جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "gambling" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

The Trading Tomorrow market is one of the informal markets in the country, which is still considered one of the important sources of determining the exchange rate in the open market. The purpose of this article is to investigate the prohibition of tomorrow transactions in the light of jurisprudence, Islamic Penal Code and the regulations governing foreign exchange operations.

This article is descriptive and analytical. The materials and data are also qualitative and data collection has been used.

Ethical Considerations: 

In this article, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness are observed.

The findings showed that the jurisprudential challenges, such as being fake, formal, and gambling, are certain and undeniable in tomorrow's transactions. Nevertheless, in the legal prohibition of tomorrow trading in Article 13 of the regulations governing currency exchange operations, reasons such as destroying the stability of the exchange rate, intensifying inflation and negative economic growth have been addressed, and no attention has been paid to jurisprudential challenges.

The deterrent lever of the sharia prohibition of these transactions has been neglected due to its gambling nature and the possibility of criminal prosecution, citing articles 710-705 of the Islamic Penal Code.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of digital technology, the emergence of blockchain and cryptocurrencies has presented new challenges and questions for religious jurisprudence. Among these, the practice of cryptocurrency mining has sparked debates concerning its conformity with Islamic laws, particularly in light of similarities drawn between mining activities and gambling [Ghomar] — a concept well-defined and often condemned in Islamic teachings. This paper aims to explore the intricate dynamics of cryptocurrency mining within the framework of Imamia Jurisprudence, scrutinizing whether the practice bears the hallmarks of gambling, as traditionally understood within the Sharia. Given the profound impact of digital currencies on global financial systems and the ethical considerations they raise, this investigation seeks to elucidate the religious standings on cryptocurrency mining, thereby guiding adherents in their engagement with this modern financial phenomenon.

Research Question:

The core inquiry of this study revolves around the assessment of cryptocurrency mining through the lens of Imamia Jurisprudence: "Does the process of cryptocurrency mining align with the characteristics of gambling as defined by Islamic law, thereby rendering it prohibited. This question seeks to unravel the ethical and religious implications of mining activities, which involve significant financial investment in competition for a potentially lucrative reward, mirroring aspects of chance and speculation akin to gambling.

Research Hypothesis:

This paper hypothesizes that despite superficial similarities between cryptocurrency mining and gambling—such as the reliance on chance, competitive investment, and the potential for monetary gain without traditional labor—there are fundamental differences that could distinguish mining activities from gambling under Imamia Jurisprudence. These differences hinge on the intentions behind mining, the nature of effort and investment involved, and the broader economic implications of cryptocurrency within Islamic ethical frameworks. The hypothesis posits that a nuanced understanding of these factors may reveal that cryptocurrency mining does not inherently constitute gambling and thus may not be universally deemed haram within an Islamic context.

Methodology & Framework, if Applicable:

To address the research question and test the hypothesis, this study adopts a descriptive analytical methodology, underpinned by a qualitative framework that involves the examination of primary and secondary sources within Islamic jurisprudence. The research will delve into the canonical texts, fatwas, and scholarly interpretations that define gambling from an Imamia perspective, subsequently applying these criteria to the process of cryptocurrency mining. Through comparative analysis, the study will identify the parallels and distinctions between mining and gambling, considering factors such as the element of risk, the role of skill versus chance, and the societal and economic contributions of cryptocurrency mining. This methodological approach allows for a comprehensive assessment of the subject matter, grounded in the rich tradition of Islamic legal scholarship while engaging with the contemporary implications of digital finance.

