Section: The apparent position of Ahmad's school is that a waqf is established by the act itself when accompanied by indications that point to it, such as if one builds a mosque and grants people permission to pray in it, or a graveyard and grants permission for burial in it, or a fountain and grants permission for entry into it. For he said, in a narration by Abu Dawud and Abu Talib regarding a man who incorporated a house into a mosque and granted permission for its use, that he cannot rescind it. Similarly, if he establishes a graveyard and grants permission to people, or a fountain, he does not have the right to revoke it, and this is the opinion of Abu Hanifa. The Qadi mentioned another narration regarding this, that it does not become a waqf except by verbal declaration. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. The Qadi derived this from the words of Ahmad when al-Athram asked him about a man who enclosed a piece of land with a wall to make it a graveyard, and he intended it in his heart, then he decided otherwise? He said: "If he had dedicated it to Allah, he should not rescind it." This does not contradict the first narration, for he meant by his saying "If he had dedicated it to Allah," i.e., he intended by enclosing it to dedicate it to Allah. Thus, this is an affirmation of the first narration and an addition to it, as he forbade him from rescinding it simply due to the enclosure coupled with the intention. If he meant by his saying "dedicated it to Allah" that it was accompanied by his act of indicators pointing to that intent, such as granting people permission to bury in it, then it is the very first narration. And if he meant "he endowed it with his tongue," then its concept indicates that a waqf is not established by mere enclosure and intention, and this does not contradict the first narration; because in the first, his permission to people to bury in it was added to his act, and that was not found here, so there is no contradiction between them. Then, his intended meaning from these possibilities was not known, so this narration was negated, and the school became a single narration. And Allah knows best. They argued that this is restraining a corpus for the purpose of seeking proximity (qurba), so it is necessary that it is not valid without a verbal expression, like a waqf for the poor. Our evidence is that custom is established upon that, and there is an indication of waqf in it, so it is valid for it to be established through it, like verbal declaration. It follows the path of someone who presents food to his guest, as it constitutes permission to eat it; and someone who fills a water tank on a road, it constitutes making it a public endowment; and someone who scatters gifts among people, it is permission for them to pick them up, and taking them is permitted. Likewise, entering a bathhouse and using its water without explicit permission is permissible by the indication of the situation. We have previously stated in the section on sales that it is valid through mutual exchange (mu'atah) without a verbal expression.