Islamic Fiqh > Endowments (waqf) and property > Reviving dead land (ihya') > The legal ruling on iqta'
Contents
Updated on 25 September 2026 at 6:57 PM
This part belongs to the full section: All sections of this part.
Iqta' is the grant by which the imam (the ruler) assigns to an individual a piece of land or a defined right of use. An institution examined in detail by the jurists of the four schools, it covers the validity of the grant, its types, its limit, the regime of mines and of developed lands, the leasing of the grant, and public spaces. The nine sheets below give a faithful translation of it, with the exact positions of the schools and their classical references.
The jurists of the four schools agree on the validity of the imam's grant in general, with its conditions, whether it is a grant conferring ownership or a grant of attachment and use. The evidence cited in support is the following.
Asma bint Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with them both, said: "I used to carry on my head the date pits from al-Zubayr's land that the Messenger of Allah had granted him, and it lay a third of a farsakh from Mina." Reported by al-Bukhari (2982) and Muslim (2182), the wording being al-Bukhari's
Al-Bukhari also reports, through another chain from Hisham from his father: "The Prophet granted al-Zubayr land from the property of Banu Nadir." Al-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, draws from it the proof of the validity of the imam's grant (Sharh Sahih Muslim, 14/165). Badr al-Din al-Ayni writes: "This hadith establishes the imam's permission to grant lands under his authority to whomever he wills among those he deems fit for it" (Umdat al-Qari, 12/221).
Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both, reports that the Prophet granted al-Zubayr the ground covered by the charge of his horse: he spurred his horse until it stopped, then threw his whip and said: give him as far as the whip reached. Weak hadith, reported by Ahmad (6458) and Abu Dawud (3072)
Urwa reports from his father that the Messenger of Allah granted al-Zubayr a land, and that Umar ibn al-Khattab granted all of al-Aqiq, saying: where are those who claim grants? Reported by al-Shafi'i in al-Umm (4/50), then by al-Bayhaqi (11582) through his chain, with an authentic chain of transmission
Al-Shafi'i, may Allah have mercy on him, comments: "Al-Aqiq is near Medina; and his saying 'where are those who claim grants' means: we will cut them off" (al-Umm, 4/50).
Wa'il ibn Hujr, may Allah be pleased with him, reports that the Prophet granted him a land in Hadramawt. Authentic hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (3058) and al-Tirmidhi (1381)
Urwa reports that Abdallah ibn Awf said: "The Messenger of Allah and Umar ibn al-Khattab granted me a land of such and such extent. Al-Zubayr went to Umar's family, bought his share from them, then came to Uthman ibn Affan and said: Abdallah ibn Awf claims that the Messenger of Allah and Umar ibn al-Khattab granted him a land of such extent, and I have bought the share of Umar's family. Uthman said: the testimony of Abdallah may be accepted for him and against him." Reported by Imam Ahmad in his Musnad (1670)
Anas ibn Malik, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "The Prophet called the Ansar in order to grant them lands in Bahrain. They said: O Messenger of Allah, if you do so, write the same for our brothers of Quraysh. This displeased the Prophet, who said: you will see after me preference (athara), so be patient until you meet me." Reported by al-Bukhari (2248, 2992)
Added to these are the hadiths mentioned below. It is reported that Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, granted lands to Uyayna ibn Hisn, and that Umar granted al-Aqiq, with no one objecting to either of them: their consensus therefore establishes the validity of the grant (Tahbir al-Mukhtasar, 4/627; al-Sharh al-Kabir ma'a Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 5/442; al-Bayan, 7/493; al-Hawi al-Kabir, 7/482; Sharh Sahih Muslim, 14/165; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/438; al-Mughni, 5/336; al-Insaf, 6/377; Kashshaf al-Qina', 4/237; Matalib Uli al-Nuha, 4/194; Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 6/36; al-Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya, 14/314; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 8/240; al-Lubab, 1/683; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 6/433).
Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "The grant is permitted to the imam over dead lands that no one has acquired: he makes it to whomever he sees among the people able, by their means or by their work, to benefit the Muslims; it is like the fay': he places it where he sees the most general benefit for the Muslims."
