Concepts such as lahw (frivolity), laghw (futility), la‘b (play), iḍlāl ‘an sabīl Allāh (leading astray from the path of God), and similar terms, despite their long-standing use as reasons for prohibiting an act in the discipline of jurisprudence, have rarely been independently analyzed in terms of their linguistic meaning and legal rulings. Among these, laghw is perhaps the least discussed. Yet, in many instances, an act is deemed prohibited or undesirable due to its classification under this concept. Hojjat al-Islam Dr. Ali Sharifi, a professor of advanced levels at the Qom Seminary and a doctor of criminal law, explores the concept of laghw and its application as a basis for prohibiting artistic works in this exclusive commentary. The full text of the commentary by the academic secretary of the Institute of Politics and Governance at the Research Institute for Contemporary Fiqh Studies is presented below:

Laghw, lahw, and la‘b are terms used in religious literature with closely related meanings and are generally condemned. There is disagreement among jurists regarding whether laghw is prohibited, and if so, whether it is absolutely prohibited or only certain types are forbidden. Additionally, many artistic works today—such as performances, acting, playing music, or engaging in theatrical movements—may be considered instances of laghw. This raises the question: what impact does deeming laghw prohibited have on artistic works?

To address this question, two issues must be clarified:

1. Which type of laghw is prohibited?
2. Which artistic works can be considered instances of prohibited laghw?

A) Semantic Analysis of Prohibited Laghw

Regarding the first issue, it is necessary to define laghw. Lexicographers have defined laghw as falsehood [1], disordered speech [2], words spoken without thought or consideration and given no weight [3], offensive speech [4], and actions lacking benefit [5]. However, from a jurisprudential perspective, based on Quranic verses and narrations, laghw has two meanings: first, a meaning synonymous with lahw, in which case any ruling applicable to lahw also applies to laghw; second, any purposeless actions [6].

Sheikh Ansari cites several jurists, such as Sheikh Tusi, Ibn Idris, and Allama Hilli, who have stated that lahw is prohibited and have ruled certain acts as forbidden on the grounds that they constitute lahw, such as traveling for pleasure and enjoyment. Their statements suggest that lahw is absolutely prohibited. However, Sheikh Ansari himself argues that there is no evidence for the absolute prohibition of lahw. In linguistic terms, lahw refers to mere play, which involves actions lacking a rational purpose, and there is no doubt that not all play or actions without a rational purpose are prohibited. The prevailing view and historical practice also confirm that, in no era, have jurists deemed all forms of play or actions without a rational purpose to be forbidden. Therefore, the intended meaning of prohibited lahw must be lahw baṭarī, which refers to intense joy, such as dancing, clapping, and playing with instruments of amusement. These actions are not merely joyful but also stimulate lustful desires [7].

Thus, if laghw is synonymous with lahw, which is equivalent to la‘b (play), only laghw baṭarī can be deemed prohibited. However, if laghw has a distinct meaning from lahw—where lahw refers to actions accompanied by pleasure, but laghw refers to purposeless actions, even without pleasure—then it can only be deemed undesirable (makrūh) [8].

Ayatollah Khoei argues that there is no evidence for the absolute prohibition of lahw, whether it means falsehood or not. First, there is no evidence for the absolute prohibition of lahw. Second, the narrations cited to support the prohibition of lahw are weak in terms of authenticity and pertain only to a specific type of lahw, namely lahw accompanied by prohibited acts, such as gambling [9]. Other jurists share this view, asserting that there is no evidence for the absolute prohibition of laghw.

B) The Impact of the Prohibition of Laghw on Artistic Works

Based on the brief discussion of the meaning and jurisprudential ruling of laghw, artistic works can be divided into two categories:

1. Works that are not instances of laghw: These include cinematic productions, television programs, paintings, poetry, music, and other artistic works created and presented with the aim of promoting lofty religious or human values or fostering positive spiritual transformation in individuals. These works are not fundamentally instances of laghw or purposeless, futile actions lacking a rational purpose, and thus cannot be deemed prohibited on these grounds.
2. Works that may be instances of laghw: These include works that either have no purpose, such as what is today referred to as “art for art’s sake” (Parnassianism), or have futile and lustful objectives, such as various forms of dance, exhilarating and lust-inducing ghinā (singing), immoral paintings and sculptures, and the like. Regarding this second group, prohibition applies only to the latter type—works with futile objectives. Thus, narrations classify this category as instances of prohibited lahw or laghw. For example, a narration from the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibits gambling, chess, playing the tambourine, and the flute [10].

However, for the first type—artistic works that lack both positive and negative objectives and are created solely for the sake of art—if they lead to wasting time, neglecting worship, or similar consequences, they can be evaluated as undesirable (makrūh) as they hinder human perfection.

References:

[1] Kitāb al-‘Ayn, vol. 4, p. 449.

[2] Al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lugha, vol. 5, p. 132.

[3] Mufradāt Alfāẓ al-Qur’ān, p. 742.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Al-Taḥqīq fī Kalimāt al-Qur’ān al-Karīm, vol. 10, p. 207.

[6] Kitāb al-Makāsib (Sheikh Ansari, modern edition), vol. 2, p. 48.

[7] Ibid., p. 47.

[8] Ibid., p. 49.

[9] Miṣbāḥ al-Fiqāha (al-Makāsib), vol. 1, p. 424.

[10] Man Lā Yaḥḍuruh al-Faqīh, vol. 4, p. 6.