-
Crypto Futures & Gambling (Maysir), Clarification Needed
Assalamu alaikum,
I’m trying to understand where crypto futures trading stands on the gambling (maysir) question.
Context: futures involve no possession of the underlying asset — you’re speculating on price via a contract. Some argue this is maysir since it’s a bet on direction; others say skill-based analysis (not random guessing) shifts it out of gambling, similar to normal business risk.
My questions:
1. Is there a recognized threshold — research, risk management, track record — that separates “informed speculation” from gambling in Islamic law?
2. Does leverage make a trade closer to gambling on its own, separate from any Riba concern?
3. Mufti Taqi Usmani’s stricter view questions whether crypto itself qualifies as valid property (mal) — does that affect the maysir ruling independently, or are these two separate issues?
A comparison to existing rulings on forex CFDs would help too.
JazakAllah khair.
-
3 Replies
-
Crypto Futures & Gambling (Maysir), Clarification Needed
updated 2 weeks, 6 days ago
2 Members
·
3
Replies
-
1. Is there a recognized threshold — research, risk management, track record?
No, and not because the matter is unsettled, but because in this framework it is the wrong shape of question. Effort is not the variable, and no quantity of it converts one category into another. Duration, amount of risk, and price fluctuations are not factors in determining whether or not something is a gamble. It is the fact that purely on the basis of chance someone attempts to gain money that he has no moral right to because it is being played with the sole intention of making gain at the peril of the other participants. (See: Discussion 88493 & Discussion 117145).
Speculative trading does not mean blindly taking positions without any analysis. Speculative trading is relatively a shorter-term strategy that mainly relies on technical / sentiment analysis and aims to benefit from price fluctuations in a short duration. All kinds of trade are halal except those that may involve something immoral or unjust. However, if someone adopts attitude of mere speculation (complete guesswork), then such an attitude is discouraged.
2. Does leverage make a trade closer to gambling, on its own?
No. Leverage magnifies the consequence of being right or wrong; it does not change the nature of act being performed. Risk as such is expressly not the defect. This kind of risk more or less is there in every business. It is not gambling therefore it is rightful. However it is always advised from a financial standpoint to be cautious when taking bigger investment risks (See: Discussion 95933)
3. Mufti Taqi Usmani on crypto as ‘mal’ — does it affect the ‘maysir’ ruling?
They are two independent questions, and conflating them is the source of most of the confusion.
Logically, first: “is X valid property?” is a question about the ‘object’ of the contract. “Is this transaction maysir?” is a question about its ‘structure’. If crypto were not valid ‘mal’, the trade would fail for want of valid subject-matter — it would not thereby become gambling. And a perfectly valid ‘mal’ can be gambled with e.g. people wager on sports.
Second — and this is the substantive divergence — Ghamidi Sahab’s framework answers the ‘mal’ question differently, and treats it as a matter of human convention rather than ‘sharai’ determination. Ghamidi Sahab’s own reservation about crypto is prudential — and he separates it from ‘ḥurmah’ himself:
“Another currency is that, like paper currency. These new things are coming into existence today. Until the system of the state does not guarantee it, till that time, keep yourself and money safe… Right now, there is a paper in our hand… it is written in it that its guarantee is being given by the state bank. So, if that guarantee is obtained, then you take advantage of it. Otherwise, wait. So, this is one thing. It has nothing to do with whether it is permissible or not. It has to do with the fact that good people should save their money. They should keep it safe.“
[Ask Ghamidi Live, Ep. 65, 23:48–25:25](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh55zJDO970&t=1428s)
He then immediately turns to the trading question and answers it on a different principle entirely: “the things that you usually hear from the Ulema, that things should come under control… this is the principle of ‘Zarar–gharar‘. That is, there should not be a dispute, there should not be a fight.”