The scholars also agree, with no disagreement, that the imam may not grant what has already become property through revival or through any other valid mode of acquisition, nor the pastures the people cannot do without for their camels and their livestock, for such places follow the regime of a determined ownership. Note that when the Messenger of Allah granted Dahnah to a man, a woman said to him: O Messenger of Allah, it is where the camels of Banu Tamim are tethered, and the women of Banu Tamim lie beyond it; the Messenger of Allah therefore withdrew the grant (hadith with a weak chain, reported by Abu Dawud (3070); al-Istidhkar, 3/146-147).
Iqta' is of two types: the grant with transfer of ownership (tamlik) and the grant of attachment and use (irfaq). The first is for the imam to grant one of his subjects a land that he will bring into cultivation (al-Mughni, 5/336). The Malikis specify: iqta' is a transfer of ownership free of any compensation, whether by revival or otherwise, and it requires no building (Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 5/442).
The scholars agree, as has been seen, on the validity of the grant made by the imam. The jurists, however, differ on one question: does the granted land become the grantee's property by the mere grant, so that he may sell it and dispose of it, or is revival required before he owns it? The scholars give a nuanced answer.
The Hanbalis hold that whoever receives from the ruler a share of dead land does not own it before reviving it, for dead land is acquired only by revival, which has not yet taken place; the grantee nevertheless becomes the most entitled to it, like the one who reserves a plot in advance in order to develop it. Proof: the hadith of Bilal ibn al-Harith, from whom Umar took back what he had been unable to develop of the al-Aqiq that the Messenger of Allah had granted him; had he owned it, taking it back would have been invalid. Umar also revoked the grant Abu Bakr had made to Uyayna ibn Hisn; Uyayna asked Abu Bakr to renew the document, and he answered: by Allah, I will not renew anything Umar has revoked. Reported by Abu Ubayd.
The grantee nevertheless becomes the most entitled to the land and the first entitled to develop it. If he develops it, well and good; otherwise the ruler says to him: "Develop it, or withdraw your hand from it", as Umar said to Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani: the Messenger of Allah did not grant you this land to withhold it from the people; he granted it to you so that you would develop it; take from it what you can work and return the rest. If he asks for a delay with an excuse, it is granted him in due measure; if he asks without an excuse, it is refused.
Ibn Qudama, may Allah have mercy on him, said: if another outpaces him and develops the land before anything is said to him, or during the delay granted, does he come to own it? Two views.
It is narrated from Amr ibn Shu'ayb that the Prophet granted a land to people of Juhayna or Muzayna and they abandoned it; other people came and developed it, and the first grantees disputed the matter before Umar, who said: "Had it been a grant from me or from Abu Bakr, I would not have revoked it; but it is a grant from the Messenger of Allah, and I am returning it." This shows that if the grant comes from someone other than the Messenger of Allah, the land belongs to whoever developed it.
According to the second view, he does not own it, for the right of the granter attaches to it. The purport of the Prophet's words: "Whoever revives a dead land that is not a Muslim's right, it is his", is that if a Muslim's right attaches to it, its revival is no longer permitted. We have already given the two views concerning the one who reserves a plot, and this is analogous; al-Shafi'i's school on this point is as we have said (al-Mughni, 5/337; al-Insaf, 6/377; Kashshaf al-Qina', 4/237; Matalib Uli al-Nuha, 4/194).
The Shafi'is say: when the imam grants a dead land to someone, it is either a grant with transfer of ownership, in which case the grantee becomes owner by the mere grant, or a grant without transfer of the corpus of the land, in which case he becomes, by the mere grant, the most entitled to develop it, like the one who reserves a plot in advance according to the distinction stated above. In this second case neither its sale nor its donation is valid according to the soundest and expressly transmitted position; in the first, the sale is valid. According to the soundest view, if another person develops it, that person becomes its owner, even though acting in disobedience, just as one who enters his brother's auction and buys. According to the second view, he does not own it, lest he nullify another's right. The dispute concerns the case where the grantee neglects development; if he abandons it, whoever develops the land becomes its owner definitively (al-Bayan, 7/493; al-Muhadhdhab, 1/426; Rawdat al-Talibin, 4/105-106; al-Najm al-Wahhaj, 5/419, 421; Kanz al-Raghibin, 3/222-223; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/436; al-Dibaj, 2/502; Tuhfat al-Muhtaj, 7/402-403; Nihayat al-Muhtaj, 5/390; al-Siraj al-Wahhaj, p. 299).
