Hubbry Logo
MuftiMuftiMain
Open search
Mufti
Community hub
Mufti
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Mufti
Mufti
from Wikipedia

A mufti (/ˈmʌfti/; Arabic: مفتي [muftiː], listen) is an Islamic jurist qualified to issue a nonbinding opinion (fatwa) on a point of Islamic law (sharia).[1][2] The act of issuing fatwas is called iftāʾ.[3] Muftis and their fatāwa have played an important role throughout Islamic history, taking on new roles in the modern era.[4][5]

Tracing its origins to the Quran and early Islamic communities, the practice of ifta crystallized with the emergence of the traditional legal theory and schools of Islamic jurisprudence (madhahib).[1][2] In the classical legal system, fatwas issued by muftis in response to private queries served to inform Muslim populations about Islam, advise courts on difficult points of Islamic law, and elaborate substantive law.[4] In later times, muftis also issued public and political fatwas that took a stand on doctrinal controversies, legitimized government policies or articulated grievances of the population.[6][5]

Traditionally, a mufti was seen as a scholar of upright character who possessed a thorough knowledge of the Quran, hadith and legal literature.[1] Muftis acted as independent scholars in the classical legal system.[4] Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually incorporated into state bureaucracies, while Shia jurists in Iran progressively asserted an autonomous authority starting from the early modern era.[5]

With the spread of codified state laws and Western-style legal education in the modern Muslim world, muftis generally no longer play their traditional role of clarifying and elaborating the laws applied in courts.[3][4] However, muftis have continued to advise the general public on other aspects of sharia, particularly questions regarding religious rituals and everyday life.[3][7] Some modern muftis are appointed by the state to issue fatwas, while others serve on advisory religious councils.[1] Still others issue fatwas in response to private queries on television or over the internet.[5] Modern public fatwas have addressed and sometimes sparked controversies in the Muslim world and beyond.[5]

The legal methodology of modern ifta often diverges from pre-modern practice.[8] While the proliferation of contemporary fatwas attests to the importance of Islamic authenticity to many Muslims, little research has been done to determine to what extent the Muslim public continues to acknowledge the religious authority of muftis or heeds their advice.[8]

Mufti
Occupation
Occupation type
Profession, vocation
Activity sectors
Islamic studies
Description
CompetenciesVerbal reasoning, knowledge of Islamic law, knowledge of Classical Arabic
Education required
an Ijazah or University degree[9]
Fields of
employment
Religious leadership
Related jobs
Imam, qadi, marja'

Terminology

[edit]

The word mufti comes from the Arabic root f-t-y, whose meanings include "youth, newness, clarification, explanation."[4] A number of related terms derive from the same root. A mufti's response is called a fatwa. The person who asks a mufti for a fatwa is known as mustafti. The act of issuing fatwas is called iftāʾ.[3][5] The term futyā refers to soliciting and issuing fatwas.[10]

Origins

[edit]

The origins of muftis and the fatwa can be traced back to the Quran. On a number of occasions, the Quranic text instructs the Islamic prophet Muhammad how to respond to questions from his followers regarding religious and social practices. Several of these verses begin with the phrase "When they ask you concerning ..., say ..." In two cases (4:127, 4:176) this is expressed with verbal forms of the root f-t-y, which signify asking for or giving an authoritative answer. In the hadith literature, this three-way relationship between God, Muhammad, and believers, is typically replaced by a two-way consultation, in which Muhammad replies directly to queries from his Companions (sahaba).[11]

According to Islamic doctrine, with Muhammad's death in 632, God ceased to communicate with mankind through revelation and prophets. At that point, the rapidly expanding Muslim community turned to Muhammad's Companions, as the most authoritative voices among them, for religious guidance, and some of them are reported to have issued pronouncements on a wide range of subjects. The generation of Companions was in turn replaced in that role by the generation of Successors (tabi'un).[11] The institution of ifta thus developed in Islamic communities under a question-and-answer format for communicating religious knowledge, and took on its definitive form with development of the classical theory of Islamic law.[4] By the 8th century CE, muftis became recognized as legal experts who elaborated Islamic law and clarified its application to practical issues arising in the Islamic community.[2]

