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 doubting whether one or two prostrations were performed?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If a worshiper is in doubt regarding the number of units (rak'ahs) or prostrations (sajdahs) performed, he must build upon the minimum (i.e., assume the lower number) and perform the prostration of forgetfulness (Sujud al-Sahw) before the Salam at the end of the prayer. This is based on the report from ‘Ata’ ibn Yasar that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: 'When anyone of you is in doubt about his Salat (prayer) and does not know how many he has prayed, three or four (Rak'at) he should cast aside his doubt and base his prayer on what he is sure of. Then, he should perform two prostrations before Taslim (salutation). If he has prayed five Rak'at, they will make his Salat (prayer) an even number for him and if he has prayed exactly four, they (i.e. two prostrations) will be humiliation for the devil..' (Narrated by Abu Dawud).
 
It is stated in Al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah: 'If one doubts [whether he performed] a bowing (ruku’), a prostration, or a rak'ah, he must perform it and prostrate [for forgetfulness], even if the doubt is removed before the Salam—unless the doubt is removed before he performs what would potentially be an addition. Thus, if he doubts whether he prayed three or four, he is obligated to build upon the minimum.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on following the actions of the imam in prayer and how this following is achieved?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The follower (ma'mum) is required to follow his imam in the actions of the prayer. This "following" (mutaba'ah) means that the follower performs each action of the prayer after the imam has begun it but before he has finished it. For example, the follower bows (in ruku') after the imam has reached the position of bowing, then rises after the imam has risen. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "The imam is only appointed to be followed, so when he says the takbir, say the takbir; and when he bows, then bow; and when he prostrates, then prostrate" (agreed upon, i.e., reported by both al-Bukhari and Muslim).
It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (1/505): "Among the conditions of valid congregational prayer (iqtida') is following the imam in the actions of the prayer... meaning that following the imam is obligatory in the physical actions of the prayer, not in its verbal utterances... Complete following (kamal al-mutaba'ah) is achieved when the follower's beginning of an action comes after the imam's beginning of that same action, while the follower's beginning of the action precedes the imam's completion of it" — end of quote, with slight paraphrasing.
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

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.

See More