Morning coffee, series in the evening, scrolling on the phone between two prayers: some habits settle in without being questioned. When a religious tradition imposes clear prohibitions on alcohol or narcotics, the gray area of soft addictions (screens, sugar, vaping, mobile games) remains largely uncharted. The question of limits then falls neither solely under pure theology nor medicine, but at the intersection of religious discourse, legal frameworks, and public health data.
Soft addictions and religion: what the texts do not resolve
The three monotheisms share a common foundation: anything that alters consciousness or harms the body is discouraged, even prohibited. Islam forbids khamr (anything intoxicating), Christianity warns against drunkenness, and Judaism values self-control. These principles target substances that have been identified for centuries.
The problem arises with recent products. Combustion-free nicotine, CBD, energy drinks, or single-use puffs do not appear in any classical corpus. Religious authorities issue opinions on a case-by-case basis, often differing from one country to another, from one legal school to another.
This lack of consensus forces each practitioner to construct their own framework for understanding. The repeated action (vaping, snacking, scrolling) is not forbidden in itself, but the dependence it creates may contradict the spirit of the text. The boundary then shifts from the product to the behavior.
French regulation of so-called soft substances: a changing framework
French law does not classify products according to religious categories, but its recent logic sometimes aligns with the concerns of faith communities. The regulatory evolution surrounding CBD and cannabinoids illustrates this unexpected convergence.
CBD, HHC, and synthetic cannabinoids
The Anses has reported the increasing presence of synthetic or semi-synthetic cannabinoids in products sold as CBD. A consumer who thinks they are purchasing a “soft” product may actually be inhaling a substance with marked psychoactive effects. The softness of a product cannot be inferred from its label.
HHC was banned in France in 2023. The following year, entire families of cannabinoids were classified as narcotics. Regulation shifted from a molecular logic (banning a specific substance) to a chemical family approach, to anticipate the emergence of new variants.
Disposable puffs: a ban targeting the format
Law No. 2025-175 of February 24, 2025, prohibits disposable electronic cigarettes, including those containing CBD or any nicotine-free substance. The ban applies to the single-use device itself, not just to what it contains. The legislator deemed that the disposable format, due to its accessibility and low cost, encourages habitual use, particularly among young people.
This reasoning aligns with a logic found in several religious traditions: it is not just the substance that poses a problem, but the mechanism that creates dependence.
Daily life and behavioral addiction: the blind spots of religious discourse
Substance-free addictions (screens, video games, social media, compulsive shopping) pose a particular challenge to religious frameworks. No sacred text prohibits looking at one’s phone. The notion of sin or haram is difficult to apply to such a mundane action.
- Compulsive scrolling on social media can occupy several hours a day without the person being aware, reducing time spent on prayer, family, or rest.
- Mobile games with microtransactions use variable reward mechanisms similar to those of slot machines, a format that most religious traditions consider gambling.
- Excessive consumption of sugar or caffeine, rarely addressed in sermons, can create a physical dependence documented by medical literature.
Field reports vary on this point: some religious leaders incorporate these topics into their interventions with young people, while others believe that the issue strictly falls under personal discipline and not normative frameworks.
Drawing the line: practical criteria between permissible and harmful
Neither medical discourse nor religious discourse offers a universal framework. However, several concrete criteria allow individuals to assess where their own limit lies.
- Loss of control: if stopping the action causes irritability, anxiety, or an uncontrollable urge to resume, the threshold of dependence has likely been crossed.
- Impact on obligations: when a habit regularly encroaches on work, religious practices, or family relationships, it ceases to be trivial.
- Concealment: hiding one’s consumption from loved ones is a reliable marker of a shift toward addiction, whether it involves vaping, online gaming, or late-night snacking.
- Financial cost: increasing and unplanned expenses to maintain a habit signal usage that escapes rational control.
These criteria are neither religious nor secular. They function as cross-cutting indicators, usable regardless of personal conviction. The limit lies where the action ceases to be a free choice.
The French legal framework is evolving toward an acknowledgment of format and addictive mechanisms, beyond just the chemical nature of the product. Religious traditions have an ancient principle (preserving body and mind) that remains relevant in the face of new forms of dependence.
What is lacking, in both cases, is a structured dialogue between health authorities and religious leaders to support practitioners confronted with products that neither the law nor classical Islamic jurisprudence had anticipated.
