Islam and cannabis: Legalisation and religious debate in Iran.
Maziyar Ghiabi, Masoomeh Maarefvand, Hamed Bahari, Zohreh Alavi
International Journal of Drug Policy April 9, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.009 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Qualitative study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Population | Iran's leading Shi'a religious authorities (maraje'-e taqlid) |
| Topics | Cannabis |
| Keywords | Humans Legislation, drug Religion and medicine Middle east Iran Regulation Islamic law Legalisation History of cannabis |
| Key findings | The authors report that responses from Iran's leading Shi'a authorities to eight questions about cannabis revealed differing opinions among the religious scholars on its legality in Islam, potential medical use, and domestic production. The authors speculate about the possibility of policy reform based on these responses. |
Abstract
Iran is currently discussing cannabis and opium regulations, which could bring a legalisation of drug consumption through a state supervised system. The article engages with the question of cannabis by looking at the legal interpretation of religious authorities in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The choice of Iran is justified for several reasons: firstly, Iran has a long history of drug use and cannabis has been part of the country's intoxicant traditions since times immemorial; secondly, the Iranian state is unique in that it combines religious exegesis with political machination through official channels; finally, among all Middle East and Islamic countries, Iran is at the avant-garde in experimenting in the field of drugs policy which makes an excellent case for the study of cannabis regulation. The article is the result of a direct engagement with Iran's leading Shi'a authorities, the maraje'-e taqlid, 'source of emulation'. The authors redacted a list of eight questions (estefta'at) about the status of cannabis in Iranian society. It questioned cannabis' legality in Islam, its potential medical use, the feasibility of domestic production and other relevant aspects of its social-religious life. Based on the responses, the authors analysed the difference in opinions among the religious scholars and speculate on the possibility of policy reform. Given the dearth of scholarly work about illicit drugs in the Islamic world, about which many readers might not be familiar, the article opens with an overview of the place of cannabis in the history of Islamic societies. It discusses terminological ambiguities, references in religious texts and traditions, and the general interpretations within Muslim religious schools of thought. Then, it discusses the status of cannabis in contemporary Iran before tackling the responses provided by the religious scholars. Eventually, the paper puts forward reflections about the potential implications for future policy developments on cannabis.
Comparable studies
Other qualitative studies on cannabis, most cited first.
| Study | Year | Design | Participants |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psychoactive substances as a last resort—a qualitative study of self-treatment of migraine and cluster headaches Users of online forums discussing cluster headache and migraine treatments | 2017 | Qualitative thematic analysis | |
| Psychoactive drug or mystical incense? Overview of the online available information on Spice products Web pages related to Spice products | 2009 | Qualitative study | n = 200 |
| Patterns, Trends, and Meanings of Drug Use by Dance-drug Users in Edinburgh, Scotland Clubbers in clubs and pre-club bars | 2004 | Cross-sectional survey with focus groups | n = 124 |
| Fascination and Social Togetherness-Discussions about Spice Smoking on a Swedish Internet Forum. Swedish internet forum users who posted reports about Spice intoxication | 2013 | Qualitative study | n = 40 |
| Cannabis as entheogen: survey and interview data on the spiritual use of cannabis. Participants recruited from seven online communities, median age 33, 81% male | 2020 | Mixed methods (qualitative interviews and quantitative survey) | n = 319 |