In pre-modern Islam

[edit]

Mufti's activity (iftāʾ)

[edit]
Turkish mufti (1687 engraving)

The legal theory of the ifta was formulated in the classical texts of usul al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence), while more practical guidelines for muftis were found in manuals called adab al-mufti or adab al-fatwa (etiquette of the mufti/fatwa).[7]

A mufti's fatwa is issued in response to a query.[8] Fatwas can range from a simple yes/no answer to a book-length treatise.[3][5] A short fatwa may state a well-known point of law in response to a question from a lay person, while a "major" fatwa may give a judgment on an unprecedented case, detailing the legal reasoning behind the decision.[3][5] Queries to muftis were supposed to address real and not hypothetical situations and be formulated in general terms, leaving out names of places and people. Since a mufti was not supposed to inquire into the situation beyond the information included in the query, queries regarding contentious matters were often carefully constructed to elicit the desired response.[6] A mufti's understanding of the query commonly depended on their grasp of local customs and colloquial expressions. In theory, if the query was unclear or not sufficiently detailed for a ruling, the mufti was supposed to state these caveats in their response.[6] Muftis often consulted another mufti on difficult cases, though this practice was not foreseen by legal theory, which saw futya as a transaction between one qualified jurist and one "unqualified" petitioner.[12]

In theory, a mufti was expected to issue fatwas free of charge. In practice, muftis commonly received support from the public treasury, public endowments or private donations. Taking of bribes was forbidden.[11][6] Until the 11th or 12th century, the vast majority of jurists held other jobs to support themselves. These were generally lower- and middle-class professions such as tanning, manuscript copying or small trade.[13]

Role of muftis

[edit]

The classical institution of ifta is similar to jus respondendi in Roman law and the responsa in Jewish law.[6][14]

Muftis have played three important roles in the classical legal system:

  • managing information about Islam by providing legal advice to Muslim populations as well as counseling them in matters of ritual and ethics;[4][6]
  • advising courts of law on finer points of Islamic law, in response to queries from judges;[4][5]
  • elaborating substantive Islamic law, particularly though a genre of legal literature developed by author-jurists who collected fatwas of prominent muftis and integrated them into books.[4][6]
A mufti gives sexual advice in response to a woman's complaint about her son-in-law's inability to consummate his marriage to her daughter. Ottoman manuscript, 1721.

Islamic doctrine regards the practice of ifta as a collective obligation (farḍ al-kifāya), which must be discharged by some members of the community.[2] Before the rise of modern schools, the study of law was a centerpiece of advanced education in the Islamic world. A relatively small class of legal scholars controlled the interpretation of sharia on a wide range of questions essential to the society, ranging from ritual to finance. It was considered a requirement for qualified jurists to communicate their knowledge through teaching or issuing fatwas. The ideal mufti was conceived as an individual of scholarly accomplishments and exemplary morals, and muftis were generally approached with the respect and deference corresponding to these expectations.[6]

Judges generally sought an opinion from a mufti with higher scholarly authority than themselves for difficult cases or potentially controversial verdicts.[3][10] Fatwas were routinely upheld in courts, and if a fatwa was disregarded, it was usually because another fatwa supporting a different position was judged to be more convincing. If a party in a dispute was not able to obtain a fatwa supporting their position, they would be unlikely to pursue their case in court, opting for informal mediation instead, or abandoning their claim altogether.[15] Sometimes muftis could be petitioned for a fatwa relating to a court judgement that has already been passed, acting as an informal appeals process, but the extent of this practice and its mechanism varied across history.[16] While in most of the Islamic world judges were not required to consult muftis by any political authority, in Muslim Spain this practice was mandatory, so that a judicial decision was considered invalid without prior approval by a legal specialist.[17]

