Ayatullah Saanei then moves onto narrations but he uses the same principle to all the narrations.
He considers the term “Qimar” (used in the narrations – also means gambling) as something specifically for playing with tools of gambling with actual gambling of money/items, not without (e.g. in Majma’ al-Bahrayn).
In addition, he uses the argument that the reality is known that playing these games without actually gambling is not something that strengthens what is wrong, and weakens the truth, especially when the goals are to strengthen the mind, for example. This makes many of the narrations not applciable.
[The implication is that all the narrations say that these are the ills of “qimar” and “maysar” so cannot be to do with this type of game without gambling]
Therefore, with the lack of evidence for terming this type of gambling haram, the rule of “asalat al-ibaha” is applicable. This rule basically states that if there is no clear indication about whether something is haram or halal, it must be mubah.
Following an email I sent about an intensive course on Usul I will be teaching in the Summer, there has been an interest on what type of topics I would be discussing. In the next few blogs, I will discuss one of the topics that would be in this course: what should be done when there is no clear ruling from the narrations. (this will explain the asalat al-ibaha as well)
No comments:
Post a Comment