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

What is the ruling on a woman who learns of her divorce or her husband's death after her *ʿiddah* has ended? And does the *ʿiddah* of a woman who abandoned mourning (*iḥdād*) for the whole period of the *ʿiddah*, or part of it, still end, even though she knew that abandoning it is forbidden?**

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The waiting period of a widow who is not pregnant is four months and ten days, based on the saying of Allah Almighty (which means): “And those of you who die and leave wives behind, they shall wait concerning themselves for four months and ten days” [al-Baqarah/234]. If she is pregnant, her ʿiddah ends with the delivery of her child. The ʿiddah is calculated by lunar months and begins from the date of death.
If her ʿiddah ends before she learns of her husband’s death, or of his divorcing her, she does not observe the ʿiddah upon learning of it, because her ʿiddah has already ended.
It is stated in al-Bayān fī Madhhab al-Imām al-Shāfiʿī (Vol.11/p.41), one of the books of the Shāfiʿī school: “If a man divorces his wife, or dies while he is absent from her, her ʿiddah is from the time of the divorce or from the time of death. If she does not know of the divorce or the death until her ʿiddah period has ended, then her ʿiddah has ended. If she learns of it before the end of the ʿiddah period, she completes her ʿiddah counting from the time of the divorce or death.”
As for a woman who abandoned mourning throughout the ʿiddah while knowing that it is forbidden, she is sinful, although her ʿiddah has nonetheless ended. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on eating from one`s Udhiyah?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) is divided into two categories: the vowed sacrifice (Al-Mandhurah) and the voluntary sacrifice (Al-Tatawwu').
 
First: The Vowed Sacrifice (Al-Mandhurah)
This refers to a sacrifice that has become strictly obligatory due to a formal vow (Nadr). It is completely impermissible for the person offering it, or any members of their family whom they are financially obligated to maintain, to eat any of its meat or fat. Furthermore, it is unlawful for them to personally benefit from its hide, wool, or any other part of it. If they happen to eat any portion of it, the offerer is legally obligated to give an equivalent amount of meat or its monetary value to charity. (As noted in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj by Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami,Vol. 9/P.364).
 
Second: The Voluntary Sacrifice (Al-Tatawwu’)
This is a recommended, non-obligatory sacrifice. The person offering it is fully permitted to eat from its meat, distribute portions as charity to the poor, and give pieces as gifts to those who are well-off. However, it remains a mandatory requirement to donate at least a minor portion of it to charity; this should not be less than approximately half a kilogram of raw, uncooked meat. And Allah the Almighty 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.

Is an animal that results from crossbreeding between two types of livestock (an'ām) valid [for sacrifice]?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
An animal that results from crossbreeding between two types of livestock (an'ām) is valid [for sacrifice], with consideration given to the higher of the two required ages. Thus, in the case of an animal crossbred between sheep (ḍa'n) and goats (ma'z), only one that has reached two years of age is valid [for sacrifice]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More