Digital Mediation and Fatwa Authority in Contemporary Islam: A Critical Islamic Legal and Media-Theoretical Framework
Open accessAbstract
In contemporary Muslim societies, digital platforms, algorithmic infrastructures, and networked religious content have fundamentally reshaped not only the circulation of fatwas but also the conditions under which religious authority is constituted, recognized, and contested. This article develops an integrated analytical framework that brings Islamic legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh) into sustained dialogue with mediatization theory and digital religion scholarship in order to examine how digital mediation reconfigures fatwa authority. Grounded in a qualitative analytical–comparative methodology, the study reconstructs the classical architecture of fatwa authority—rooted in scholarly qualification, isnād-based transmission, contextual discernment, and institutional oversight—and systematically compares it with contemporary digitally mediated environments structured by visibility metrics, platform logics, audience engagement, and algorithmic amplification. It identifies a series of interrelated transformations affecting the epistemic foundations, institutional gatekeeping mechanisms, communicative forms, and normative accountability of fatwa practice. The analysis demonstrates that digital mediation does not merely expand access to religious guidance; it alters the balance between evidentiary reasoning and infrastructural prominence, reshapes the relationship between muftī and mustaftī, and introduces new ambiguities concerning authority, legitimacy, and moral agency—particularly in the context of AI-assisted religious tools. While digital fatwas may enhance accessibility and transnational connectivity, they also risk epistemic fragmentation, erosion of institutional credibility, and the diffusion of accountability. By articulating a Critical Islamic Legal and Media-Theoretical Framework structured around epistemic, institutional, and communicative axes and evaluated through maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, this article offers a systematic model for analyzing digitally mediated Islamic authority. It concludes by outlining jurisprudential and ethical guidelines for integrating digital technologies into the fatwa domain in ways that preserve methodological rigor, moral responsibility, and the integrity of religious guidance.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
AI-assisted religious guidance is best understood as a problem of institutional mediation rather than technological substitution.
“Building on this insight, Atallah [5] argues that AIassisted religious guidance is best understood as a problem of institutional mediation rather than technological substitution.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [5]
The legitimacy of AI-generated religious guidance depends not only upon computational capability but also upon methodological rigor, scholarly accountability, and institutional oversight.
“Drawing upon uṣūl al-fiqh, he demonstrates that the legitimacy of AI-generated religious guidance depends not only upon computational capability but also upon methodological rigor, scholarly accountability, and institutional oversight.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [5]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The mediatisation of religion: Theorising religion, media and social change
Hjarvard, S. (2011) · Culture and Religion · doi:10.1080/14755610.2011.579719 · Cited by 319 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- Ab Rahim, Siti Farahiyah, Muhamad Firdaus Ab Rahman, Hussein Azeemi Abdullah Thaidi, Nik Nur Muhammad Alif Nik Mohd Azimi, and Munawar Rizki Jailani. 2025. Artificial Intelligence for Fatwa Issuance: Guidelines and Ethical Considerations. Journal of Fatwa Management and Research 30: 76-100. [CrossRef · DOI
- Ahmed, Shoayb. 2024. Fatwā and AI: A Literature-Based Assessment on How AI Impacts the Role of the Muftī. Journal for Islamic Studies 42: 19.
- CrossRef · DOI
- CrossRef · DOI
- Bastien, Frédérick. 2020. The Mediatization of Politics, Religion, and Science. In Reimagining Communication: Experience. Edited by Michael Filimowicz and Veronika Tzankova. New York: Routledge, chap. 10. Available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/ chapters/edit/10.4324/9781351015356-10/mediatization-politics-religion-science-fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9rick-bastien (accessed on 1 November 2025). · DOI
- Bauman, Zygmunt. 2003. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Bunt, Gary R. 2003. Islam in the Digital Age: E-Jihad, Online Fatwas and Cyber Islamic Environments. London: Pluto Press. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Islam-in-the-Digital-Age%3A-E-Jihad%2C-Online-Fatwas-Bunt/4443e09044d4c 8477fb748696baf2b404dd2b0e3 (accessed on 1 November 2025).
- Bunt, Gary R. 2018. Hashtag Islam: How Cyber-Islamic Environments Are Transforming Religious Authority. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. [CrossRef · DOI
- Hamdani, Amamur Rohman. 2023. Fatwa in the Digital Age: Online Muftī, Social Media, and Alternative Religious Authority. Hikmatuna: Journal for Integrative Islamic Studies 9: 53-63. [CrossRef · DOI
- Hamdeh, Emad. 2020. Shaykh Google as Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿAṣr: The Internet, Traditional ʿUlamā', and Self Learning. American Journal of Islam and Society 37: 67-102. [CrossRef · DOI
- Hjarvard, Stig. 2008. The Mediatization of Religion: A Theory of the Media as Agents of Religious Change. Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook 6: 9-26. [CrossRef] [PubMed · DOI
- Ismail, Farhana. 2015. An Analysis of the Discursive Representations of Women's Sexual Agency in Online Fatwas: A Case Study of askimam.org. Ph.D. dissertation, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
- Ismail, Farhana, and Fatima Seedat. 2017. Gender Asymmetry and Mutual Sexual Relations in Online Legal Interpretation-Beyond the Dissonance through the Fatwas of askimam.org. Journal of Gender and Religion in Africa 23: 95-124.
