Islamic Fiqh > Endowments (waqf) and property > Is a waqf irrevocable?
Can one take back a property dedicated to waqf? The rule of irrevocability, its evidence, the schools' nuances on the mosque and on the phase before delivery.
Contents
Updated on 06 October 2026 at 10:50 PM
The majority (Abu Yusuf and Muhammad among Hanafis, and the retained view with them, Malikis, Shafiites, Hanbalis) rejects any revocation once the waqf is formed: the property is no longer sold, gifted or inherited. The base proof is Umar's Khaybar waqf, ordered by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), followed by the Companions' unanimity: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Talha, az-Zubayr, Aisha, Zayd ibn Thabit, Rafi' ibn Khadij, Khalid ibn al-Walid, Jabir, Ibn Umar, Umm Salama and Hafsa all endowed property, with no disagreement reported. Jabir even states: « No Companion able to endow property remained without consecrating it. »
al-Tahawi reports from Umar: « Had I not already mentioned my waqf to the Messenger of Allah, I would have taken it back. » al-Qurtubi's word settles it: « Revoking the waqf contradicts consensus and merits no consideration. » Ibn Hajar notes however that Umar's chain is interrupted and his words may also be read as confirming that only the pledge made before the Prophet stopped him from returning.
Abu Hanifa holds the waqf non-binding and remaining with the founder, revocable and sellable; it binds only in 3 cases: if a judge rules on the dispute; if he suspends the waqf upon his death, making it a bequest within the third of his estate; if he makes a property a mosque separated from his estate by opening prayer to the people. In his view, delivering the property to the manager completes the binding; otherwise the founder keeps his property.
The Companions' practical consensus and the wording « retain its principle » ground the irrevocability held by all schools except the pure Hanafi case; a founder wishing to keep control prepares it through valid conditions during his life rather than through a revocation the Law does not open.
Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudama · Hanbali school
It is possible too that he give him the equivalent of its value. The first view is sounder, for this is a sale, in which mutual consent is considered; but it is a sale by immediate exchange (mu'ata): if he compensated him with a compensation agreed upon, the sale was realized by what took place of immediate exchange with consent; and if consent was not realized, it is not valid, for lack of contract, for neither offer nor acceptance nor immediate exchange with consent took place. The origin of this is the statement of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him): "Whoever makes a gift seeking the reward remains upon his gift; he returns to it if he is not satisfied with it". And the meaning of that was reported from Ali, Falala ibn Ubayd and Malik ibn Anas. And it is the view of al-Shafi'i.
Bada'i al-Sana'i by al-Kasani · Hanafi school
because the waqf is the withholding of the principal and charity of the yield; and withholding does not imply ownership of the withheld, like the pledge; and it is required to begin by directing the yield toward the interests of the waqf: its construction, the repair of what has decayed of its building, and its other indispensable charges, whether the founder stipulated that or not; for the waqf is a perpetual charity in the path of Allah, the Most High, and it flows only by this way.