|
چکیده
|
In the Islamic jurisprudence, being a Muslim is a condition in such cases as executorship and testimony. The question arising is that whether or not a Christian, a Jew or a Zoroastrian can be the superintendent of the endowments if the beneficiaries are Muslims. Through a descriptive-analytic method, this study first brings up the pieces of evidence for the impermissibility of Christian, Jewish or Zoroastrian superintendence and then proves the possibility of non-Muslim superintendence on Muslims’ endowments in some cases by means of juridical evidence. Indeed, designating a non-Muslim as a superintendent on Muslim endowments cannot be absolutely rejected. This is because the issue has different forms and each form has its own rules depending on the superintendent’s scope of authority, the type of endowment, the endower being a Muslim or a non-Muslim, and the existence of any superintendent already appointed by the endower.
|