Reasons Cited by Scholars Who Prohibit the Leasing of Agricultural Land

The Messenger (SAW) once forbade the leasing of agricultural land—whether kharajiyah (land subject to land tax) or ushriyah (land subject to tithe)—regardless of whether the rent was paid in the form of produce or cash. However, this must be understood critically, taking into account the specific conditions and timing under which the prohibition was issued.

The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: "Whoever possesses land (agricultural land) should cultivate it or give it to his brother; if he refuses (to give it), then he should retain the land himself" (Narrated by Al-Bukhari). In a sahih (authentic) hadith narrated by Muslim, the Messenger of Allah (SAW) forbade accepting rental fees (ajrun) or a share of the produce (hazhun) derived from the land. These hadiths clearly prohibit the leasing of agricultural land (ijaratul ardh).

Some scholars permit the cultivation of agricultural land under a profit-sharing system known as muzara'ah. They base this on the fact that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) engaged in a transaction with the people of Khaybar using a profit-sharing arrangement, wherein half the produce went to the Messenger of Allah (SAW) and the other half to the people of Khaybar.

This argument is not strong enough to support a general land-leasing system, because the land in Khaybar was not empty agricultural land but rather land containing trees. Thus, the transaction conducted by the Prophet (SAW) was a profit-sharing arrangement for tending existing trees—known as musaqat—rather than profit-sharing from empty land that was subsequently planted (muzara'ah). The majority of the land in Khaybar consisted of tree-bearing land (specifically date palms); only a small portion was empty land suitable for planting crops.

The prohibition discussed here applies specifically to leasing agricultural land for the purpose of planting crops. As for leasing land for purposes other than planting—such as for livestock enclosures, fish ponds, storage facilities (warehouses), drying harvested rice, and the like—it is permissible, as there is no Sharia prohibition regarding such matters. Some hold the view that the leasing of agricultural land is prohibited because it resembles riba (usury). Why is this the case? Because the lessee pays the rent upfront, yet there is no guarantee of a harvest. What happens if the crop fails, even though the rent was paid at the outset?
The religious scholars who prohibit this type of leasing arrangement base their ruling on the following hadiths. It is narrated from Ibn Abi Nu’aim that Rafi’ bin Khudaij recounted how the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) passed by him while he was cultivating the land. The Messenger asked him who owned the crops and who owned the land. Rafi’ bin Khudaij replied, "These are my crops, my seeds, and my labor; I will receive half, and the landowner will receive half." The Messenger then said, "You have engaged in riba (usury)." "Return the land to its owner and take your wages" (Narrated by Abu Dawud).

At first glance, this hadith appears to forbid land leasing. However, upon closer examination, it actually reinforces the meaning of the preceding hadith. The "riba" (usury) referred to by the Messenger of Allah here likely alludes to a Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic) practice that had long been in use.

Faced with this difference of opinion—regarding what is permissible and what is not—some adopt an attitude of wara’ (pious caution), choosing the best course of action between two equally permissible options. A case in point is the hadith narrated by Salim bin Abdullah bin Umar (Abu Dawud), which recounts how Abdullah bin Umar ultimately chose not to lease out his land, fearing that the Messenger of Allah might have issued a new ruling.

Some argue that leasing land for a fixed monetary sum is permissible, whereas leasing it in exchange for a share of the future harvest is forbidden (haram). Others maintain that land leasing cannot be equated with riba.

A prominent modern scholar, Yusuf al-Qardawi, holds the view that leasing land for money—or for a fixed rental fee—is prohibited. His opinion warrants careful study, as he boldly forbids fixed-rate land leasing, contrasting with the views of many other scholars—such as Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik—who permit it.

According to experts who have analyzed the matter in depth, Yusuf al-Qardawi’s stance was formulated in contrast to profit-sharing arrangements. This prohibition is based on several grounds, notably the inherent injustice found in the system of leasing land for money. Justice is a fundamental tenet of Islam; if this principle is absent, the practice becomes haram because it conflicts with Islam's core values. A key factor contributing to the injustice of fixed-rate monetary leasing is the uncertainty regarding the land's actual yield or benefit.

And Allah knows best. This is indeed a sensitive issue. Honestly, I am not certain which view is correct. Therefore... We ask readers to approach this matter wisely. Please consult religious scholars and teachers who can explain this more precisely.

In summary, I believe the prohibition on land leasing stems from the following reasons:

1.              It is inequitable. There is a potential for the tenant to suffer losses if the harvest fails or is only partially successful. Conversely, the landowner is guaranteed a profit, having already received the lease payment in cash at the start of the season. Therefore, a profit-sharing arrangement is the recommended alternative.

2.              Land is a unique resource—truly one of a kind—necessitating specific legal principles. A tenant gains nothing without the effort of cultivating, planting, tending, and harvesting the land. They must also incur costs for seeds, fertilizer, and labor, alongside their own physical toil, before any yield is realized. This differs from renting a room, which offers immediate utility (a place to sleep) upon occupancy. For this reason, the practice of qiyas—drawing an analogy between land leasing and the rental of other goods—is flawed.

3.              Land belongs to Allah SWT, not the landowner. Even when someone is said to "own" land, that ownership extends only to its utilization; the essence of the land remains Allah’s property. Thus, in accordance with the hadith, if one lacks the manpower or time to cultivate the land, one should entrust it to another person rather than leasing it out for profit. Allah provided the land for all of us to cultivate, not for exclusive individual ownership. The notion that government authority—backed by a title deed—grants absolute ownership, allowing one to neglect the land at will, is perhaps a concept we need to reconsider.

4.              It exploits poverty. Landowners invariably benefit, whereas those without land lease out of necessity and often suffer hardship. In my experience as a researcher specializing in the sociology of agriculture—specifically agrarian issues—landowners generally enjoy a favorable position. Their share is consistently larger than that of the tenant. The lower the land-to-farmer ratio in a given region, the more the landowner can simply sit back and profit without effort. Money flows smoothly into their pockets every season, free of risk. Lease agreements are concluded against this backdrop of imbalance; tenants are compelled to rent—and to pay high rents—simply because they have no other choice.

 ******