عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Artificial Intelligence: An Assistant or a Mufti?
Author : Dr. Mufti Sa`eid Farhan
Date Added : 21-07-2025

Artificial Intelligence: An Assistant or a Mufti?

 

All praise is to Allah, who exalts whom He wills and abases whom He wills. Peace and blessings be upon the one who came with guidance, upon his pious family and companions, and upon those who follow his path until the Day of Judgment.

Among Allah’s mercies to creation is that He made the divine law He ordained for mankind suitable and guiding for every time and place. Islamic law necessitates the existence of scholars—the people of knowledge—to issue fatwas (religious rulings) and clarify the rulings of people’s dealings in all aspects of life. Allah says {what means}: "And We sent not before you except men to whom We revealed [Our message]. So ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." [An-Nahl/43]

As a result of progress, development, and astounding scientific leaps, humanity has reached what is now known as artificial intelligence (AI). The best definition of AI is that of Philip Janssen, who defined it as: "The science and engineering of machines with capabilities considered intelligent by human intelligence standards." [1]

Humans have reached a stage where machines serve them in all aspects of life—even in matters specific to religion and worship. This advancement has extended to the point where AI is being used to issue fatwas and provide religious guidance, effectively replacing human scholars in some cases.

The AI revolution has entered nearly every field—education, medicine, sports, commerce, and even religion. We now witness massive strides in AI applications, including its use in issuing Islamic legal rulings (fatwas).

Before discussing the ruling on using AI for fatwas, we must clarify the reality of fatwa-giving. Issuing a fatwa is not merely judging an action or incident; it is broader than that and consists of four pillars:

  1. The Mufti (the scholar issuing the fatwa)
  2. The Mustafti (the one asking the fatwa)
  3. The Incident in Question
  4. The Ruling

Each of these has specific conditions and aspects. Sometimes, the first three pillars exist, but the ruling does not—either because the issue requires further research or because the mufti refrains from answering for a valid reason. This is something no machine, no matter how advanced, can assess.

The Use of AI in Fatwas is of Two Types:

First: Using AI as a tool for the mufti, such as in drafting fatwas, researching juristic opinions from different schools of thought, or finding similar cases. This is akin to a mufti referencing books and specialized sources. This use is permissible and even beneficial, as it assists the mufti in research—provided it does not replace his direct engagement with primary sources.

Second: Using AI as a replacement for the mufti, entirely removing the human scholar and substituting him with a machine. This is where disagreement arises—between those who permit it and those who forbid it.

To resolve this disagreement, we must review the conditions of a mufti. Without delving into the arguments of those who permit or prohibit AI fatwas, the key issue is highlighting the obstacles preventing AI from validly issuing fatwas, derived from the conditions scholars have established for a mufti.

Obstacles Preventing AI from Issuing Fatwas:

1. A Foundational Obstacle (Usooli)
Scholars unanimously agree that the first condition for a mufti is that he must be:

  • A legally accountable (mukallaf) Muslim
  • Trustworthy (thiqqah)
  • Free from immorality and dishonorable traits
  • Sound in reasoning, precise in deduction, and alert

As Imam An-Nawawi stated:
"The mufti must be a legally accountable Muslim, trustworthy, safeguarded from sinful behavior and moral failings, intellectually competent, sound in mind, firm in thought, correct in reasoning and deduction, and vigilant." [2]

AI does not meet these conditions—it is not accountable (mukallaf), nor is it even a living being.

2. A Jurisprudential Obstacle (Ijtihadi)
Custom (urf) is a critical factor in fatwas. Sometimes, custom is the deciding factor between two equally valid opinions. Understanding people’s psychology, social habits, and societal norms is essential—something AI cannot grasp.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said:
*"A man should not appoint himself for fatwa-giving unless he has five qualities:

  1. Sincere intention (otherwise, his speech lacks divine light)
  2. Patience, dignity, and composure
  3. Strength in knowledge and understanding
  4. Self-sufficiency (or people will exploit him)
  5. Knowledge of people (their customs and conditions)"* [3]

How can a machine, no matter how data-filled, comprehend this?