The Malikis hold that when the imam grants a land to someone, apart from forcible clearing, that person owns it even without developing it: he may sell it, give it as a gift, and it is inherited. This is not an effect of revival but a pure acquisition: the grantee does with it what he wishes, sale or otherwise. The imam retains only the possibility of reclaiming it by having it developed; if he does not do so or declares himself unable, he grants it to another, for he may not withhold from the people a land once granted, so that it benefits neither him nor anyone else. The basis is the report that the Messenger of Allah granted Bilal ibn al-Harith, from al-Aqiq, what could be worked; Bilal did not work it. Umar said: if you are able, work it, otherwise grant it to the people. Bilal answered: the Messenger of Allah granted it to me. Umar said: the Messenger of Allah laid a condition upon you in it. Umar therefore granted the land to the people, and Bilal had developed nothing.
If, after proving unable to develop it, he sells it, gives it away or gives it as charity before the imam examines his case, the transaction stands and is definitive; for the purpose is that the land not remain outside all exploitation, and the buyer, the recipient and the beneficiary of the charity take the place of the seller, the donor and the giver of charity.
Ibn Rushd, may Allah have mercy on him, said: if he declares that he will not develop it, or proves unable to do so, the imam may grant it to another. If, after that inability, another develops it without a new grant from the imam, the question remains discussed, in line with the accepted divergence over one who develops near developed areas without the imam's permission: does the operation stand, or is it annulled, the value of his demolished building being owed to him?
But if another develops it before the grantee proves unable, while the latter knows of it, this is an unjustified encroachment, for the grantee acquired the land by the mere grant, even without development or building (al-Bayan wa-l-Tahsil, 10/301-302).
The difference, for the Malikis, between the grant and revival is that the imam's grant requires, according to the well-known position, a taking of possession like other gifts: if the imam dies before the grantee takes possession, the grant is void. The two institutions agree in that in both cases sale, gift and inheritance become possible upon the death of the one who revived or of the grantee. If the imam grants subjecting the land to a fixed levy each year, the clause is applied; the levy is collected at the bayt al-mal (public treasury), and the imam may not appropriate it, for what he has granted is not his property, even though the grantee becomes owner through the grant (Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 7/69; al-Taj wa-l-Iklil, 4/548; al-Sharh al-Kabir ma'a Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 5/442; Hashiyat al-Sawi, 9/116; Tahbir al-Mukhtasar, 4/627).
As for the Hanafis, I have found no formal position of theirs on this question. They did state that if the imam permits someone to develop a land and he develops it, he becomes its owner by consensus. The purport of their words is that he owns it only through revival. They also established that whoever encloses a dead land without developing it for three years, the imam takes it from him and gives it to another (al-Hidaya, 4/99; al-Inaya, 14/312; al-Ikhtiyar, 3/84; Mukhtasar al-Wiqaya, 2/201; al-Jawhara al-Nayyira, 4/223; al-Lubab, 1/682; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 6/433). Their words here make clear that he does not own it by the mere grant but by revival: this is a pious scruple; if another develops it before that term expires, he becomes its owner, like one who outbids his brother: this is disliked, but if it happens the contract stands (al-Hidaya, 4/99; al-Inaya, 14/312; al-Ikhtiyar, 3/84; Mukhtasar al-Wiqaya, 2/201; al-Jawhara al-Nayyira, 4/223; al-Lubab, 1/682; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 6/433).
The majority of the Malikis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis expressly established that it is not permissible for the imam to grant a dead land to anyone except within the measure of what he can develop; if he grants more than the grantee can develop, he takes it back from him.
The Shafi'is say: the imam may grant no one a dead land except what the grantee can develop; for if he grants him what he cannot develop, he harms the people without any benefit, and others have the right to develop the surplus. The intended capacity is both physical and legal: a dhimmi (non-Muslim under protection) is never granted land in the abode of Islam (al-Bayan, 7/493; al-Muhadhdhab, 1/426; Rawdat al-Talibin, 4/106; al-Najm al-Wahhaj, 5/419, 421; Kanz al-Raghibin, 3/222-223; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/438; al-Dibaj, 2/502; Tuhfat al-Muhtaj, 7/403; Nihayat al-Muhtaj, 5/390).