And on who is competent to decide such questions:
“See, this decision has to be made by people. Our job is to tell them what to think about in religion… these are all moral things. Whatever work you are doing, if you have adopted a new currency… you should consider that there should not be any deceit for anyone, there should not be any matter of harming anyone. Like in gambling, if you sit with full intention of harming the other person… However, on some occasions — if there is a matter of stock exchange, or other such matters — in which the effects are not [between two people but on the whole economy], the decision-making work of that should be done by the states”…
[Islamic Ruling on Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVXQGwCQe-Y)
4. Comparison with forex CFDs
There’s nothing inherently wrong with buying or selling futures contracts — it is not gambling. However, one should be mindful about whether or not the underlying asset is halal, as well as whether there’s anything morally questionable in the contract agreement. (See: Discussion 119668)
The condition of physical possession for conducting a trade is not an absolute requirement according to Javed Ahmed Ghamidi Sahab. Prophet Muhammad (SWS) suggested it in the context of physical items in order to minimize any chance of misrepresentation/deceit or damage to the other party (See: Discussion 105322)
And Ghamidi Sahab himself, given a description of exactly this instrument — “nothing is physically in our hands; rather, there is a contract, and there is a profit or loss only based on the rate”:
…”The Prophet ﷺ had instructed people in the market of Madinah that until you take something into your possession, do not sell it. This was not a question of whether it was forbidden or permissible. It was an instruction to protect you from dispute… In the present time this matter is no longer so simple… these angles of buying and selling have now become far more free from dispute… There is no question of Haram or Halal in this“…
[Ask Ghamidi Live, Ep. 67, 17:51–19:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JJ1-Mp5aa0&t=1094s)
Regulated FX sits comfortably inside that condition. A great deal of crypto-derivatives activity does not. Counterparty and exchange-insolvency risk, auto-deleveraging and socialized losses, opaque or discretionary liquidation engines, wash-traded volume, thin books and manipulable oracles — each of these is precisely the ‘dispute-and-deception’ hazard the precaution was designed against.
So crypto futures fall in the same category as forex CFDs — under bay, not maysir — but the conditions on which Ghamidi Sahab relaxes the possession rule are far less well met on many crypto venues than on regulated FX. That is where the genuine caution belongs, and it is checkable venue by venue: regulatory status, proof of reserves, insurance fund, published liquidation methodology, withdrawal record under stress. A professional should be consulted in this regard.
-
This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by
Umer.
-
This reply was modified 3 weeks, 2 days ago by
-
So if I trade CFDs on a trusted broker like binance, there is nothing inherently wrong with that in Sir Javed Ahmed Ghamidi’s point of view?
-
Does the “spectator vs. participant” restriction in the wager-exception hadith apply to CFD trading?
The hadith “la sabaqa illa fi khuffin aw hafirin aw nasl” (no wager except in hoof, hoof, or arrow) permits wagering specifically for the participants of the contest — the archer, the rider — not for outside parties betting on the outcome. This is reflected in classical rulings on spectator betting at races: several scholars (e.g. Saudi Arabia’s Permanent Committee for Islamic Research and Ifta, Fatwa 3219) explicitly rule that if a prize pool comes from spectators wagering on who wins, rather than from the competitors’ own stakes, that is gambling among the spectators and falls outside the exception — even though the race itself is permitted.
Given Ghamidi sahib’s position that skill/effort is the ‘illah that permits wagering (rather than chance), I’d like to raise a structural question about CFD trading specifically:
In an archery or racing wager, the bettor’s own skill and effort directly produce the outcome being staked on. In CFD trading, however, the price movement is produced by the aggregate supply and demand of the broader market — no single party’s skill or effort moves the price. The trader is not a participant producing the outcome; they are external to it, staking money on a price movement they do not control or contribute to, much like a spectator staking money on who wins a race they are not riding in.
Two follow-up angles I’ve already tried to resolve myself, but would value a response to:
1. If “informed analysis” is what separates a CFD trader from a mere spectator, wouldn’t that same reasoning validate a sports bettor who studies team form and injury reports before betting — which nobody accepts as permissible? If informed prediction isn’t sufficient there, why would it be sufficient for CFDs?
2. Does the fact that CFD counterparties are typically betting against each other (or against the broker, in a dealing-desk model) — rather than against “the market” itself — mean the actual zero-sum relationship is structurally closer to spectator betting (bettor vs. bettor) than to participant wagering (competitor vs. competitor), regardless of what produces the underlying price uncertainty?
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
