This, then, is the view of Mālik and his associates, of Abū Ḥanīfah, and of Aḥmad and his associates (1), as well as the position held by the vast majority of the Successors; and no Companion is known to have deemed it permissible.

Al-Shāfiʿī (2) explicitly ruled that nard (backgammon) is forbidden, yet he suspended judgment with respect to chess, declining to declare it unlawful and noting that its prohibition had not become clear to him. Because of this, his disciples differed over chess (3): some prohibited it outright, while others considered it merely disliked without deeming it unlawful. Among those who forbade it and argued forcefully for its prohibition was Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Ḥalīmī (4).

Al-Shāfiʿī also stated that nard is prohibited even when no stake is involved, whereas he remained undecided about chess played without a stake. Some of his followers carried this hesitation over to nard as well, saying, “If no stake is involved, it is not forbidden—just like chess.” This, however, is pure analogy, for the harm inherent in chess is greater than the harm inherent in nard.