a charitable cause; and it is also valid for him to lease it out, since it is his property.

If someone were to ask: Bridges are used by both Muslims and disbelievers; what is the answer? We say: What matters is the intention, and this is intended as a charitable act. As for the disbeliever who crosses it, he is either among those who may receive charity or among those who may not; yet what is permitted incidentally is not permitted independently.

His statement, “and the poor”: the poor are a charitable cause because they are in need. Thus, if he endows this house for the poor, this is a charitable cause, and priority is given