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 making up missed prayers during prohibited times?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to make up (qada’) missed prayers at any time, even during the periods when prayer is generally prohibited. The prayers that are forbidden and considered invalid during these times are 'absolute voluntary prayers' (nafl mutlaq)—which have no specific cause—and voluntary prayers whose cause follows the prayer itself, such as the Sunnah of entering Ihram or the Sunnah of the Istikharah prayer. Furthermore, no prayer is considered disliked (makruh) during these prohibited times when performed within the Meccan Sanctuary (Makkah al-Mukarramah).
 
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim (Vol.1/P.181), one of the Shafi’i texts: 'It is not forbidden to perform prayers that have a cause that is not delayed (i.e., the cause is preceding), such as making up a missed prayer (fa’itah)—even if it was a voluntary one—and the funeral prayer (janazah); or a cause that is simultaneous, such as the prayer for rain (istisqa’) or the eclipse prayer (kusuf)... and the Sunnah of wudu, the greeting of the mosque (tahiyyat al-masjid), the Sunnah of circumambulation (tawaf), the Sunnah of arrival, and the prostrations of recitation (tilawah) or thankfulness (shukr). These mentioned prayers and their like are not forbidden provided that one does not specifically intend (ta'ammud) to perform them during the disliked time because it is a disliked time. If one does so intentionally, it becomes forbidden, even if it is a mandatory makeup prayer that is due immediately; because in that case, one is acting in defiance of the Sharia. This is in contrast to when one does not specifically seek out that time, even if the prayer happens to fall within it, or if one seeks it for another purpose—such as delaying a funeral prayer to that time so that a larger number of people may pray over the deceased; in such cases, it is permissible and valid... And it is forbidden to perform prayers with no cause at all, like absolute nafl, or those with a delayed cause, such as the Istikharah prayer, the prayer for Ihram, the prayer for a need (hajah), the prayer before leaving the house, or the prayer before execution; because their causes occur after the prayer itself.' And Allah the Exalted knows best."

Is the one offering the sacrifice liable if its meat spoils?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
If the meat (of the sacrifice) spoils due to the negligence of the one offering the sacrifice in preserving it, or due to improper storage, then he is liable to compensate for the portion due to the poor (which is estimated as half a kilogram of meat). If the sacrifice was a vowed (mandatory) one, then he is liable for all of it.
 
However, if he was not negligent, then there is no liability upon him, because its ruling is the ruling of a trust (like an item left in someone's care). And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to agree with a butcher to purchase the meat of an animal after it has been slaughtered — for instance, by buying the meat of a sheep at a price determined by the weight of its meat following slaughter, at a fixed rate per kilogram? And what is the ruling if the animal is being purchased with the intention of it being an uḍḥiyyah (sacrificial offering)?

 
 
 
 
 

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible to sell livestock in the manner of pricing each kilogram of meat after slaughter at a fixed rate, because the meat within the animal prior to slaughter is unseen and unknown. This leads to jahālah (ignorance of the subject matter) and gharar (contractual uncertainty), both of which are among the invalidating factors in sales transactions.
However, it is permissible for the buyer to issue a promise to purchase the meat of the animal after slaughter at a specified price per kilogram, with the actual sale being concluded at the time of weighing the meat — at which point both the quantity of the goods and the total price become known. There is no Sharī'ah objection to this arrangement.
The jurists have stipulated that for a sale to be valid, both countervalues must be present and observable. Al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states:
"It is valid to sell a heap of grain whose total measure is unknown to both contracting parties at a rate of one sā' per dirham. This sale is valid because the subject of sale is present and observable, and ignorance of the total price is not harmful since it is known in detail — and uncertainty is thereby lifted."— [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.355]
As for the uḍḥiyyah, the 'aqīqah, and vowed blood sacrifices (al-dam al-mandhūr) — full ownership of the animal must be established prior to slaughter. It is not valid for such animals to be slaughtered while still in the ownership of the butcher. Rather, the animal must be purchased alive and then slaughtered with the intention of uḍḥiyyah or the like. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

See More