it is permissible, so it resembles jewelry and is distinguished from wax, as wax is only utilized in a way that destroys its essence. Once this is established, if the person specifies what they are leasing it for, it is good. If they leave the lease unconditional, Abu al-Khattab said: The lease is valid, and the person may utilize them for whichever of the two they wish, because their benefit in a lease is defined as adornment and weighing, and they are similar; therefore, it is necessary that the lease be construed as applying to both when it is left unconditional, like leasing a house unconditionally, as it encompasses both dwelling and placing belongings in it. The Qadi said: The lease is not valid, and it would be a loan. This is the school of Abu Hanifa, because a lease necessitates utilization, and the customary utilization of dirhams and dinars is through their physical essence, so if the utilization is left unconditional, it is construed as the customary utilization. The Shafi'i scholars said: The lease is not valid, nor does it constitute a loan, because adornment causes it to decrease, whereas weighing does not, so the mode of utilization has differed, making it impermissible to leave it unconditional. It is also not permissible to use it to express a loan, because a loan is a transfer of ownership to another, while a lease necessitates utilization while the entity remains intact, so it is not permissible to use the terminology of one for the other. Furthermore, nomenclature and terminology are taken based on transmission, and it is not known in the language to use the term "lease" to express a "loan." The view of Abu al-Khattab is more correct, God Almighty willing, because when a contract can be interpreted as valid, it is better than declaring it void, and it is possible to interpret it as a lease for the purposes for which it is permissible to lease it. The view of the Qadi is incorrect, because a lease only necessitates utilization while the entity remains intact, so it is not construed as anything else. What the others mentioned regarding the decrease of the entity through usage in adornment is far-fetched, as it is minimal and has no effect; therefore, its existence is as if it were non-existent.

Section: It is permissible to lease trees and palm trees to dry clothes on them or to spread them out to seek shelter in their shade. The Shafi'i scholars have two opinions on this, similar to what they mentioned regarding currencies. Our view is that if they were cut, it would be permissible to lease them for this purpose, and likewise when they are standing; this is because the benefit is obtained from them equally in both states, so what is permissible in one of them is permissible in the other.