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

What is the ruling on men wearing rings (those made of silver and of other metals, such as iron), and are there conditions for men wearing rings?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is sunnah for men to wear a silver ring on the right hand, following the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). It is reported in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, on the authority of Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him), that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) took a silver ring and had “Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh” engraved on it. He said: “I have taken a ring of silver and had ‘Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh’ engraved on it, so let no one engrave the like of its engraving.”
It is a condition that the silver ring not exceed the size customary in the local norm (ʿurf). If it does, that is extravagance (isrāf). A ring made of a metal other than silver, such as iron or copper, is permissible to wear without disapproval (karāhah), except gold, which is forbidden (ḥarām) for a man to wear.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/p.586): “It is permissible, without disapproval, to wear a ring of iron or lead. It is sunnah for a man to wear a silver ring on the little finger of his right or left hand. Wearing it on the right is better, and it is permissible on the left, and on both together.”
It is also stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.97): “It is lawful for him, that is, the man, and likewise the khunthā (person of indeterminate sex), indeed all the more so, to wear a ring of silver, by consensus (ijmāʿ), because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a ring of silver, narrated by the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhārī and Muslim). Wearing it is in fact sunnah, whether on the right or the left, though the right is better according to the sound position, as stated in the chapter on clothing in al-Rawḍah… The Shāfiʿī jurists did not specify the permitted size of the ring, and they probably relied on custom (ʿurf), that is, the custom of that country and the habit of people of his standing in it. Whatever exceeds that is extravagance, as they said regarding a woman’s anklet. This is the reliable position (al-muʿtamad).” And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on eating or drinking during the circumambulation?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is disliked (makrūh) to eat or drink during the circumambulation (ṭawāf).
Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī states in al-Majmūʿ: "It is disliked to eat or drink during ṭawāf, and the dislikedness of drinking is lighter. Neither of them, nor both together, invalidates the ṭawāf. Al-Shāfiʿī said: 'There is no objection to drinking water during ṭawāf, and I do not consider it sinful; however, I prefer that it be avoided, as refraining from it is more befitting in terms of proper conduct.' Among those who explicitly stated the dislikedness of eating and drinking, and that drinking is the lesser of the two, is the author of al-Ḥāwī."
If, however, a person is in genuine need of drinking, then there is no dislikedness in doing so. In any case, the ṭawāf itself remains valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on using the *subḥah* (prayer beads) to count during *tasbīḥ* and *dhikr*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is recommended to use the ordinary or electronic subḥah (prayer beads or counter) to count tasbīḥ, dhikr, and istighfār, because it helps one to remember Allah. Many reports have been transmitted from the Companions and the Followers (tābiʿūn) showing that they continued to use strings of date pits as an aid to dhikr and tasbīḥ.
It is one of the lawful means of worship. Indeed, what is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), namely that he counted tasbīḥ on his right hand, shows that it is permissible to count tasbīḥ with whatever helps a Muslim keep track of the number. There is therefore no basis for calling it an innovation (bidʿah), and we know of no jurist who said so.
Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Suyūṭī (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote a dedicated treatise on the subject titled al-Minḥah fī al-Subḥah, printed within al-Ḥāwī li’l-Fatāwī (vol. 4–6).
Shaykh al-Islām Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Does the subḥah have a basis in the Sunnah? He replied: “Yes, and al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Suyūṭī wrote on this. Among the evidence is what is authentically reported from Ibn ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with them both): ‘I saw the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) counting tasbīḥ on his hand.’ Ibn Abī Shaybah, Abū Dāwūd, and al-Tirmidhī also narrated: ‘Hold fast to tasbīḥ, tahlīl, and taqdīs, and do not be heedless, lest you forget the affirmation of Allah’s oneness (tawḥīd). Count them on the fingertips, for they will be questioned and made to speak.’ Counting tasbīḥ with pebbles, date pits, and a knotted string has also been reported from a group of the Companions and those after them. Some scholars held that counting on the fingertips is better than the subḥah, based on the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar. Others distinguished, saying: if the one reciting is safe from miscounting, counting on the fingertips is better; otherwise the subḥah is better.” [al-Fatāwā al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kubrā, Vol.1/p.152]. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.