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 the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on reciting the Chapter after Al-Faatihah , and what should a worshiper who forgets it do?

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds.                                                                                                                                                                  Any other part of Qur'an that a worshiper reads after Al-Faatihah during the first and the second Rak`ahs is a Sunnah, and forgetting to do so doesn`t nullify prayer, and doesn`t require performing Sujood As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness). And Allah Knows Best.

I work overtime after regular working hours and may become occupied with my phone or the work computer for personal matters — what is the ruling on this?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is obligatory upon an employee to abide by the instructions and regulations governing overtime hours, and equally obligatory to uphold honesty and avoid all forms of deception and dishonesty. Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, be mindful of Allah and be with the truthful." [Al-Tawbah/ 119]
Whoever is assigned to work overtime must be present at his workplace — even if he has no specific tasks to carry out at that time. In such a case, he should strive as best he can to spend that time in a manner that benefits the institution he works for. If there is genuinely no work for him to do, there is no objection to occupying his time with something beneficial — such as reciting the Holy Qurʾān, reading, or listening to educational lessons — provided he has already completed all the responsibilities assigned to him.
If, however, he does have work to complete, he must spend that time fulfilling it. He may attend to phone calls or other personal matters to the extent that is customarily acceptable, as long as this does not result in delaying or postponing his work. If he delays his work on account of personal preoccupations, the wages he received for that wasted time are not lawfully his to keep, and he is obliged to return the equivalent amount to the institution by whatever means available to him. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More