Author-jurists collected fatwas by muftis of high scholarly reputation and abstracted them into concise formulations of legal norms for the benefit of judges, giving a summary of jurisprudence for a particular madhhab (legal school).[4][15] Author-jurists sought out fatwas that reflected the social conditions of their time and place, often opting for later legal opinions which were at variance with the doctrine of early authorities.[15] Research by Wael Hallaq and Baber Johansen has shown that the rulings of muftis collected in these volumes could, and sometimes did, have a significant impact on the development of Islamic law.[2]

During the early centuries of Islam, the roles of mufti, author-jurist and judge were not mutually exclusive. A jurist could lead a teaching circle, conduct a fatwa session, and adjudicate court cases in a single day, devoting his night hours to writing a legal treatise. Those who were able to act in all four capacities were regarded as the most accomplished jurists.[13]

Qualifications of a mufti

[edit]
Algerian mufti, British drawing (1817)

The basic prerequisite for issuing fatwas under the classical legal theory was religious knowledge and piety. According to the adab al-mufti manuals, a mufti must be an adult, Muslim, trusted and reliable, of good character and sound mind, an alert and rigorous thinker, trained as a jurist, and not a sinner.[11] On a practical level, the stature of muftis derived from their reputation for scholarly expertise and upright character.[3] Issuing of fatwas was among the most demanding occupations in medieval Islam and muftis were among the best educated religious scholars of their time.[2]

According to legal theory, it was up to each mufti to decide when he was ready to practice. In practice, an aspiring jurist would normally study for several years with one or several recognized scholars, following a curriculum that included Arabic grammar, hadith, law and other religious sciences. The teacher would decide when the student was ready to issue fatwas by giving him a certificate (ijaza).[16]

During the first centuries of Islam, it was assumed that a mufti was a mujtahid, i.e., a jurist who is capable of deriving legal rulings directly from the scriptural sources through independent reasoning (ijtihad), evaluating the reliability of hadith and applying or even developing the appropriate legal methodologies. Starting from around 1200 CE, legal theorists began to accept that muftis of their time may not possess the knowledge and legal skill to perform this activity. In addition, it was felt that the major question of jurisprudence had already been addressed by master jurists of earlier times, so that later muftis only had to follow the legal opinions established within their legal school (taqlid). At that point, the notions of mufti and mujtahid became distinguished, and legal theorists classified jurists into three or more levels of competence.[18]

Unlike the post of qadi, which is reserved for men in the classical sharia system, fatwas could be issued by qualified women as well as men.[14] In practice, the vast majority of jurists who completed the lengthy curriculum in linguistic and religious sciences required to obtain the qualification to issue fatwas were men.[3] Slaves and persons who were blind or mute were likewise theoretically barred from the post of a judge, but not that of mufti.[11]

Mufti vs. judge

[edit]

The mufti and the judge play different roles in the classical sharia system, with corresponding differences between a fatwa and a qada (court decision):

  • A fatwa is nonbinding, while a court decision is binding and enforceable.[3][4]
  • A fatwa may deal with rituals, ethical questions, religious doctrines and sometimes even philosophical issues, while court cases dealt with legal matters in the narrow sense.[4][3]
  • The authority of a court judgment applies only to the specific court case, while a fatwa applies to all cases that fit the premises of the query.[6]
  • A fatwa is made on the basis of information provided in the request, while a judge actively investigates the facts of the case.[3][6]
  • A judge evaluates rival claims of two parties in a dispute in order to reach a verdict, while a fatwa is made on the basis of information provided by a single petitioner.[3][6]
  • Fatwas by prominent jurists were collected in books as sources of precedent, while court decisions were entered into court registers, but not otherwise disseminated.[3][6]
  • While both muftis and judges were interpreters of sharia, judicial interpretation centered on evaluating evidence such as testimony and oath, while a mufti investigated textual sources of law (scripture and legal literature).[6]
  • In the classical legal system, judges were civil servants appointed by the ruler, while muftis were private scholars and not appointed officials.[8]

Institutions

[edit]
Ulugh Beg Madrasa, Samarkand (est. 1422)

