عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Issuing Fatwas
Author : Researcher AbdulRahman al-Sharif
Date Added : 26-04-2026

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Issuing Fatwas

 

Issuing a fatwa is among the most intricate and consequential functions in Sharia, as it involves the direct clarification of Allah’s rulings regarding the ever-evolving realities of people's lives.

With the acceleration of technological progress and the emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a tool capable of analyzing texts and accessing data, fundamental questions have surfaced regarding the impact of this technology on the role of the Mufti. These questions explore the extent to which this technology can be utilized in the process of formulating fatwas without compromising Sharia foundations or the methodology of Ijtihad (independent legal reasoning).

The importance of this topic is heightened within the Mufti’s specialization, as they are directly responsible for governing the relationship between sacred texts, contemporary reality, and emerging technological means.

I. AI and its Importance in Scientific and Jurisprudential Research:

Artificial Intelligence is a technical system based on data processing and pattern extraction, enabling software to perform specific cognitive tasks. These technologies are described as supporting tools that assist a researcher in gaining a comprehensive grasp of scholarly material.

Currently, these systems can process vast amounts of text in a remarkably short time, offering precise indexing, comparisons between texts and opinions, and the ability to track evidence within its primary sources. Furthermore, AI helps link specific legal issues to their precedents and parallels across various schools of thought (Madhahib). It also facilitates the retrieval of legal maxims (Qawa’id) and principles (Usul) relevant to the issue at hand, providing the researcher with a broader vision and a more organized methodology [1].

II. The Unique Nature of Fatwa [2]:

A fatwa is distinguished from other scholarly activities by being the application of a Sharia ruling to a specific reality, necessitating a deep consideration of differences in circumstances, individuals, and environments, as well as an evaluation of consequences (Ma’alat), public interests (Masalih), and potential harms (Mafasid).

For this reason, scholars have stipulated several conditions for a Mufti [3], including:

1. Legal capacity (Taklif) and being a Muslim.

2. Piety (Wara’) and being free from transgressions or behaviors that undermine personal integrity (Muru’ah).

3. Profound understanding of sacred texts and their evidences.

4. Soundness of mind.

5. Understanding of contemporary reality and custom (’Urf).

6. Proficiency in the objectives of Sharia (Maqasid) and the scales of legal preference (Tarjih).

7. The ability to bear the responsibility and consequences of the religious verdict.

These characteristics make the fatwa a deeply human and intellectual endeavor that cannot be reduced to an automated response. Consequently, any machine or software is excluded from the actual domain of "issuing" a fatwa. However, this does not preclude a Mufti from benefiting from AI.

III. Areas Where a Mufti Can Benefit from AI [4]:

A Mufti can employ AI in fields that serve their work without influencing the essence of the fatwa, such as:

1. Gathering jurisprudential opinions and tracking the positions of scholars rapidly.

2. Indexing Sharia evidences and linking them to specific issues.

3. Assisting in defining the point of contention (Tahrir Mahall al-Niza’) in recurring cases.

4. Archiving previous fatwas and analyzing general trends.

5. Supporting institutional work within Fatwa Houses and Fiqh Academies.

Ultimately, it serves as a tool to aid Ijtihad, not as the Ijtihad itself.

IV. Risks of Using AI in Fatwa Issuance [5]:

Among the most serious risks facing a person seeking religious guidance (Mustafti) when using AI are:

1. Relying on automated answers without scholarly verification.

2. The absence of verification regarding the Mufti’s qualifications.

3. Misunderstanding resulting from brevity or taking texts out of context.

4. Overlooking the specific condition of the questioner and the unique context of the fatwa.

5. Confusing a formal fatwa with general education or guidance.

6. The exploitation of AI to spread extremist fatwas and ideologies.

This places a double responsibility on the Mufti to correct public awareness and clarify the difference between fatwa of Sharia and a mere technical response.

V. The Sharia Ruling from the Mufti’s Specialized Perspective:

From a foundational standpoint:

• AI is not a "Sharia Mufti," and a fatwa cannot be attributed to it.

• Its use is commendable only if it is subject to the Mufti's direct supervision.

• Religious responsibility is entirely shouldered by the Mufti, not the tool.

Consequently, it is not permissible for a Mufti to delegate the process of issuing fatwas to a machine, nor to relay a ruling without understanding its context and impact.

