How do we reconcile the action of Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) when he vomited food that originated from soothsaying, with the permissibility of dealing with those involved in usury, as stated in the fatwas on this website? And is it permissible to adopt one of these two opinions?

It is permissible to deal with a person whose wealth is mixed (halal and haram), though some jurists dislike it.

As for unlawful wealth, it is divided into two types:

1. Wealth that is unlawful in itself: such as stolen goods and alcohol. It is not permissible to deal with this type of wealth.

2. Wealth that is unlawful due to its acquisition: such as usury (riba) and wages from singing. This is unlawful only for the one who acquired it. It becomes permissible for someone who takes it through a lawful means, such as a gift, wage, or inheritance.

The story of Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, and his vomiting the food obtained from soothsaying earnings, demonstrates his extreme piety and avoidance of doubtful matters, because the payment to a soothsayer is specifically prohibited, thus making it similar to wealth that is unlawful in itself.

In summary: There is no harm in taking a wage from a person who deals in usury, because their wealth is unlawful due to its acquisition, not in itself.