according to people’s customs and established practices. Whatever they regard as a sale is a sale; whatever they regard as a gift is a gift; and whatever they regard as a lease is a lease.

Another example is Mālik’s permission to sell produce concealed underground, such as carrots and turnips, and to sell cucumber crops in bulk, just as he and the majority of scholars permit the sale of broad beans and similar produce in their pods. Undoubtedly, this has been the practice of Muslims from the time of their Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, until the present day. People’s needs cannot be met without it. Whatever uncertainty may be thought to exist in such transactions is likewise permitted in other sales, since it is slight and there is a need for it. Either consideration alone makes this permissible; how much more so when both are present?

Similarly, Mālik’s permission to include the benefit of trees as incidental to a lease of land—for example, leasing land or a house containing one or two trees—is more consistent with the established legal principles than the view prohibiting this. Some followers of Ahmad ibn Hanbal also permit this without restriction. They allow the leasing of an orchard comprising both land and trees, as ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb did when he arranged the lease of Usayd ibn al-Hudayr’s orchard for a third and used the payment received in advance to settle a debt Usayd owed. I have discussed this issue at length elsewhere.

This becomes clearer through a discussion of usury. Its prohibition is more stringent than that of gambling, because it constitutes an unequivocal injustice. For when Allah, glorified and exalted be He, made His creation of two kinds—the rich and the poor