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

Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What are the conditions for a valid Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
First: The age of the animal must meet the Sharia requirements. These requirements vary depending on the type of sacrifice:
 
Camels: Must have completed five years and entered their sixth.
 
Cows: Must have completed two years and entered their third.
 
Goats: Must have completed two years and entered their third. As for Sheep, they must have completed one year and entered their second.
 
Some scholars have permitted goats that have completed one year and entered their second.
 
The Hanafi school, along with an opinion in the Maliki school, permits sacrificing sheep that are at least six months old, provided they are healthy and physically substantial. According to the Shafi’i school, it is permissible if the sheep sheds its front teeth (ajdha') before reaching one year [Al-Iqna’, by Al-Shirbini (Vol.2/P.588)].
 
Second: Soundness and freedom from defects. The animal must be free from any defect that causes a decrease in its meat or market value. This is based on the hadith narrated by Al-Bara' bin 'Azib, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:
 
"Four [defects] are not permissible in sacrifices: A one-eyed animal whose blindness is evident, a sick animal whose illness is evident, a lame animal whose lameness is evident, and an emaciated animal that has no marrow in its bones." [Reported by Abu Dawood and Al-Tirmidhi, who graded it as authentic].
 
These defects are detailed as follows:
 
Evident Lameness: It is not permissible to sacrifice a lame animal if the lameness is severe enough to prevent it from walking to the pasture or seeking food, as this leads to a decrease in its meat. However, slight lameness that does not hinder its grazing is overlooked.
 
Evident Blindness (One-eyed): It is not permissible to sacrifice a sheep, cow, or camel that has a white film over its eye blocking light, or one that has lost an eye entirely. Weak vision that does not affect its ability to eat does not prevent the sacrifice from being valid.
 
Evident Illness: An animal with a clear sickness that prevents it from eating or moving is not valid. This includes severe mange (Jarab) that spoils the meat.
 
Extreme Emaciation: An animal so thin that there is no marrow left in its bones is invalid. The standard for emaciation that invalidates the sacrifice is that which spoils the quality of the meat to the point that people would find it undesirable even in times of plenty.
 
Additional Considerations:
These are the defects mentioned in the Prophetic tradition, and any defect that causes emaciation or reduces the meat or value is compared to them by analogy. This includes animals that are mentally unstable (diseased), those with mange, or those with a missing ear. In contrast, a slit or pierced ear does not affect the validity of the sacrifice. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the best manner in distributing the meat of the Aqeeqah?

It is better to divide all of it as cooked meat amongst the poor and the needy. Dividing it into three portions is a Sunnah, but it is permissible to keep all of it provided that a portion, even a small one, is given to the poor and needy (one kilo for example).

A woman made a wig for herself from her own [previously shed] hair, which she wears on her head after having lost her hair [due to hair loss]. Is this permissible?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Since the hair belongs to the woman herself, the wig can be removed during the obligatory ghusl (ritual bathing), and part of the head can still be wiped during wuḍū' (ablution), there is no sharī‘ah objection to making this wig — provided she does not appear wearing it in front of non-maḥram men (Any males outside a woman's immediate family whom she is permitted to marry under Islamic law), since it is not permissible for them to look at a woman's detached hair.
It is stated in Rawḍat aṭ-Ṭālibīn wa ‘Umdat al-Muftīn: "Whatever it is not permissible to look at while still attached [to the body] — such as the male genitalia, a free woman's forearm, the hair of her head, and a man's pubic hair, and similar matters — it remains unlawful to look at even after it has been detached [from the body], according to the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ)." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

See More