Our jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, held that it is not valid to sell or lease its dwellings, because it is regarded as land connected with a sacred rite. A person does not own anything in it with the complete ownership he has elsewhere, except for the dwellings he has built: he may sell those, but the land itself may not be sold.

Shaykh al-Islam, may Allah have mercy on him, held a middle position on this matter. He said that it may be acquired through reclamation, inheritance, and sale, but that it is unlawful to lease it out. Whoever no longer needs a place must make it available to someone else. If people were to follow Shaykh al-Islam’s view, it would bring great ease to them. This is because people would build only what they themselves needed; and when the pilgrims arrived, whoever found a dwelling built of stone and mud would occupy it, and otherwise they would use tents.

The third view on the matter is that Mecca is like other places: it may be acquired through reclamation and sale, and it is permissible to sell and lease it. This is the view acted upon today, and it is the only view that can be implemented in the present time. For if we were to adopt the position of the madhhab, it would be a weak view that cannot be put into practice; and if we were to adopt Shaykh al-Islam’s preferred view, disputes, hostility, and resentment would arise. When a pilgrim arrives and stands at a house, saying to its owner, “There is an empty room in this house,” and the owner replies, “There is none,” conflict and quarrelling would result. Moreover, can we say to the person who has come to rent a dwelling: “You have the right to ask the owner of the house: How large is your family? How many rooms are there in the house? Whatever exceeds your need must be vacated for us!”? This would be difficult. Therefore, the judges today follow the view that it may be owned through buying and selling, and that it may be leased out.