3. A Spiritual Obstruction (Sulooki)
There is a fundamental difference between a machine and its creator—the Muslim scholar who fears Allah and seeks divine aid.

Imam Ash-Shatibi said:
"Knowledge was first in the hearts of men, then transferred to books—but the keys to it remain in the hands of scholars. A true scholar must know the foundations of his field, articulate its meanings, and understand its implications." [4]

He also emphasized:
"Books alone do not benefit a student without the guidance of scholars—this is an observable reality." [5]

A mufti connected to Allah, conscious of Him, undoubtedly receives divine support and openings (futuhat) in his rulings.

Imam Ash-Shams Ar-Ramli said:
*"Allah says {what means}: "And fear Allah, and Allah will teach you." (Al-Baqarah/282). It has been said: ‘No servant succeeds except by Allah’s grant.’ When this is rare, Allah mentions it only once in the Qur’an: "And my success is not but through Allah." (Hud/88). If you understand and act, Allah promises that whoever fears Him, He will grant light to his heart to comprehend and discern truth from falsehood: "O believers, if you fear Allah, He will grant you a criterion." (Al-Anfal/29). Thus, through taqwa (God-consciousness), knowledge increases."* [6]

How can such divine inspiration descend upon a lifeless machine?

Additional Considerations:

  • The duty of da’wah (calling to Islam) and personal advice from a mufti to the questioner plays a crucial role in the latter’s adherence and behavior—something AI cannot replicate.
  • Practical experiments have shown AI’s failure in correctly answering religious questions, especially in high-stakes rulings like divorce, where error is unacceptable.

We ask Allah, the Most High, to guide us to truth and correctness. Our final prayer is all praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds.

References:
[1] Mark Coeckelbergh, AI Ethics, trans. Hiba Abdulaziz Ghannam, p. 51.
[2] An-Nawawi, Adab al-Fatwa wal-Mufti wal-Mustafti, p. 19.
[3] Abu Ya’la, Al-‘Uddah fi Usul al-Fiqh, Vol. 5, p. 1599.
[4] Ash-Shatibi, Al-Muwafaqat, Vol. 1, p. 140.
[5] Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 148.
[6] Ash-Shams Ar-Ramli, Ghayat al-Bayan Sharh Zubd Ibn Raslan, p. 4.

 

The published article reflects the opinion of its author

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on wiping the front of the head beneath the ḥijāb, and is it permissible to wipe over the ḥijāb if it was put on while in a state of purification (wudu`)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible to wipe the front portion of the head (nāṣiyah) with the fingertips. It is likewise sufficient to place a wet hand over a head covering (ḥijāb), provided the moisture actually reaches the hair beneath it — if it does not, it does not suffice. A head covering is not treated in the same manner as leather socks (khuff) and may not be wiped over in lieu of the head itself.
Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.1/P.407): "If a person is wearing a turban and does not wish to remove it — whether for a valid reason or otherwise — he should wipe the entire front portion of the head... The same ruling applies to whatever a woman wears on her head. If, however, he confines himself to wiping over the turban without wiping any part of the head itself, this does not suffice — and there is no disagreement among us on this point." He further states: "A woman is like a man in the manner of wiping the head... She should insert her hand beneath her head covering so that the wiping falls upon the hair itself. If she places her wet hand over her head covering, our scholars stated: if the moisture does not reach the hair, it does not suffice her." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) described with specific attributes and authorizing an agent to slaughter them?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) that are described with specific attributes is permissible. This falls under the category of a salam sale (forward sale) if conducted using the terminology of salam, and under the category of a regular sale if not using the terminology of salam.
 
As for authorizing the seller to slaughter the sacrificial animal, the basic principle is that it is permissible, because the agent (wakil) stands in the place of the principal (muwakkil) in achieving his objective. This is a contract that the principal (the buyer) is entitled to perform himself, so authorizing another (the seller) to do so on his behalf is valid.
 
