tantamount to consensus, since no one objected, even though they would not remain silent about what they considered wrong. They objected to Umar’s prohibition of excessive dowries, and a woman even challenged him. They also dissuaded him from inflicting the prescribed punishment on a pregnant woman, saying: ‘If Allah has given you authority over her back, He has given you no authority over what is in her womb.’ They objected to Uthmān’s performing the prayer in full during Hajj, whereupon he said: ‘I have entered a town where my family resides.’ They opposed Ali when he held that slave women who had borne their masters’ children could be sold. Had relocating the mosque been objectionable, it would have deserved denunciation all the more, since it was a conspicuous act of grave import.”

He also cited the report narrated by Abū Hafs in al-Manāsik from Ā’isha—may Allah be pleased with her—that she was asked:

“Mother of the Believers, the covering of the Kaaba is sometimes passed around?”

She replied:

“It should be sold and its proceeds devoted to charitable purposes.”

Thus, Ā’isha instructed that the covering of the Kaaba be sold, although it was an endowment, and that its proceeds be devoted to charitable purposes, because that was more beneficial to the Muslims.

Those who preferred Ibn Hāmid’s position concerning income-producing endowments, such as Abū Muhammad, likewise addressed this matter. He said:

“If an endowment’s benefit has not ceased entirely, but has diminished, or another property would be more beneficial and yield a greater return for its beneficiaries, it may not be sold. The basic rule is that selling it is forbidden; permission was granted only out of necessity, to safeguard the endowment’s intended purpose from being lost while that purpose can still be achieved and benefit derived from it. If we say so, the intended purpose is lost. The exception, of course, is when its benefit diminishes to the point where it no longer counts as a benefit, so that its existence is equivalent to its absence.”

The response is: What they have stated is not conceded. They have offered no evidence for it, either from Islamic law or from the teachings of their legal school.