- CrossRef · DOI
- Maravia, Usman, Zhazira Bekzhanova, Mansur Ali, and Rakan Alibri. 2021. British Muslims Caught Amidst FOGs-A Discourse Analysis of Religious Advice and Authority. Religions 12: 140. [CrossRef · DOI
- CrossRef · DOI
- Samudra, Imam, Zakiyyah Wardatul Laini, Juni Yanti, Syukri Amin, and Fransiskus Novrianto Pakpahan. 2024. Algorithmic Author- ity and Public Trust: A Bibliometric Analysis of YouTube's Recommendation System in Shaping Islamic Religious Authority (2013-2023). Cognoscere: Jurnal Komunikasi dan Media Pendidikan 2: 35-50. [CrossRef · DOI
- Sati, Ali, Abdul Halim, Abdul Hayy Nasution, and Muhammad Ridwan. 2025. The Digital Transformation of Tafsir and Its Implica- tions for Islamic Legal Derivation in the Contemporary Era. MILRev: Metro Islamic Law Review 4: 389-415.
- CrossRef · DOI
- Sbardelotto, Moisés. 2016. Mediatización de la religión: La relación entre lo 'religioso' y lo mediático en tiempos de red. Mediaciones de la Comunicación 11: 113-37. [CrossRef · DOI
- Schulz, Dorothea. 2012. Dis/Embodying Authority: Female Radio 'Preachers' and the Ambivalences of Mass-Mediated Speech in Mali. International Journal of Middle East Studies 44: 23-43. [CrossRef · DOI
- CrossRef · DOI
- CrossRef · DOI
- Skovgaard-Petersen, Jakob. 1997. Fatwas in Print. In Islamic Legal Interpretation: Muftis and Their Fatwas. Edited by Muhammad Khalid Masud, Brinkley Messick and David S. Powers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 281-97. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Fatwas-in-print-Skovgaard-Petersen/a9f10259116bfd3d4309d5be6d8ac11def45cd40 (ac- cessed on 1 November 2025).
- Stępniak, Krzysztof. 2023. Communicating the Sacred in Religious Advertising in Light of the Mediatization of Religion Theory and Research on Digital Religion. Church, Communication and Culture 8: 285-307. [CrossRef · DOI
- Šisler, Vít. 2008. The Internet and the Construction of Islamic Knowledge in Europe. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Tech- nology 2: 19-36. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Internet-and-the-Construction-of-Islamic-in- %C5%A0isler/4a4cc88976965149ccebbf93488ee5901391f010 (accessed on 13 February 2026).
- CrossRef · DOI
- Triantoro, Dony Arung, Fathayatul Husna, Rizky Amalia Syahrani, Futri Syam, and Ainal Fitri. 2023. Adaptation of Popular Culture in Digital Fatwa on Social Media. Islam Realitas: Journal of Islamic and Social Studies 9: 169-85. [CrossRef · DOI
- Usmonov, Mirismoil. 2025. From Human Scholars to AI Fatwas: Media, Ethics, and the Limits of AI in Islamic Religious Communi- cation. Al-i'lam-Journal of Contemporary Islamic Communication and Media 14. Available online: https://elicit.com/review/5a782ef8- 4334-4647-8ccc-b53e714c8d21/source/ss-280144866 (accessed on 1 November 2025).
- CrossRef · DOI
- Wahid, Soleh Hasan. 2024. Research Insights on Online Fatwas: A Comprehensive Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Fatwa Management and Research 29: 23-46.
- CrossRef · DOI
- CrossRef · DOI
- Yiğit, Yasin, and Vahdeddin Şimşek. 2025. Content Analysis of AI's Responses to Family-Related Religious Questions: A Compara- tive Study with the Fatwas of the Supreme Council of Religious Affairs. Şırnak University Journal of Divinity Faculty 37: 58-73.
- Yucel, Salih, and Ismail Albayrak. 2021. Are Online Fatwas Credible? A Critical Analysis of Fifty Fatwas on Organ Donation and Transplantation. Religions 12: 902. [CrossRef] · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ahmad, H., & Ghafar, N. A. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-026-01254-5 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Building on this insight, Atallah [5] argues that AI-assisted religious guidance is best understood as a problem of institutional mediation rather than technological substitu-tion.”
- Authors
- Atallah, F. A.
- Affiliations
- Jouf University (SA)
- Corresponding author
- Atallah, Fouad Ahmed
- ORCID
- Atallah, Fouad Ahmed
- Venue
- Religions
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2026-03-11
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 350
- ISSN
- 2077-1444 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W7134950944
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 148.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Religions (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Media, Religion, Digital Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Islamic Finance and Communication
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Islamic Thought and Society Studies
- Keywords
- fatwa, digital mediation, religious authority, usul al-fiqh, mediatization theory, digital religion, isnad, algorithmic amplification, epistemic fragmentation, institutional credibility, maqāṣid al-sharīʿah
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review