The research meticulously dissected the characteristics traditionally associated with gambling within Islamic jurisprudence and juxtaposed these with the intrinsic elements of cryptocurrency mining. This comparative analysis yielded several critical insights, underscoring the distinct nature of cryptocurrency mining from gambling. Key findings include:     Rational benefit and ecosystem contribution: cryptocurrency mining was found to offer tangible benefits to the digital currency ecosystem, enhancing security and facilitating transactions. This utility and contribution render it distinct from gambling activities, which lack productive output or societal benefit.
     Nature of rewards: unlike gambling, where stakes are placed with the possibility of total loss or gain based on chance, cryptocurrency mining rewards are not predicated on the loss of another but are rewards for computational efforts contributed to the network.
     Financial risk and effort: the research clarified that the financial investment in mining does not equate to wagering since it involves expenditure towards productive work with inherent value, differentiating it from the speculative risk in gambling.
     Competition and intent: the competitive aspect of mining does not inherently signify gambling, as it lacks the direct adversarial win-lose scenario typical of gambling. Instead, mining competition is more akin to market competition, where success does not necessitate another's loss.
     Investment and loss: the argument that miners face a total loss in the absence of rewards was countered by the understanding that investments in mining infrastructure and operations constitute business expenses rather than gambles, with inherent value and potential for future gains.
     Chance versus effort: The role of chance in mining does not align with the gambling criterion of reliance on pure luck, as mining involves significant preparatory effort, investment, and an ongoing contribution to network maintenance.
     These findings collectively argue against the classification of cryptocurrency mining as gambling within the framework of Imamia Jurisprudence, highlighting the nuanced understanding required to evaluate modern financial technologies through the lens of traditional religious law.

The exhaustive investigation into the parallels between gambling characteristics and cryptocurrency mining concluded a significant divergence between the two under Imamia Jurisprudence. The research established that cryptocurrency mining does not embody the essential elements of gambling, namely, reliance on chance, direct financial wagering, and lack of productive contribution. Instead, mining is characterized by its integral role in the maintenance and security of the blockchain network, necessitating significant effort, investment, and skill.
     However, the conclusion that mining does not equate to gambling does not automatically confer legitimacy on all aspects of cryptocurrency operations within an Islamic context. The research underscores the need for further scholarly examination on other concerns related to cryptocurrency, such as the legitimacy of earnings and the intrinsic value of digital currencies.
     In essence, this study not only clarifies the position of cryptocurrency mining in relation to gambling within Imamia Jurisprudence but also opens avenues for further research into the broader ethical and economic implications of cryptocurrencies. It serves as a foundational piece for ongoing dialogue and exploration in the intersection of technology, finance, and religious ethics, emphasizing the importance of informed, nuanced scholarship in addressing contemporary issues through the lens of traditional jurisprudence.

Betting in the form of predicting the results of sports competitions has increased sharply in Iran in recent years, and the statistics of the country's political and judicial authorities indicate that this phenomenon has become a social issue worthy of attention. However, in practice, a kind of inefficiency, disorder and obvious contradiction can be observed in the stance towards this phenomenon. This research, which was conducted by referring to library sources and reviewing previous researches and using a descriptive-analytical method, aims to investigate the inefficiency and contradiction of the existing policies regarding this phenomenon, which the result of the research shows that this is due to ambiguity and disagreement. In recognizing the nature, status, and in general, the legitimacy or non-start of these activities, it comes from the perspective of jurisprudence and statutory laws. This activity has an ambiguous status in terms of the practical Sharia regulations in terms of gambling, in terms of civil law regulations in accordance with hostage-taking, and in terms of criminal law regulations, which due to its significant and multifaceted harmful consequences, the necessary intervention of the legislator in formulating precise, transparent and It requires independence in this field.

Gambling is one of the illegitimate methods of gaining property, the prohibition of which is reflected in the criminal law. In jurisprudential works, the types of gambling have been studied by considering the two indicators of playing with gambling implements and betting, and their substantive and obligatory effects have been explained. According to the mentioned indicators, gambling can be distinguished from what is considered gambling ruling and from similar topics such as betting and lottery. In the present article, in addition to the jurisprudential analysis of the issue, according to the criminal laws before and after the revolution,the types of crimes related to gambling and the conditions for its realization have been investigated. A comparison of the rules shows that the criminal legislator has taken a stricter approach than before each time. However, the inclusion of existing laws regarding committing gambling on cyberspace platforms is difficult due to ambiguity in the definition. Also, the lack of definition of gambling and similar issues such as betting and lottery has caused some differences of opinion. Therefore, it seems necessary to provide a clear and based on jurisprudential criteria definition of gambling and similar issues, which include committing it in cyberspace.