The Hanbalis say: the imam should not grant a dead land except what can be developed; for granting more would constrict a right shared among the people without any benefit. If he does so and the grantee's inability then appears, he takes the land back from him, as Umar took back from Bilal ibn al-Harith what he could not develop of the al-Aqiq granted by the Messenger of Allah (al-Mughni, 5/337-338; Kashshaf al-Qina', 4/238; Rawdat al-Talibin, 4/106; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/438).
Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "The grant is permitted to the imam over dead lands that no one has acquired: he makes it to whomever he sees among the people able, by their means or by their work, to benefit the Muslims; it is like the fay': he places it where he sees the most general benefit for the Muslims. And this must be within what the man and his workers can bear."
It is reported that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, said to Bilal ibn al-Harith: "The Messenger of Allah granted you what you cannot bear; see what you can bear of it and hold it, and I permit you to grant the rest to whoever needs it." He permitted him, and he granted what another took from him. Abu Bakr's act was not a revocation of the act of the Messenger of Allah: had he considered himself able to revoke it, he would not have asked Bilal's leave. He rather considered that the Messenger of Allah had not, at the moment of the grant, measured the extent of what he was granting; had he known what Abu Bakr learned, he would not have granted all of it. And despite this he sought Bilal's leave: had Bilal not permitted him, he would not have informed him, but would have taken the land with his consent (al-Istidhkar, 3/146-147).
Minerals are of two kinds: apparent (on the surface) and hidden (underground). The jurists ask whether the imam may grant the apparent minerals the Muslims cannot do without.
The majority of jurists, Hanafis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis, hold that the imam may not grant these mines, that is, those whose content is reached without any expense, which people may freely access and benefit from: salt, water, sulfur, pitch, mumiya, petroleum, kohl, baram, ruby, clay pits and the like. Proof: the report of Abidh ibn Hammal al-Mazini.
Abidh ibn Hammal came to the Messenger of Allah and asked him for the grant of the salt mine of Ma'rib, which he granted him. When he had left, a man of the assembly said: do you know what you have granted him? You have granted him only perpetual water, that is, permanent water whose supply never ceases. The Prophet therefore took it back from him. Hasan hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (3064), al-Tirmidhi (1380), Ibn Majah (2475), al-Nasa'i in al-Kubra (5767) and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih (4499)
The Hanafis say: the imam may not grant the apparent minerals the Muslims cannot do without, that is, those whose substance, deposited by Allah in the treasures of the earth, is visible: mines of salt, kohl, pitch, petroleum, and wells from which people draw water. If he granted them, such a grant would have no legal effect: the grantee and everyone else would be perfectly equal. If he barred people's access, he would commit a wrong by that prevention while remaining owner of what he had taken, for his wrong lies in the prevention, not in the taking. He is therefore restrained from preventing and diverted from permanent working, so that his grant may not resemble a true acquisition nor take on the regime of established properties (Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 6/36; al-Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya, 14/314; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 8/240; al-Lubab, 1/683; al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 6/433).
Al-Shafi'i, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "Minerals fall into two categories: what is apparent, like salt in the mountains which people may access; no one may grant it in any circumstance, the people having been made sharers in it; the same applies to the river, the apparent water, and plants growing on what belongs to no one. Abidh ibn Hammal asked the Prophet to grant him the salt of Ma'rib, and he granted it to him, or intended to; it was said to him: it is like perpetual water; he said: then no. Everything of this kind, every apparent deposit such as petroleum, pitch, sulfur, mumiya or apparent stones on what belongs to no one, follows the regime of water and pasture: the people are equal in it."
Al-Mawardi, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "This is sound. Minerals are of two kinds: apparent and hidden; the ruling on the hidden ones comes later. As for the apparent, they are all that shows at its deposit and is taken without effort, in all its states: salt, petroleum, pitch, sulfur, mumiya and stone. All these apparent minerals may not be granted by the imam, nor may anyone enclose them against the Muslims: all people stand equal in them, with no difference between young and old, man and woman, Muslim and disbeliever." Thabit ibn Sa'd reported from his father and grandfather the following report of Abidh ibn Hammal.