VI. Professional Guidelines for the Mufti in Dealing with AI [6]:

A Mufti should adhere to several guidelines, most importantly:

1. AI must serve the process of Ijtihad, not generate it.

2. All outputs must undergo a critical and scholarly review.

3. Adherence to the approved jurisprudential methodology of the Mufti’s respective institution.

4. Avoid using it in major contemporary calamities (Nawazil) except to understand the data of the case.

5. Clarifying to the questioner that the fatwa is a product of human Ijtihad and that AI was merely a tool.

In conclusion, the role of Artificial Intelligence remains within the framework of an auxiliary tool, not a substitute for the qualification of Ijtihad. The deep understanding of texts, the verification of the legal basis (Tahqiq al-Manat), the application of rulings to specific incidents, and the consideration of Sharia objectives and realistic factors are tasks that can only be undertaken by a qualified jurist who combines grounded knowledge with precise insight into reality.

AI lacks an understanding of higher objectives (Maqasid) and value-based perception; it operates within the data it is fed without distinguishing between the outweighed (Marjuh) and the preponderant (Rajih) opinions. Therefore, it is not fit for Ijtihad or fatwa. The proper jurisprudential approach to AI should be functional and critical—it should neither be rejected absolutely nor relied upon entirely. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

 

[1] Dr. Yasser Ahmed Ahmed Al-Fiqi, The Impact of Using Artificial Intelligence on the Development of the Contemporary Juridical Mind.

Available at: https://mkwn.journals.ekb.eg/article_433907.html

[2] See: Muhammad Taqi Usmani, The Principles and Etiquettes of Fatwa Issuance (Usul al-Iftaa wa Adabuhu), p. 8 and onwards.

[3] See: Imam al-Nawawi, The Etiquettes of Fatwa, the Mufti, and the Questioner (Adab al-Fatwa wa al-Mufti wa al-Mustafti).

[4] See: Hanan Mohammed bin Hussein Jastaniah, The Sharia Perspective on Using Generative Artificial Intelligence in Deriving Rulings and Sharia Fatwas (2025); and Dr. Maryam Ahmed Ali Al-Kandari, The Ruling on Using AI Programs (ChatGPT) in Fatwa, Journal of Sharia Sciences, 2025.

[5] See: Osama Abdel Alim Al-Sheikh, Rationalizing Fatwa in Light of Digital Challenges.

[6] The General Secretariat for Fatwa Authorities Worldwide, The Charter of Fatwa in Light of Digital Transformation.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]




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

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on a Friday sermon in which the khaṭīb did not explicitly exhort the congregation to be conscious of Allah (taqwā) in both sermons, but sufficed with commanding them to obey Allah and refrain from disobeying Him?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
For the Friday sermon (khuṭbat al-Jumʿah) to be valid, certain essential pillars (arkān) must be fulfilled. Among these is the exhortation to be conscious of Allah (waṣiyyah bi-taqwā Allāh), which must be present in both sermons. Alongside this pillar, the praising of Allah (ḥamdallah) and the sending of blessings upon the Messenger of Allah ﷺ are equally required.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "These three are pillars in each of the two sermons, because each sermon is independent and separate from the other." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj,Vol.4/P.447]
It is not a condition that the exhortation be expressed in any specific wording, nor is it required that the word "taqwā" itself be used — such as saying "I exhort you to be conscious of Allah." Rather, this pillar is fulfilled by any expression that contains a command to obey Allah the Almighty and to abstain from what He has prohibited.
Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "The third pillar is the exhortation to taqwā... The specific wording of this exhortation is not required, according to the most correct view, because the purpose is admonition and the urging of obedience to Allah the Almighty. Therefore, any expression that conveys admonition suffices — whether long or short — such as: 'Obey Allah and be ever mindful of Him.'" [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol.1/P.550]
Accordingly, what the khaṭīb has done — by commanding obedience to Allah and forbidding disobedience to Him in both sermons — is valid and sufficient. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is "Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm" a verse (āyah) of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The basmalah ("Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm") is, without question, a verse (āyah) of the Noble Qur'an, and according to the Shāfi‘ī school, it constitutes a verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah itself. Al-Fātiḥah is a pillar of the prayer, and it consists of seven verses, of which the basmalah is one. The prayer is not valid without reciting it, nor if any of the Fātiḥah's verses, letters, or shaddahs (consonant doublings) are omitted or altered.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm (Vol.1/p.202), from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "The basmalah is a complete verse of it [i.e., of al-Fātiḥah] in practice — and it suffices, for this to be established, that there be strong probability (ẓann), especially given that this has come very close to certainty (yaqīn), due to the consensus (ijmā‘) of the Companions on its inclusion in the muṣ-ḥaf [the written text of the Qur'an] in its script, despite their extreme diligence in excluding from it anything that did not genuinely belong to it — to the point that they even [carefully regulated] its diacritical dots and vowel markings." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

See More