One of the most significant developments in contemporary contract law in the digital era is the emergence of blockchain technology and smart contracts. By relying on self-executing mechanisms and the immutable recording of data, smart contracts enable the automated performance of contractual obligations without the continuous intervention of the parties or third-party intermediaries. In contrast, modern legal systems recognize various mechanisms for preserving contractual equilibrium under exceptional circumstances. The doctrine of contract adaptation seeks to prevent disproportionate losses resulting from fundamental changes in circumstances by allowing contractual obligations to be revised when necessary. This study examines whether the principles of blockchain immutability and the self-executing nature of smart contracts can be reconciled with the theoretical foundations of contract adaptation under Iranian law. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology based on library research, the study analyzes the relevant legal and Islamic jurisprudential foundations. The findings indicate that although smart contracts enhance contractual certainty, security, and transparency, their absolute enforcement may conflict with flexible doctrines of contract law, including force majeure, the rule of no harm, the doctrine of hardship, and the doctrine of changed circumstances. The analysis further demonstrates that the principle of the binding force of contracts under Iranian law is not absolute and permits corrective legal intervention in exceptional situations. Accordingly, the study criticizes the “Code is Law” approach and proposes the Hybrid Smart Contract model as an appropriate mechanism for reconciling technological certainty with contractual justice. Under this model, while preserving the advantages of blockchain technology, contract adaptation may be achieved through renegotiation clauses, legal oracles, and limited judicial intervention.