which had deteriorated, and they feared the mosque might collapse. ‘May these two beams be sold, the proceeds spent on the mosque, and two palm trunks put in their place?’

He replied: ‘I see no harm in that.’ He cited as evidence endowed animals that can no longer be put to use: they are sold and their proceeds applied to the endowment.”

There is no doubt that his words establish the permissibility of replacing a mosque when this serves a beneficial purpose, even if the original mosque remains usable, because the benefit afforded by the second is greater. The original property then becomes free of the endowment restrictions.

Abū Bakr said in Zād al-Musāfir (Provisions for the Traveller): Ahmad said, as reported by Sālih:

“The treasury in Kufa was broken into while Ibn Masʿūd was in charge of it. He wrote to ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb—may Allah be pleased with him—and ʿUmar wrote back: ‘Relocate the mosque and place the treasury on its qiblah side, for there will always be someone praying in it.’ Saʿd then moved it to the site of today’s date merchants, and the date merchants’ market came to occupy its former site. The treasury was established on its qiblah side. Thus, there is no harm in relocating mosques when they fall into ruin.”

He said, as reported by Abū Tālib:

“If a mosque is too cramped for its congregation, there is no harm in moving it to a more spacious site.”

He permitted its relocation because the benefit afforded by the original mosque was diminished, not because using it had become impossible.

Al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā said: He said, as reported by Sālih:

“A mosque may be relocated for fear of thieves, or if its site is filthy.”

Al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā adopted the second view.

He also said, as reported by Abū Dāwūd, concerning a mosque whose congregation wished to raise it above ground level and establish a drinking-water facility and shops beneath it, while some of them objected:

“The view of the majority of them should be taken into account