Abidh ibn Hammal asked the Messenger of Allah for the grant of the salt mine of Ma'rib, and he granted it. Al-Aqra' ibn Habis al-Tamimi then said: O Messenger of Allah, in the time of ignorance I traveled to this salt; it lies in a land that produces none, and whoever reaches it takes it; it is like the perpetual water of a land. The Prophet therefore withdrew the grant of salt from Abidh, who said: I release you from it on condition that you make it a charity on my behalf. The Messenger of Allah said: it is, from you, a charity, and it is like perpetual water: whoever reaches it takes it. Hasan hadith, reported by Ibn Majah (2475)
Buhaysa reported from her father that he said: "O Prophet of Allah, what is the thing whose access it is not permitted to bar? He said: water. She said: O Prophet of Allah, what is the thing whose access it is not permitted to bar? He said: salt. She said: O Prophet of Allah, what is the thing whose access it is not permitted to bar? He said: that you do good; that is better for you." The one who reserves is not more entitled than the one excluded: the people must therefore stand equal. When people are equal over the apparent minerals, if their sharing can take place by mutual agreement, so be it; otherwise the earlier-comer comes first, then the next.
If their arrival is simultaneous, two views: lots are drawn between them, and the one the lot designates goes first; or the ruler chooses, by his independent judgment (ijtihad), whom he sees fit to prefer. If a man stays long at the deposit and monopolizes it and its content, the matter is examined: if through his monopoly he bars others, he has wronged them, and the ruler must withdraw his hand from the place, while he keeps what he has taken. If he bars no one, two views: his holding is recognized so long as it causes no harm to another; or he is prevented, lest his long stay and lasting appropriation make the place pass from the regime of free things to that of owned properties. These two views, in these two scenarios, reflect the divergence of our jurists: does the ruler have a right of supervision over such places or not? Two views.
An issue: al-Shafi'i said: "If near the coast there is a spot where, upon digging, water enters and salt appears, the ruler may grant it, and the man may develop it in this manner and become its owner." Al-Mawardi comments: this is sound, for in its present state the spot is not a mine; it is a dead land that becomes a mine through development: granting it is therefore permitted, like granting dead lands. And Allah knows best (al-Hawi al-Kabir, 7/491-492; see also: al-Muhadhdhab, 1/426; al-Bayan, 7/494-495).
Ibn Qudama, may Allah have mercy on him, cites the following statement: "except if it is a salt land, or water whose benefit belongs to the Muslims: then no individual may claim it exclusively." Summary of the question: the apparent mines, those whose content is reached without expense and which people freely use (salt, water, sulfur, pitch, mumiya, petroleum, kohl, baram, ruby, clay pits and the like) are not acquired by development; it is not permitted to grant them to anyone, nor to enclose them against the Muslims, for this harms them and restricts them. Ahmad said on this: the Prophet granted Abidh ibn Hammal the salt mine; when he was told it was like perpetual water, he took it back.
Abu Ubayd, Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi reported, each through his chain, from Abidh ibn Hammal that he asked the Messenger of Allah for the salt of Ma'rib; when he had gone, it was said: O Messenger of Allah, do you know what you have granted him? You have granted him only perpetual water. The Prophet took it back from him. Abidh relates: I said: O Messenger of Allah, what protects from the arak trees? He said: so long as the camels' hocks do not reach it. This hadith is rare (gharib). Another version has: there is no reserve (hima) in the arak trees. And Sa'id reported, from Isma'il ibn Ayyash, from Amr ibn Qays al-Ma'rubi from his father, from Abidh ibn Hammal: I asked the Messenger of Allah for the salt mine of Ma'rib and he granted it to me; it was said: O Messenger of Allah, it is like perpetual water, meaning it never runs dry; the Messenger of Allah said: then no.
Such places, being tied to the general interest of the Muslims, may neither be developed for private use nor granted, like watercourses and the Muslims' paths. Ibn Aqil said: this is one of the generous materials Allah has spread with liberality and without which people cannot do; were someone to own it by enclosure, he could bar access and straiten the people; were he to charge for it, he would make it dear, departing from the station Allah assigned it: free access for all who need it at no cost. This is al-Shafi'i's school, and I know of no dissenter (al-Mughni, 5/333, 337; see also: al-Kafi, 2/244).
