Can Artificial Intelligence Perform Ijtihad? Authority, Epistemology, and Legitimacy in Digital Islamic Jurisprudence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23917/suhuf.v38i1.16437Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, Ijtihad , Usul al-Fiqh, Legal authority, Digital islamic jurisprudenceAbstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) can rapidly search juristic sources, compare legal opinions, and generate structured arguments. Yet its fluency may obscure the distinction between computational capability and legitimate authority in Islamic jurisprudence. Objective: This study examines whether AI can independently perform ijtihad and identifies conditions for its responsible use without displacing human juristic authority. Methodology: A structured normative-doctrinal approach integrates classical usul al-fiqh and fatwa doctrine with scholarship on generative AI, algorithmic accountability, and AI governance. Analysis applies five criteria: source competence, methodological reasoning, contextual judgment, moral agency, and answerability. Results: Current AI systems satisfy only instrumental aspects of source competence and methodological reasoning. They can retrieve sources, map disagreements, identify analogies, and organize preliminary arguments, but cannot possess legally recognized intention, bear taklif, assume responsibility for harm, or receive juristic authorization. The study proposes a five-layer Augmented ijtihad Model: source retrieval, doctrinal mapping, inferential support, contextual and maqasid evaluation, and final authorization. Conclusion: AI can strengthen ijtihad but cannot function as an independent mujtahid. Implication: Islamic legal institutions should require verified databases, school-of-law tagging, uncertainty disclosure, qualified human review, audit trails, contestability, and post-deployment monitoring, positioning AI as accountable research infrastructure under scholarly supervision rather than autonomous religious authority
Downloads
References
[1] E. M. Bender, T. Gebru, A. McMillan-Major, and S. Shmitchell, “On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 610–623. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922.
[2] Z. Ji et al., “Survey of hallucination in natural language generation,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 55, no. 12, p. 248, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3571730.
[3] A. A. Munshi, W. H. AlSabban, A. T. Farag, O. E. Rakha, A. A. Al Sallab, and M. Alotaibi, “Automated Islamic jurisprudence legal opinions generation using artificial intelligence,” Pertanika J. Sci. Technol., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1135–1156, doi: https://doi.org/10.47836/pjst.30.2.16.
[4] S. Ahmed, “Fatwa and AI: A literature-based assessment on how AI impacts the role of the mufti,” J. Islam. Stud., vol. 42, no. 1–2, doi: https://doi.org/10.25159/2957-9163/14400.
[5] A. Priantina, M. M. Uula, Aufa, and E. Herindar, “AI in fatwa formulation: Transforming Sharia-compliant finance,” J. Cent. Bank. Law Institutions, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 595–634, doi: https://doi.org/10.21098/jcli.v4i3.446.
[6] A. Hilmi, M. Najib, H. Bisri, and H. Suhendar, “Methodology of Islamic Economic Fatwas Issuance: Comparing Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta’ and Indonesia’s National Sharia Board,” J. Huk. Islam, vol. 23, no. 2, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.28918/jhi.v23i2.08.
[7] A. Raquib, B. Channa, T. Zubair, and J. Qadir, “Islamic virtue-based ethics for artificial intelligence,” Discov. Artif. Intell., vol. 2, p. 11, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-022-00028-2.
[8] E. Elmahjub, “Artificial intelligence (AI) in Islamic ethics: Towards pluralist ethical benchmarking for AI,” Philos. Technol., vol. 36, p. 73, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00668-x.
[9] F. Ali, K. Bouzoubaa, F. Gelli, B. Hamzi, and S. Khan, “Islamic ethics and AI: An evaluation of existing approaches to AI using trusteeship ethics,” Philos. Technol., vol. 38, p. 120, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-025-00922-4.
[10] M. G. Abdelnour, “Artificial intelligence and the Islamic theology of technology: From ‘means’ to ‘meanings’ and from ‘minds’ to “hearts,” Religions, vol. 16, no. 6, p. 796, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16060796.
[11] A. Polat, S. Khan, and U. Bashir, “An inquiry into the application of artificial intelligence on fatwa,” in Digital transformation in Islamic finance: A critical and analytical view, Y. Suzuki and M. D. Miah, Eds., Routledge, pp. 273–286. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003262169-18.
[12] H. Latifi, “Challenges of using artificial intelligence in the process of Shi’i Ijtihad,” Religions, vol. 15, no. 5, p. 541, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15050541.
[13] A. Jobin, M. Ienca, and E. Vayena, “The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines,” Nat. Mach. Intell., vol. 1, no. 9, pp. 389–399, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2.
[14] U.N.E.S.C.O., Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. UNESCO. [Online]. Available: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137
[15] E. Tabassi, “Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0),” National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1.
[16] C. Autio et al., “Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile,” National Institute of Standards and Technology. doi: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1.
[17] B. Mittelstadt, “Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI,” Nat. Mach. Intell., vol. 1, pp. 501–507, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4.
[18] M. H. Kamali, Principles of Islamic jurisprudence, 3rd ed. Islamic Texts Society. doi: https://doi.org/10.22219/jes.v2i2.5109.
[19] W. B. Hallaq, Authority, continuity, and change in Islamic law. Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511495557.
[20] A. H. Al-Ghazali, “Al-Mustasfa min ilm al-usul.” [Online]. Available: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.432464/mode/2up
[21] D. P. Muhammad Masud, Brinkley Messick, Islamic legal interpretation: Muftis and their fatwas. Harvard University Press. [Online]. Available: https://nes.princeton.edu/publications/islamic-legal-interpretation-muftis-and-their-fatwas
[22] S. D. Al-Qarafi, “Al-Ihkam fi tamyiz al-fatawa an al-ahkam wa tasarrufat al-qadi wa al-imam.” [Online]. Available: https://archive.org/details/McGillLibrary-115354-522/page/n1/mode/2up
[23] A. D. Selbst, D. Boyd, S. A. Friedler, S. Venkatasubramanian, and J. Vertesi, “Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems,” in Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 59–68. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287598.
[24] T. Hutchinson and N. Duncan, “Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research,” Deakin Law Rev., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 83–119, doi: https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70.
[25] I. al-Jawziyyah, “I’lam al-muwaqqi’in an rabb al-alamin,” Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah. [Online]. Available: https://ia600700.us.archive.org/23/items/Ibnu_Qayyim/Panduan Hukum Islam (I’lamul Muwaqi’in) I-IV.pdf
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alwy Ahmed, Mowafg Masuwd, Muhammad Rehan Sabir, Mahmudulhassan Mahmudulhassan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
