Skip to content

feat(compliance): the #472 primer — framework basics, three kinds of rules, 'Shariah law' FAQ - #72

Merged
eaitbrahim merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/compliance-472-primer
Aug 22, 2026
Merged

feat(compliance): the #472 primer — framework basics, three kinds of rules, 'Shariah law' FAQ#72
eaitbrahim merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/compliance-472-primer

Conversation

@eaitbrahim

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closes #70 — full rationale, content sources, and acceptance criteria on the issue. Copy adapted from the maintainer's own replies in keel discussion #472; no fiqh claims beyond them. Verified: 10 sections render in en/ar/fr (framework primer, three-kinds with the bank answer and USDC remedy, framing FAQ), zero overflow at 390px, astro check clean. Engine-side follow-up deliberately separate: keel#490.

…s, three kinds of rules, and the 'Shariah law' FAQ

Closes #70. Discussion keel#472 was the best usability test this page
ever had: a non-technical US reader arrived asking what Shariah
governance asks of money, whether 'Shariah law' should worry him, and
whether his interest-paying bank blocks him. The answers that worked
are already written — in the maintainer's replies — so the page now
carries them, adapted faithfully:

- What the framework asks of money: four prohibitions and one
  obligation (riba, gharar, maysir, prohibited sectors, zakat), ending
  on 'more conservative than a standard brokerage, not less'.
- Three kinds of rules — and where your bank fits: what you supply
  (rulings as inputs, not a fatwa engine), what the engine enforces
  mechanically (settled-balance-only, never a linked bank, silence is
  not consent to spend), and what it cannot verify plus the remedy
  (USDC Rewards: runbook manual step, no fake config flag, purification
  ledger counts and reports).
- 'Is this Shariah law?': the scare-tactic framing answered —
  self-constraint, not imposition; no embedded ruling; and the usury
  prohibition's thousand-year Christian history ('a road not taken').

EN/AR/FR with rev bumps; the engine-side question this discussion
raised (sizing equity vs accrued reward income) is filed separately as
keel#490 and deliberately not worked here.
@sonarqubecloud

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@eaitbrahim
eaitbrahim merged commit 46b9c4b into main Aug 22, 2026
2 checks passed
@eaitbrahim
eaitbrahim deleted the feat/compliance-472-primer branch August 22, 2026 01:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Compliance page: the #472 primer — what the framework asks, three kinds of rules, and the 'Shariah law' framing FAQ

1 participant