Question:
Some months ago, the explanation was given that after conquering Khaybar, the Prophetﷺ allowed the Jewish inhabitants to cultivate the land. They were required to give half of the produce, but if nothing was produced, they were not required to give anything.
She asks: Does this mean the Prophetﷺ took only profit but not loss? And if so, can we structure modern business partnerships in the same way — where we share profits but do not share losses?
For example, she asks: If I pay the advance for a shop and the rent, can I demand 50% of the profits while saying I will not share any loss?
Answer:
When the Prophetﷺ conquered Khaybar, the lands there became the property of the Islamic state. Those lands had previously been controlled by the Jews.
In those times, regions were small independent territories. When Khaybar was conquered, its public lands legally came under the control of the Islamic government.
The Prophetﷺ then made a practical arrangement. The Muslims themselves could not suddenly cultivate all the land. The Jewish residents were already living there and had experience managing the fields.
So, the Prophetﷺ negotiated with them: “These lands now belong to the Islamic state. You may continue cultivating them, but you must give half of the produce.”
Why half? Because the land itself was the main investment. The seeds and labor were minor in comparison to the value of the land.
Thus, the Jews would cultivate the land and share the harvest.
Now, normally if land is rented, rent must be paid regardless of profit or loss.
For example, even if the land cultivation produces 10 lakhs, the rent is Rs 10000 only. Even if no cultivation, the rent is Rs 10000 only and in case of house, if you rent a house, you must pay rent whether you live there, leave it empty, or make profit from it. Once the property is under your control, rent must be paid.
However, the Prophetﷺ showed leniency. Instead of demanding fixed rent, he said: If produce exists, give half. If nothing grows, you owe nothing.
This was a concession, not an exploitation. In fact, the Prophetﷺ was sharing the loss. If the land produced nothing, the Muslims received nothing despite owning a very valuable property. So, this arrangement was not taking profit without sharing loss. It was actually sharing risk.
Can similar arrangements exist today? Yes — if it concerns your own property.
For example, if you own building worth millions and allow someone to run a shop there, you may agree: If profit occurs, we share it. If there is no profit, you pay nothing.
That is permissible because you are the owner of the property.
But what is not permissible is taking a building that you yourself have rented from someone else, paying an advance, and then trying to act as though you are the owner and demand profit share from another person. You cannot sell rights that you do not own.
So, the key rule is:
- If the property belongs to you, such agreements are permissible.
- If it does not belong to you, you cannot structure such profit-sharing arrangements.