Whoever owns a thing owns that which is lighter than it. It is said there is another opinion: it is not permitted, because it is a type of usage not customary for a shirt, similar to wrapping it as an izar.

Section: If one rents land, it is valid for the reasons mentioned previously. It is not valid until he sees the land, because the benefit varies depending on its condition, and it cannot be known except by viewing, as it cannot be precisely determined by description. It is not valid until he specifies for what he is renting it: for cultivation, planting, or building, because land is suitable for all of these, and their impact on the land differs; thus, it is necessary to specify it. If he says, "I rented it to you to cultivate it or to plant it," it is not valid, because he did not specify one of the two, making it similar to saying, "I sold you one of these two slaves." If he says, "To cultivate it as you wish, and to plant in it as you wish," it is valid. This is the view stated by al-Shafi'i. Most of his companions disagreed with him, saying it is not permitted because one does not know how much he will cultivate or plant. Some said it is valid, and he may cultivate half of it and plant the other half. Our view is that the contract required the permissibility of these two things, so it is valid, just as if he had said, "To cultivate it as you wish." And because the difference between two genera is like the difference between two types, and his saying, "To cultivate it as you wish," is a permission for types and varieties, and it has been validated; so it is the same for two genera. He may plant it all, and if he prefers, he may cultivate it all, just as if he permitted him all types of cultivation; he would be allowed to cultivate all of it as one type, and he would be allowed to cultivate it as two types—likewise here. If he rented it for cultivation alone, there are four issues:

First, he rented it for cultivation unconditionally, or said, "To cultivate it as you wish." It is valid, and he may cultivate whatever he wishes. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. It is narrated from Ibn Surayj that it is not valid until the crop is specified, because its damaging effect varies, so it is not valid without specification, just as if he did not mention what he is renting it for—cultivation, planting, or building. Our view is that it is permissible to rent it for the most damaging type of cultivation, and he is permitted all of the