harm in that, and the view of the majority is to be considered.’”

He thus expressly permitted replacing its structure with a better one, even if the original founder of the endowment objected. He also permitted raising it and establishing a drinking-water facility beneath it, even if frail elderly men opposed them, provided the neighbours chose this, giving weight to the majority’s view.

He said:

He also said, as reported by Ibn al-Hakam: “If the mosque has a minaret but is not securely enclosed, there is no harm in demolishing the minaret and using its materials in the mosque’s wall to secure it.”

Abū al-ʿAbbās said:

Even if the evidence they cited were sound, it would entail giving preference to a different opinion. There would then be two opinions on the matter, one of which they have preferred. How much more so, then, when these arguments are weak!

As for the assertion, “Relocation and replacement are permissible only when benefiting from the property becomes impossible,” this is not conceded. They have offered no evidence for it, either from revealed law or from the teachings of the school. This prohibition on which they rely comes neither from the Lawgiver nor from the founder of the school. Rather, the evidence of revealed law and the statements of the school’s founder indicate the contrary.

Ahmad said: “If the mosque becomes too small for its congregation, there is no harm in relocating it to a more spacious site.” Its being too small for its congregation has not rendered it useless; rather, its benefit remains as before, but the number of people has increased. Another mosque could be built for them, and it is not a requirement that a mosque accommodate everyone. Nevertheless, he permitted relocating it to another site, because gathering people in one mosque is better than dividing them between two mosques. The larger the congregation, the better, for the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“A man’s prayer with another man is more meritorious than his prayer alone