Before the 11th century CE, anyone who possessed scholarly recognition as an Islamic jurist could issue fatwas. Starting around that time, however, the public office of mufti began to appear alongside the private issuing of fatwas. In Khurasan, the rulers appointed a head of the local ulama, called shaykh al-Islam, who also functioned as the chief mufti. The Mamluks appointed four muftis, one for each of the four Sunni madhhabs, to the appeals courts of provincial capitals. The Ottomans organized muftis into a hierarchical bureaucracy with a chief mufti of the empire called shaykh al-islam at the top. The Ottoman shaykh al-Islam (Turkish: şeyhülislam), was among the most powerful state officials.[6] Scribes reviewed queries directed to Ottoman muftis and rewrote them to facilitate issuing of fatwas.[6][5] In Mughal India and Safavid Iran the chief mufti had the title of sadr.[5]

For the first few centuries of Islam, muftis were educated in informal study circles, but beginning in the 11th and 12th centuries, the ruling elites began to establish institutions of higher religious learning known as madrasas in an effort to secure support and cooperation of the ulema (religious scholars). Madrasas, which were primarily devoted to the study of law, soon multiplied throughout the Islamic world, helping to spread Islamic learning beyond urban centers and to unite diverse Islamic communities in a shared cultural project.[19]

In some states, such as Muslim Spain, muftis were assigned to courts in advisory roles. In Muslim Spain jurists also sat on a shura (council) advising the ruler. Muftis were additionally appointed to other public functions, such as market inspectors.[4]

In Shia Islam

[edit]

While the office of the mufti was gradually subsumed into the state bureaucracy in much of the Sunni Muslim world, Shia religious establishment followed a different path in Iran starting from the early modern era. During Safavid rule, independent Islamic jurists (mujtahids) claimed the authority to represent the hidden imam. Under the usuli doctrine that prevailed among Twelver Shias in the 18th century and under the Qajar dynasty, the mujtahids further claimed to act collectively as deputies of the imam. According to this doctrine, all Muslims are supposed to follow a high-ranking living mujtahid bearing the title of marja' al-taqlid, whose fatwas are considered binding, unlike fatwas in Sunni Islam. Thus, in contrast to Sunni muftis, Shia mujtahids gradually achieved increasing independence from the state.[5]

Public and political fatwas

[edit]

While most fatwas were delivered to an individual or a judge, some fatwas that were public or political in nature played an important role in religious legitimation, doctrinal disputes, political criticism, or political mobilization. As muftis were progressively incorporated into government bureaucracies in the course of Islamic history, they were often expected to support government policies. Ottoman sultans regularly sought fatwas from the chief mufti for administrative and military initiatives, including fatwas sanctioning jihad against Mamluk Egypt and Safavid Iran.[3] Fatwas by the Ottoman chief mufti were also solicited by the rulers to legitimize new social and economic practices, such as financial and penal laws enacted outside of sharia, printing of nonreligious books (1727) and vaccination (1845).[5]

At other times muftis wielded their influence independently of the ruler, and several Ottoman and Moroccan sultans were deposed by a fatwa.[3] This happened, for example, to the Ottoman sultan Murad V on the grounds of his insanity.[5] Public fatwas were also used to dispute doctrinal matters, and in some case to proclaim that certain groups or individuals who professed to be Muslim were to be excluded from the Islamic community (a practice known as takfir).[3] In both political and scholarly sphere, doctrinal controversies between different states, denominations or centers of learning were accompanied by dueling fatwas.[6] Muftis also acted to counteract the influence of judges and secular functionaries. By articulating grievances and legal rights of the population, public fatwas often prompted an otherwise unresponsive court system to provide redress.[5]

In the modern era

[edit]

Modern institutions

[edit]
Muhammad Abduh, who served as the second Grand Mufti of Egypt (1899–1905) in the Egyptian Dar al-Ifta

