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

If someone regularly fasts the six days of Shawwal, are they obligated to fast them every year?

A person is not obligated to fast the six days of Shawwal every year, even if they have made it a habit. However, someone who regularly performs a good deed should not abandon it as long as they are able.

What is the ruling on mentioning Allah`s name upon slaughtering an animal?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is a Sunnah (prophetic tradition) for the person slaughtering to say: "Bismillah" (In the Name of Allah), though the most complete and perfect phrasing is to say: "Bismillah ar-Rahman ar-Rahim" (In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful). This is in accordance with the words of Allah Almighty: "So eat of that [meat] upon which the name of Allah has been mentioned." (Al-An'am/118)
 
However, pronouncing it is not an obligatory requirement (Wajib). If someone omits it—whether deliberately or out of forgetfulness—the meat remains entirely lawful (Halal) to eat, though purposely omitting it is considered disliked (Makruh). 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.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More