The formative years of Darul Uloom, Vazhakkad, a well-known Muslim waqf institution in northern Kerala in India established in the late nineteenth century for imparting religious education, is examined in this article. Darul Uloom is probably the first registered waqf in Kerala and by analysing the registered waqf deeds of this institution, we seek to understand the operation of authority and management in the initial years of this institution, especially in the background of contestations between emergent Islamic reformists and traditionalists. We trace the significant reformulation of the foundational intent evident in the subsequent deeds by later custodians and the intervention of various social groups, particularly the local community, in refashioning the trajectory of the waqf. A shift in authority—a complex product of theological, political and economic contestations emerged in the context of transformations brought by British Colonialism in Malabar—is evident in this process. Through our analysis, we suggest that waqf institutions and its legal foundations were highly dynamic and adaptive to their changing social contexts as against the portrayal of these Islamic institutions as stagnant and inflexible.
AbrahamS.2013. ‘Formal Writing, Questionnaires and Petitions: Colonial Governance and Law in Early British Malabar, 1792–1810’. Indian Historical Review, Vol. 40(2):285–305.
2.
AliS.A. 1985 [1892]. Mahommedan Law (Volume: 1). New Delhi: Himalayan Books.
3.
AndersonN.1976. Law Reform in the Muslim World. London: University of London Athlone Press.
4.
AntounR. T.1980. ‘The Islamic Court, the Islamic Judge, and the Accommodation of Traditions: A Jordanian Case Study.’International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 12(4):455–67.
5.
ArunimaG.1996. ‘Multiple Meanings: Changing Conceptions of Matrilineal Kinship in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Malabar.’The Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 33(3):283–307.
6.
BaerG.1958. ‘Waqf Reform in Egypt.’In Middle Eastern Affairs, 161–76.
7.
BirlaR.2009. Stages of Capital: Law, Culture, and Market Governance in Late Colonial India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
8.
BonateL.2017. ‘Islam and Matriliny along the Indian Ocean Rim: Revisiting the Old ‘Paradox’ by Comparing the Minangkabau, Kerala and the Coastal Northern Mozambique.’Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 48(3): 436–451.
9.
BowenJ. R.2003. Islam, Law, and Equality in Indonesia: An Anthropology of Public Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
DaleS. F.1980. Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: The Māppil.as of Malabar, 1498–1922. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
DubeL.1995. ‘Matriliny and Islam in Lakshadweep.’India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 22 (2/3): 168–180.
12.
GhazalehP. (ed.). 2011. Held in Trust: Waqf in the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13.
GibbH. A. R.1962. Mohammedanism. New York, NY: Galaxy Book.
14.
GilsenanM.1982. Recognizing Islam: Religion and Society in the Modern Middle East. London: I.B. Tauris.
15.
HallaqW. B.1984. ‘Was the Gate of Ijtihad Closed?’International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 16(1):3–41.
16.
HallaqW. B.2009. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
IliasM. H.2007. ‘Mappila Muslims and the Cultural Content of Trading Arab Diaspora on the Malabar Coast.’Asian Journal of Social Science, Vol. 35 (4–5):434–56.
18.
KoyaS. M.1976, January. ‘Muslims of the Malabar Coast as Descendants of the Arabs,’ in Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. Indian History Congress, Vol. 37, 195–200. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40173307
19.
KozlowskiG. C.1985. Muslim Endowments and Society in British India (No. 35). CUP Archive. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511896873
20.
KuranT.2001. The Provision of Public Goods Under Islamic Law: Origins, Impact, and Limitations of the Waqf System. Law and Society Review, Vol. 35(4):841–98.
21.
KuttiMoideen. 1998. ‘Maulana Chalilakathum Vazhakkad Darul Ulomum’ (Vazhakkad Darul Uloom and Moulana Chalilakath). In Kerala Muslim Navodhana Charithram. Kozhikode: Prabodhanam.
22.
MasudM. K., MessickB., and PowersD. S.. 1996. Islamic Legal Interpretation: Muftis and Their Fatwas. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
23.
MessickB.2018. Shari’a Scripts: A Historical Anthropology. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
24.
MillerR. E.1976. Mappila Muslims of Kerala: A Study in Islamic Trends. Madras: Orient Longman.
25.
MoosaEbrahim2009. ‘Colonialism and Islamic law’, in MuhammadMasud & Salvatore (eds.), Islam and Modernity: Key Issues and Debates. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press, 158–81.
26.
OsellaF., and OsellaC.2008. ‘Islamism and Social Reform in Kerala, South India.’Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 42 (2–3):317–46.
27.
OsellaF., and OsellaC.2009. Muslim Entrepreneurs in Public Life Between India and the Gulf: Making Good and Doing Good. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 15: S202–S221.
28.
Pathusha. 1992. ‘Problems of a Wqaf and Mutavallis in Tamil Nadu.’Journal of Objective Studies, Vol. 4(1): 136–41.
29.
RahmanF.1966. Islam. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
RashidS. K.2006. Waqf Management in India: An Overview of the Past, Present, and Future Administrative and Statutory Control on Awqāf. New Delhi: Institute of Objective Studies.
31.
RashidS. K.2009. Bibliography and Review of Waqf Literature. New Delhi: Institute of Objective Studies.
32.
RobinsonF.1993. ‘Technology and Religious Change: Islam and the Impact of Print.’Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 27(1):229–51.
33.
SageerMuhammad. 1998. ‘Madrasa prasthanathinte charithram’ (The History of Madrasa Movement). In Kerala Muslim Navodhana Charithram. Prabodhanam Weekly.
34.
SchachtJ.1964. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
35.
SingerA.2002. Constructing Ottoman Beneficence: An Imperial Soup Kitchen in Jerusalem. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
36.
The Rules of Madrasa Darul Uloom Vividha Vidhyalayam. 1913. Calicut: Vidhya Vilasam Press.
37.
ZamanM. Q.2010. The Ulama in Contemporary Islam: Custodians of Change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
Ze’EviDror. 1998. ‘The Use of Ottoman Sharīʿa Court Records as a Source for Middle Eastern Social History: A Reappraisal.’Islamic Law and Society, Vol. 5(1):35–56.
