"A barter exchange between two different weighable or measurable commodities where the delivery of one side is deferred". Alternatives to the strict definition of classical scholars and revivalists have been put forward by Islamic modernists who emphasize the moral aspect of any prohibition, believing that what should be prohibited was the exploitation of the needy, rather than the interest on loans itself: Interest on some loans — "exploitive" loans — but not others. Possible meanings of exploitive riba include: interest on loans for consumption not investment, since investment loans were allegedly not practiced in Meccan society and usually earn borrowers a return they can use to pay the interest charged (this idea was proposed in the 1930s by Syrian scholar Marouf al-Daoualibi); interest on loans charging compound rather than simple interest, (an interpretation proposed in the 1940s by Egyptian jurist al-Sanhuri); charging "exorbitant" interest rates; interest on loans to the poor and needy; interest on loans made by the economically strong/rich to the economically poor and/or vulnerable (as opposed to interest paid by large banks to individual account holders); interest on loans motivated by a desire to make risk-free return of principal along with some interest or additional return, and where no concern is given to whether the funds are invested to enhance the earning ability of the lender (Muhammad Akram Khan). Varieties According to some ahadith, the prophet Muhammad said there are either 70, 72, or 73 varieties (depending on the ahadith) of riba. (The ahadith do not specify what those varieties are.) Most Islamic jurists (Fuqaha) describe several different kinds of riba: Riba al-jahiliya: usury practiced in pre-Islamic Arabia referred to in . Scholars differ on its definition. According to Raqiub Zaman and M.O. Farooq, a riba al-jahiliya debt was "doubled and redoubled" each year if the borrower could not pay what was owed. Another similar definition (described by Taqi Usmani), is that riba al-jahiliya was a kind of loan where the borrower was not charged any additional amount above the principal unless they could not repay when the loan was due, in which case they were charged an additional amount but not necessarily double or triple the principal. Usmani believes both of these definitions are incorrect, and that in reality a number of transactions where "an increased amount was charged on the principal amount of a debt" were in vogue at this time and can be considered