Hello Siggy

Thank you for your reply.

In my understanding (as a Muslim layperson rather than an expert on Islam), the default ruling for ‘worldly’ matters is one of permissibility i.e. Bitcoin is automatically deemed ‘halal’ until robust evidence is provided to the contrary.

However, my endorsement of Bitcoin is not premised only on it being halal but in a closely associated concept of goodness – in jurisprudence this is referred to as ‘tayyib’. It is my view that Bitcoin is tayyib – especially when compared to fiat money! To help you understand this concept, think of junk food. A particular serving of junk food may be halal but not tayyib.

As for interest in the context of contemporary banking, the well-known view is that such interest is not halal. However, I am aware of convincing counterarguments that modern-day banking interest is not the same as the forbidden type of riba. Additionally, just because a particular view is widely held doesn’t mean it’s correct.

As for hoarding, I do not see a problem with hodling Bitcoin. In our tradition, we say that actions are judged/evaluated according to the associated intentions. I think that a key intention of hodlers is to support Bitcoin during its current phase as a small nascent monetary asset through to better days ahead (e.g. Bitcoin maturing into an established and less volatile monetary asset). It’s yet to be seen if these better days ahead will happen but, in my opinion, now is too soon to be concerned about hoarding Bitcoin.