Today, a type of computer game has become popular in which payments are made from the loser’s accounts.Due to the nature of winning and losing, these types of games are very similar to gambling at first glance. Therefore, a public demand has been made for the jurisprudential assessment of this type of payout, whether it is gambling or not.The subject of gambling in computer games has been discussed in contemporary jurisprudential research, but only the jurisprudential ruling of this type of game has been studied, and the method of recognizing gambling other than that has not been discussed. An innovation introduced in this article is the use of the subject analysis method with a jurisprudential approach in the study of various computer games and financial payments within them.While introducing the types of payments in computer games, the method of recognizing and matching the payment directions that make the games gambling has been presented. In conclusion, the method of determining the subject and the verdict (ḥukm) of the cases in which the payment for gambling cannot be identified is stated.

There are some types of computer games with in-game payments if one side of the game loses. The similarity of winning and losing in such games with the wins and losses of gambling has raised the question of whether they are a gamble and has been considered in jurisprudential research. However, due to the influence of the direction of payments and the types of payers in the games as being gamble, it is necessary to examine these payments in these directions. The role of payments' direction has been explored in a standalone paper entitled "Thematic Gambling in Post-Loss Payments in Computer Games". However, there is no independent study on the role of different types of payers, which explains the role of payers in such games, despite their diversity and differences in their nature and role in the games as being gamble. The current study seeks to respond to the important demands of Islamic game makers in providing jurisprudential criteria for the design of payers and respond to the demands of a large number of Muslims who use computer games in order to avoid gambling. The result of the present study, through a jurisprudential study of the types of payers and an analytical study of four types of payers is as follows: 1. both sides of the game 2. One side of the game 3. Third party 4. software. To determine whether the first type and some cases of the fourth type are gamble, a method of applying the elements of gambling to the types of payers in computer games can be used.

Although the sanctity and void of gambling and robbery are considered to be Islamic Sharia laws, however, the legislator in Article 655, by virtue of jurisprudential sources, has excluded such cases as horse riding, shooting and fencing. How such an exception came into the legacy of jurisprudence and its relation to the demands of the modern age and whether it is possible to use emerging examples of Imamiyyah jurisprudence to include emerging examples in the bidding and to consider them as allegorical rather than modern. No, the present paper has led a comprehensive study of jurisprudential documentation in a descriptive-analytic research. The results of the study show that by converting the subject and changing the case, the said cases are not capable of providing the lawful purposes of prescribing such a judgment; therefore, it is necessary to replace new cases with the essence of judgment and in the light of time and place according to the requirements of time and place.

Computer games are newfound social topics that some of them is possible by the payment of money. The jurisprudence has faced doubts about the games that perform or earn points for passing its various steps need to pay within the App and via internet. The present article studies the titles that is related to jurisprudence as "playing and payment", under the two titles, “ sabaq (racing) and ramayeh (arrow-throwing) " and "gambling" and “ unlawful trades " and “Prohibition of Consuming Property Wrongfully”. Finally, the view is accepted that some computer games is forbidden, because the purpose of acquisition is forbidden and so, they are adapted to the unlawful trades. In addition, if the payment is performed, just, for passing the various stages of the game, is considered as “Consuming Property Wrongfully”, and so, is forbidden. The method of research is descriptive-analytical and documentary.

Foreign exchange trading or "Forex" is a decentralized global market in which currencies are traded in pairs and traders benefit from currency price changes. The ban on this market by the Iranian legislator should be taken into consideration. This article assesses the angles of these transactions by examining the nature of the Forex market and complaining about it in a descriptive analytical approach. The arguments presented based on the similarities of gambling transactions are reasons for the illegal Forex market. Because financial damage is not just for a trader and in turn affects many communities; several laws, including injunctions, bans on deception, profits in the country, etc., are the basis for analysis and evaluation. The article has been studied. With all of the above, not only religious status, but also the prohibition of these transactions is clear in Iran's law.

Despite the consensus on the illegality of gambling in jurisprudence, the concept, terms and conditions of this contract are ambiguous and this caused a difficult to interpret in legal literature and to adapt it to similar institutions such as lottery. This ambiguity has unfavorable consequences and individuals may engage in casual transactions that have a lot to do with gambling and, as a result, a void contract. In the present study, while explaining the overview of gambling, Lottery Examination is considered as one of the possible casualties, and the matching between the two entities results in the majority of the lottery examples, due to the combination of gambling elements such as collateral and risk, inside in the concept of gambling, it is void. However, this rule is not allocated, and items such as gambling in the form of a loan and a gamble in the form of a lawyer are not excluded by their structure and their different nature from the above rule.