Under European colonial rule, the institution of dar al-ifta was established in a number of madrasas (law colleges) as a centralized place for issuing of fatwas, and these organizations to a considerable extent replaced independent muftis as religious guides for the general population.[6] Following independence, most Muslim states established national organizations devoted to issuing fatwas. One example is the Egyptian Dar al-Ifta, founded in 1895, which has served to articulate a national vision of Islam through fatwas issued in response to government and private queries.[5] National governments in Muslim-majority countries also instituted councils of senior religious scholars to advise the government on religious matters and issue fatwas. These councils generally form part of the ministry for religious affairs, rather than the justice department, which may have a more assertive attitude toward the executive branch.[4]

While chief muftis of earlier times oversaw a hierarchy of muftis and judges applying traditional jurisprudence, most modern states have adopted European-influenced legal codes and no longer employ traditional judicial procedures or traditionally trained judges. State muftis generally promote a vision of Islam that is compatible with state law of their country.[5]

Although some early theorists argued that muftis should not respond to questions on certain subjects, such as theology, muftis have in practice handled queries relating to a wide range of subjects. This trend continued in modern times, and contemporary state-appointed muftis and institutions for ifta respond to government and private queries on varied issues, including political conflicts, Islamic finance, and medical ethics, contributing to shaping a national Islamic identity.[3]

Muftis in modern times have increasingly relied on the process of ijtihad, i.e. deriving legal rulings based on an independent analysis rather than conformity with the opinions of earlier legal authorities (taqlid).[8] While in the past muftis were associated with a particular school of law (madhhab), in the 20th century many muftis began to assert their intellectual independence from traditional schools of jurisprudence.[6]

Modern media have facilitated cooperative forms to ifta. Networks of muftis are commonly engaged by fatwa websites, so that queries are distributed among the muftis in the network, who still act as individual jurisconsults. In other cases, Islamic jurists of different nationalities, schools of law, and sometimes even denominations (Sunni and Shia), coordinate to issue a joint fatwa, which is expected to command greater authority with the public than individual fatwas. The collective fatwa (sometimes called ijtihād jamāʿī, "collective legal interpretation") is a new historical development, and it is found in such settings as boards of Islamic financial institutions and international fatwa councils.[8]

There exists no international Islamic authority to settle differences in interpretation of Islamic law. An International Islamic Fiqh Academy was created by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, but its legal opinions are not binding.[4]

Role in politics

[edit]

In the modern era, public "fatwa wars" have reflected political controversies in the Muslim world, from anti-colonial struggles to the Gulf War of the 1990s, when muftis in some countries issued fatwas supporting collaboration with the US-led coalition, while muftis from other countries endorsed the Iraqi call for jihad against the US and its collaborators.[20][7]

Tobacco protest fatwa issued by Mirza Shirazi

During the era of Western colonialism, some muftis issued fatwas seeking to mobilize popular resistance to foreign domination, while others were induced by colonial authorities to issue fatwas supporting accommodation with colonial rule. Muftis also intervened in the political process on many other occasions during the colonial era. For example, in 1904 a fatwa by Moroccan ulema achieved the dismissal of European experts hired by the state, while in 1907 another Moroccan fatwa succeeded in deposing the sultan for failing to defend the state against French aggression. The 1891 tobacco protest fatwa by the Iranian mujtahid Mirza Shirazi, which prohibited smoking as long as the British tobacco monopoly was in effect, also achieved its goals.[5]

Some muftis in the modern era, like the mufti of the Lebanese republic in the mid-20th century and the Grand Mufti of the Sultanate of Oman, were important political leaders.[6] In Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini used proclamations and fatwas to introduce and legitimize a number of institutions, including the Council of the Islamic Revolution and the Iranian Parliament.[5] Khomeini's most publicized fatwa was the proclamation condemning Salman Rushdie to death for his novel The Satanic Verses.[5]

Many militant and reform movements in modern times have disseminated fatwas issued by individuals who do not possess the qualifications traditionally required of a mufti. A famous example is the fatwa issued in 1998 by Osama bin Laden and four of his associates, proclaiming "jihad against Jews and Crusaders" and calling for killing of American civilians. In addition to denouncing its content, many Islamic jurists stressed that bin Laden was not qualified to either issue a fatwa or declare a jihad.[5]

