A religious ruling meets a new market
On July 12, Pakistan's digital asset framework faced a new religious debate after scholars reportedly rejected purchases made with digital tokens. Cointelegraph reported that Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (PVARA) chairman Bilal bin Saqib called for continued dialogue after meeting Mufti Taqi Usmani, a prominent Islamic scholar linked to the ruling.
Cointelegraph, citing Pakistani newspaper Dawn, said Usmani and five other scholars signed an Islamic legal ruling issued by Jamia Darul Uloom Karachi. The ruling reportedly treated purchases with digital tokens, including stablecoins, as impermissible because the scholars did not recognize the tokens as property or wealth under their interpretation of Islamic law.
Saqib did not dismiss the religious concern. He argued that blockchain systems, stablecoins, tokenized assets, and other digital instruments cover different structures and risks that should receive separate technical and Shariah analysis.
"The different categories of digital assets merit careful technical assessment alongside rigorous Shariah examination, rather than being viewed through a single lens."
Influence is not the same as enforcement
The reported ruling may carry social and religious influence in Pakistan, but the available accounts do not describe a court judgment, a PVARA ban, or a change to licensing rules. That boundary is essential. In this dispute, a judge's ruling would be binding and enforceable, while the fatwa is advisory guidance rather than a court command. It remains a matter of voluntary acceptance unless translated into law.
Pakistan is simultaneously building a regulated market. Cointelegraph reported that the Virtual Assets Act 2026 established PVARA and that, in April, the State Bank of Pakistan allowed banks to open accounts for firms licensed by the authority. Saqib's response suggests the regulator wants to preserve that framework while engaging scholars over how different assets should be classified.
The regulator's requested classification work would separate payment tokens, stablecoins, tokens that represent real assets, and blockchain infrastructure before a legal or Shariah conclusion is drawn. Cointelegraph reported that Saqib's discussion also covered fraud, exploitation, and financial harm. That approach treats technology, contracts, and monetary assets as distinct questions rather than one undifferentiated category.
Why It Matters
Bitcoin does not need a regulator or scholar to grant it market value, and people remain free to follow religious guidance they trust. The danger begins when advisory judgments harden into coercive rules built on poor economic assumptions, including the idea that authorities can define value independently of market participants. Marginal value is subjective, so Pakistan can debate Shariah compliance without pretending Bitcoin, stablecoins, and premine tokens share the same monetary properties. Sound policy should protect people from fraud, enforce contracts for peaceful market participants, and keep voluntary belief and state compulsion on opposite sides of that line.