Ibn Qudama adds: "The imam may not grant the apparent mines whose development is not permitted; for when Abidh ibn Hammal asked him for the salt of Ma'rib, it was said: O Messenger of Allah, you have granted him only perpetual water, and he took it back; and because this restricts the Muslims. As for hidden mines, their grant is discussed: two views we have already set out" (al-Mughni, 5/337; see also: al-Kafi, 2/244).
Ibn Muflih, may Allah have mercy on him, said: when near the shore there is a spot where entering water produces salt, it becomes property through development, and the imam may grant it (al-Mubdi', 5/252).
The Malikis say: the imam may grant, by way of independent judgment, the mines of gold, silver, kohl, copper, lead and arsenic (orpiment) to whoever works them. Granting a mine means giving the grantee the right to benefit from it for a limited or unlimited period, without transferring to him ownership of its corpus, just as anwa land (land of conquest) is not granted in full ownership but as a grant of enjoyment, the underlying right remaining with the Muslims. Likewise, if a mine appears in land owned and held by a specific owner, such as Zayd, three opinions exist in the school.
If the mine appears in land that is not owned, abandoned by its inhabitants: if they were disbelievers who left without fighting, it belongs to the imam by unanimous opinion. If they were Muslims and departed, two opinions: the adopted one is that it belongs to the imam, who grants it to whomever he wills; according to the second, their departure does not strip their ownership from their lands. And if the mines appear in the land of a people who concluded a treaty, they belong to the parties to the treaty; if they embrace Islam, the matter returns to the imam (Iqd al-Jawahir al-Thamina, 3/955; Mawahib al-Jalil, 3/165-166; Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, 2/208; al-Sharh al-Kabir ma'a Hashiyat al-Dasuqi, 2/91-92; Hashiyat al-Sawi, 3/189).
The jurists ask whether the imam may grant hidden minerals. The Malikis, who do not distinguish between apparent and hidden mines, together with the Shafi'is in one opinion and the Hanbalis in a narration chosen by Ibn Qudama, hold that the imam may grant hidden minerals, relying on the report of the grant to Bilal ibn al-Harith, and because it is permissible to grant what is not acquired by development, such as market places and roads (al-Bayan, 7/495-496).
The Prophet granted Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani the mines of al-Qibliyya, its upper part (jalsi) and its lower part (ghawri), and all that is fit for cultivation in the region of Quds, giving him no Muslim's right; and the Prophet wrote him: "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate. This is what Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, gave to Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani: he gave him the mines of al-Qibliyya, its upper and its lower part, and all that is fit for cultivation in the region of Quds, giving him no Muslim's right." Hasan hadith, reported by Abu Dawud (3062, 3063)
A note of the source specifies that al-Qibliyya is a village lying between Mecca and Medina, called al-Far' (Mughni al-Muhtaj, 4/446). Ibn Qudama said: "The sound view is the permissibility of this grant, for the Prophet granted Bilal ibn al-Harith the mines of al-Qibliyya, its upper and its lower part" (al-Mughni, 5/333; al-Kafi, 2/444). The Maliki position has already been given in the previous question: they do not distinguish between apparent and hidden mine, and the imam's grant is permissible.
The words of the Hanafis likewise indicate the permissibility of granting hidden minerals. It is stated in al-Durr al-Mukhtar: "Know that the imam may not grant what the Muslims cannot do without among the apparent minerals, that is, those whose substance deposited by Allah in the treasures of the earth is visible: mines of salt, kohl, pitch and petroleum" (al-Durr al-Mukhtar, 6/433-434; see also: Tabyin al-Haqa'iq, 6/36; al-Inaya Sharh al-Hidaya, 14/314; al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 8/240; al-Lubab, 1/683). The apparent meaning of this text is that granting hidden minerals is permissible. And Allah knows best.
The Shafi'is and the Hanbalis, in the body of the school, hold on the contrary that the imam may not grant hidden minerals, for they are not acquired by development: their grant is therefore not permitted, like that of the apparent mines. Al-Mawardi, may Allah have mercy on him, summarizes: we have said that minerals are of two kinds and that the apparent ones may not be granted. As for the hidden, those of which nothing shows at the surface until they are dug or cut, such as the mines of silver, gold, copper and iron, whether their content needs smelting and purification, like silver and copper, or not, like raw gold (tibr), two opinions exist on granting them.