The Amman Message was a statement, signed in 2005 in Jordan by nearly 200 prominent Islamic jurists, which served as a "counter-fatwa" against a widespread use of takfir (excommunication) by jihadist groups to justify jihad against rulers of Muslim-majority countries. The Amman Message recognized eight legitimate schools of Islamic law and prohibited declarations of apostasy against them. The statement also asserted that fatwas can be issued only by properly trained muftis, thereby seeking to delegitimize fatwas issued by militants who lack the requisite qualifications.[3][5]

Erroneous and sometimes bizarre fatwas issued by unqualified or eccentric individuals acting as muftis has at times given rise to complaints about a "chaos" in the modern practice of ifta.[7]

Role in society

[edit]
Sheikh Absattar Derbisali, the Grand Mufti of Kazakhstan

Advances in print media and the rise of the internet have changed the role played by muftis in modern society.[5] In the pre-modern era, most fatwas issued in response to private queries were read only by the petitioner. Early in the 20th century, the Salafi reformist Shafi'i jurist Rashid Rida responded to thousands of queries from around the Muslim world on a variety of social and political topics in the regular fatwa section of his Cairo-based journal Al-Manar.[7][6] In the late 20th century, when the Grand Mufti of Egypt Sayyid Tantawy issued a fatwa allowing interest banking, the ruling was vigorously debated in the Egyptian press by both religious scholars and lay intellectuals.[5]

In the internet age, a large number of websites have appeared offering fatwas to readers around the world. For example, IslamOnline publishes an archive of "live fatwa" sessions, whose number approached a thousand by 2007, along with biographies of the muftis. Together muftis who issue call-in fatwas during radio shows and satellite television programs, these sites have contributed to the rise of new forms of contemporary ifta.[5] Unlike the concise or technical pre-modern fatwas, fatwas delivered through modern mass media often seek to be more expansive and accessible to the wide public.[7]

As the influence of muftis in the courtroom has declined in modern times, there has been a relative increase in the proportion of fatwas dealing with rituals and further expansion in purely religious areas like Quranic exegesis, creed, and Sufism. Modern muftis issue fatwas on topics as diverse as insurance, sex-change operations, Moon exploration, and beer drinking.[20] In the private sphere, some muftis have begun to resemble social workers, giving advice on various personal issues encountered in everyday life.[7] The vast amount of fatwas produced in the modern world attests to the importance of Islamic authenticity to many Muslims. However, there is little research available to indicate to what extent Muslims acknowledge the authority of muftis and heed their rulings in real life.[8]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
A mufti (/ˈmʌfti/; Arabic: مفتي [muftiː]) is an Islamic jurist qualified to issue a nonbinding opinion (fatwa) on a point of Islamic law (sharia). The act of issuing fatwas is called iftāʾ. Muftis must possess deep knowledge of the , , and (jurisprudence), often employing (independent reasoning) to apply classical sources to novel situations. Muftis and their fatāwa have played an important role throughout Islamic history, taking on new roles in the modern era. Historically, the mufti title gained prominence in medieval Islamic societies, with muftis serving as key authorities in legal interpretation and public guidance, particularly in structured systems like the Ottoman Empire's Şeyhülislam, the chief mufti advising the on state matters. The role underscores the decentralized nature of Islamic jurisprudence, where muftis from different madhabs (schools of thought) offer varied rulings, fostering debate and adaptation rather than uniform dogma. In contemporary contexts, muftis continue to influence Muslim life by addressing modern challenges such as , , and , though their varies by region and is sometimes contested due to differing interpretations or political instrumentalization. Notable fatwas have sparked both reform, like prohibitions on in 19th-century , and controversy, including calls for violence that highlight tensions between traditionalist and contextualist approaches. While muftis are revered for upholding causal links between and human conduct, critiques from within Islamic question the rigor of some ijtihads, emphasizing the need for empirical scrutiny over rote emulation.