However, it is a condition for authorization to slaughter that the intention (niyyah) is present either at the time of slaughter or at the time of handing over the sacrificial animal to the agent. The basic principle is that the sacrificial animal must be specifically designated, as it is an act of worship. It is not required to designate it at the time of slaughter; rather, it is valid to do so before that.
 
It is permissible for the principal either to delegate the intention to the agent or to formulate it himself when authorizing the agent to slaughter. However, the sacrificial animal must be designated, even if at the time of slaughter, by the agent.
 
It is obligatory to designate the sacrificial animals so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own specific animal. Therefore, charitable organizations and companies must take this into consideration and establish a specific mechanism that ensures no mixing of sacrificial animals occurs, so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own designated animal. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on Qonot Du`a (supplication) at dawn prayer?

All perfect praise be to Allah,The Lord of The Worlds                                                                                                                                                                        It is a confirmed Sunnah, and whoever leaves it should perform Sujood As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness). And Allah Knows Best.

The Jurisprudential Significance of the Ḥadīth: "Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr Prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking..."
"Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking: 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah, lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuḥyī wa yumītu wa huwa ʿalā kulli shayʾin qadīr' ten times — ten good deeds will be recorded for him, ten bad deeds will be erased from him, he will be raised ten levels, he will spend that day in protection from everything disliked and guarded from the devil, and no sin will be able to befall him on that day except associating partners with Allah" — does this noble ḥadīth apply to the imam, and what is meant by "extraneous speech"?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite, immediately after the final salām, the specific remembrance reported in the sunnah to be said before turning away from one's place of prayer. The imam then leaves his praying spot, and the act of "turning" is fulfilled when the imam faces the congregation — even without physically leaving his spot — by positioning his right side toward them and his left side toward the qiblah, and this applies even while he is engaged in supplication.
Al-ʿAllāmah Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Tuḥfah (Vol.2/P.105): "It is most virtuous for the imam, once he has given the salām, to rise from his place of prayer immediately afterward." He adds that an exception must be made for the remembrances that are specifically required to be recited before he turns away. He then notes, citing Sharḥ al-ʿUbāb: "Yes, an exception to this rising immediately after the salām applies to the Fajr prayer, due to the authentic report that the Prophet ﷺ, when he prayed Fajr, would remain seated until the sun rose." He further cites, from al-Khādim, the ḥadīth concerning one who recites, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer while still in the position of crossing his leg to rise: "Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah..." and the rest of the well-known ḥadīth. He comments that this makes explicit that this particular remembrance is to be recited before the worshipper turns his legs to leave, and the same applies to Maghrib and ʿAṣr, as reported in those contexts as well.
What is meant by "speech" in the relevant ḥadīth is extraneous worldly speech that is not called for after the prayer and for which there is no legitimate excuse. The remembrances reported to be recited upon concluding the prayer, however, do not fall under this category of extraneous speech, since they are themselves required by the sharīʿah.
Al-ʿAllāmah ʿAlī al-Shabrāmalsī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Nihāyah (Vol.1/P.551): "If someone greets a person with salām while he is occupied with reciting this remembrance [i.e., 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh...'], should he return the greeting — without this causing him to forfeit the promised reward, since he is engaged in an obligatory matter — or should he delay returning the greeting until he finishes, this being a legitimate excuse for the delay?" He continues: "I say: the more likely view is the former, and the prohibition on speech is to be understood as applying to extraneous speech for which there is no legitimate excuse. Based on this, should the worshipper give precedence to this remembrance ('Lā ilāha illā Allāh...') or to reciting Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ ('Qul huwa Allāhu aḥad')? This requires consideration, though it is not unlikely that the remembrance takes precedence, given that the Lawgiver urged hastening to it through his words 'while crossing his leg.' This is not considered ordinary speech, since it is not extraneous to what is required after the prayer."
Accordingly, it is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite this remembrance and to give it precedence over the other remembrances of the prayer, ensuring it is said before they move from their place. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More