First opinion: granting them is not permitted; all people stand as sharers and are equal in reaching their content, as with the apparent mines; for all that they contain is created matter reached only by working and acquired by taking. On this view the grantee and everyone else are equal in exploiting the content, just as if the imam had granted apparent mines without the one who received no grant becoming any less entitled.
Second opinion: granting them is permitted, and the grantee is more entitled than others. Kathir ibn Abdallah ibn Amr ibn Awf al-Muzani reported from his father and his grandfather: "The Messenger of Allah granted Bilal ibn al-Harith al-Muzani the mines of al-Qibliyya, its upper and its lower part, and all that is fit for cultivation in the region of Mudhin, giving him no Muslim's right." Two interpretations: according to Abdallah ibn Wahb, upper and lower part designate the top and the bottom of the deposit; according to Abu Ubayd and Ibn Qutayba, the ghawr designates the territory of Tihama and the jals that of Najd. Al-Shammakh said in verse: "It became, by the water of al-Udhayb, with its spring like the mirage of al-Safa, a plateau whose depths plunge."
Hidden minerals differ from apparent ones in two respects that bring them close to dead lands. First: the heavy expenses they require, sometimes equal to the cost of developing a dead land or greater, which has no equivalent on the surface. Second: their content is only supposed and imagined, like the benefits one hopes for from a dead land after development, whereas the content of apparent mines is seen and certain. In these two respects the hidden mine parts from the apparent one as to the prohibition of granting it, and joins the dead land as to the permissibility of granting it.
On this basis, if the imam grants a man a hidden mine, he does not become its owner so long as he has not worked it, just as he does not own a dead land by the mere grant so long as he has not developed it; once he works it, he becomes its owner. Two views on this ownership. First: he owns it in perpetuity, whether he continues the working or abandons it, as one becomes owner of a dead land by its development whether one maintains it or neglects it; on this view the imam's permission is a condition for the ownership to stand, without being a condition for access to the deposit's content, which rests on the original state of free permissibility.
Second: his ownership is measured by the duration of his work: while he works, he is owner and may bar others; as soon as he ceases working, his ownership lapses and reverts to free permissibility, unless the stoppage is due to the breakdown of a tool or the flight of a slave: his ownership does not lapse while he intends to resume, until a definitive abandonment ends it. This is because his work brings into cultivation the layer he works: he becomes its owner by developing it; the layers below received no work and no development, so he does not own them.
On this basis our jurists ask whether the imam's permission is a condition for this ownership to last throughout the period of work. Two views: the first holds it a condition, so that barring others is valid, as if it strengthened his ownership; the second does not hold it a condition, just as the imam's permission is not a condition for developing a dead land; for the ownership attaches specifically to what the work directly bears upon, and as soon as he begins to work he may bar others from the place worked, not from other places by reason of excuse, just as one who begins developing a dead land may not bar others from any grant other than the place where he works. And Allah knows best (al-Hawi al-Kabir, 7/497-498; see also: al-Muhadhdhab, 1/426-427; al-Bayan, 7/486, 489; Mughni al-Muhtaj, 3/446).
Imam Ibn Qudama, may Allah have mercy on him, said: as for hidden minerals, those reached only by work and expense, such as the mines of gold, silver, iron, copper, lead, crystal and turquoise, our companions say: the imam may not grant them, for they are not acquired by development. The sound view is permissibility, for the Prophet granted Bilal ibn al-Harith the mines of al-Qibliyya, its upper and its lower part (al-Mughni, 5/333; see also: al-Mubdi', 5/252; Kashshaf al-Qina', 4/229; Matalib Uli al-Nuha, 4/182).
Al-Buhuti, may Allah have mercy on him, said: the imam may grant neither apparent nor hidden mines, because of the restriction they impose on the people. In the Sharh (Kashshaf al-Qina') he authenticated permissibility on the strength of the hadith of the grant of the mines of al-Qibliyya to Bilal, reported by Abu Dawud and others. If near the shore there is a spot where entering water produces salt, it becomes property through development, and the imam may grant it, for no restriction falls upon the Muslims; its benefit indeed arises only through work done there: it is therefore not barred, unlike the other dead lands. Its development consists in preparing it for what suits it: digging its soil, leveling it, and opening a channel that renders it fit for use (Kashshaf al-Qina', 4/229).