Terminology and Etymology

Linguistic and Conceptual Origins

The term mufti originates from the Arabic root f-t-y, whose meanings include "youth, newness, clarification, explanation." It derives from the Arabic muftī (مُفْتِي), the active of the aftā (أَفْتَى), meaning "to pronounce a decision" or "to give a formal " on a matter of ic law. A number of related terms derive from the same root: a mufti's response is called a ; the person who asks a mufti for a fatwa is known as mustafti; the act of issuing fatwas is called iftāʾ; and the term futyā refers to soliciting and issuing fatwas. This root reflects the mufti's core role as "one who issues a ," a non-binding interpretive ruling derived from sources such as the and . The word entered European languages by the late , initially denoting a Muslim empowered to expound , distinct from its later usage for civilian attire. Conceptually, the mufti's function stems from iftāʾ, the scholarly practice of extrapolating legal rulings for novel situations, which developed in tandem with the systematization of (Islamic jurisprudence) during the 8th and 9th centuries CE. This originated in the Prophetic era, where ibn Abdullah (c. 570–632 CE) issued advisory verdicts on community disputes, a emulated by his companions (sahaba) like (r. 632–634 CE) and ibn al-Khattab (r. 634–644 CE) amid expanding Islamic governance. By the formative period of Sunni madhabs (legal schools), iftāʾ was distinguished from binding judicial rulings (qadaʾ), positioning the mufti as an independent interpreter reliant on (independent reasoning) rather than state authority. This conceptual framework emphasized empirical fidelity to primary texts over speculative analogy, though qualifications for ijtihad varied across schools like Hanafi and Shafi'i, with later jurists such as (d. 1277 CE) refining procedural norms for issuance.

Definition in Islamic Jurisprudence

In Islamic jurisprudence (usūl al-fiqh), a mufti is a qualified legal (mujtahid) who possesses the expertise to perform ijtihād—independent reasoning to derive rulings (aḥkām) from primary sources such as the , , scholarly consensus (ijmāʿ), and analogical deduction (qiyās)—and thereby issue non-binding legal opinions known as fatwās on matters of . This role distinguishes the mufti as an interpreter of for specific queries, requiring mastery of both (furūʿ al-fiqh) and its methodological principles, ensuring opinions align with the religion's foundational objectives (maqāṣid al-sharīʿa). The process of issuing a fatwā, termed iftāʾ, involves responding to an individual's or judge's inquiry with a reasoned elucidation grounded in evidentiary proofs, without the coercive authority of judicial enforcement. The mufti's authority stems from rigorous scholarly attainment, including comprehensive knowledge of Arabic linguistics, sciences, and jurisprudential precedents, enabling the discernment of legal imperatives (wājib), prohibitions (ḥarām), and discretionary matters (mubāḥ). Unlike a (qāḍī), whose rulings bind parties in litigation, the mufti's fatwā serves as advisory guidance, potentially varying by (madhhab) due to interpretive differences, yet it carries moral weight as an emulation of prophetic inheritance in applying to novel circumstances. Classical texts emphasize the mufti's ethical duty to qualify responses with conditions of certainty, avoiding unsubstantiated claims that could mislead the questioner (mustaftī). This framework underscores usūl al-fiqh's role in systematizing ijtihād to preserve 's adaptability while anchoring it in verifiable textual and rational evidence.

Historical Development

Origins in Early Islam

The origins of muftis and the fatwa can be traced back to the Quran, where on several occasions the text instructs the Prophet Muhammad how to respond to questions from his followers regarding religious and social practices, often beginning with phrases such as "When they ask you concerning ..., say ...". In two cases, this is expressed with verbal forms of the root f-t-y, signifying asking for or giving an authoritative answer. In the hadith literature, this three-way relationship between God, Muhammad, and believers typically shifted to two-way consultation, with Muhammad replying directly to queries from his Companions (sahaba). The practice of ifta'—issuing non-binding legal opinions known as fatwas—originated during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (c. 570–632 CE), who served as the primary authority for interpreting divine revelation from the and providing guidance on matters of Islamic law (shari'a). As the intermediary between and the Muslim community, the Prophet issued rulings on ritual, social, and penal issues, often in response to specific inquiries, establishing the foundational model for consultative . This role was not formalized under the title mufti at the time, but it embodied the core function of deriving rulings from primary sources, without reliance on later institutional structures. Even during the 's lifetime, select companions (sahaba) began issuing fatwas on his approval or in his presence, demonstrating an early delegation of interpretive authority to trusted individuals with direct knowledge of revelation. Notable examples include al-Siddiq, ibn Affan, ibn Abi Talib, [Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf](/page/Abd_al-Rahman_ibn_Aw f), Abdullah ibn Mas'ud, and , who provided opinions on issues such as , , and transactions when the Prophet was unavailable or to illustrate applications of his teachings. Following the Prophet's death in 632 CE, with the cessation of divine revelation through prophets, the expanding Muslim community turned to the Companions as authoritative voices for religious guidance; some issued pronouncements on a wide range of subjects. The generation of Companions was succeeded in this role by the Successors (tabi'un). The responsibility for ifta' shifted to the companions as a group, who relied on their firsthand recollection of the Quran, the Prophet's Sunnah (practices and sayings), and emerging consensus (ijma'). Prominent figures such as Umar ibn al-Khattab, Ali ibn Abi Talib, and Abdullah ibn Abbas issued thousands of fatwas collectively, addressing novel situations like conquests, governance, and intertribal disputes; records indicate fatwas from over 130 companions were preserved and transmitted. This era marked the transition from prophetic monopoly to scholarly consultation among the sahaba, who prioritized empirical adherence to revealed texts over analogical reasoning (qiyas), which developed later. The institution of ifta thus developed under a question-and-answer format for communicating religious knowledge, taking definitive form with the emergence of classical legal theory and schools of Islamic jurisprudence (madhahib); by the 8th century CE, muftis became recognized as legal experts who elaborated Islamic law and clarified its application to practical issues in the community. The term mufti—derived from the Arabic root afta meaning "to explain or interpret authoritatively"—emerged to denote such qualified issuers of fatwas, though it gained prominence in subsequent generations. In the subsequent generation of the successors (, d. 7th–8th centuries CE), ifta' continued informally through figures like in , who issued opinions drawing on companion transmissions, laying groundwork for regional variations before the codification of legal schools (madhabs) around the 8th–9th centuries. This formative phase emphasized individual expertise and communal verification, absent coercive enforcement, distinguishing early muftis from judges (qadis). The process remained decentralized, responsive to real-time societal needs, and rooted in of prophetic precedents rather than abstract theorizing.

Evolution in Classical and Medieval Periods

During the classical period of Islamic jurisprudence, approximately from the 8th to the 13th centuries CE, the role of the mufti evolved from informal legal consultations by early scholars to a more structured function integrated with the emerging madhabs (legal schools). In the classical legal system, fatwas issued by muftis in response to private queries served to inform Muslim populations about Islam, advise courts on difficult points of Islamic law, and elaborate substantive law. Pioneering jurists such as (d. 767 CE), founder of the , exemplified this by issuing extensive fatwas in , reportedly numbering in the thousands, drawing on reasoning (ra'y) and consensus to address practical legal queries from the community. Similarly, (d. 795 CE) in served as a mufti emphasizing regional practice (amal ahl al-Madina), while al-Shafi'i (d. 820 CE) formalized the methodology of ifta through his work on usul al-fiqh, establishing systematic rules for deriving rulings from , , ijma', and , which muftis thereafter applied in fatwa issuance. This period saw ifta as a primary juristic activity, distinct yet complementary to qada' (judging), with muftis often operating independently to provide non-binding opinions that influenced daily Muslim life amid the Abbasid caliphate's expansion (750–1258 CE). The Abbasid era facilitated this evolution by patronizing scholars and translating works that enriched , leading to the compilation of collections as precursors to systematic legal texts. Jurists like (d. 855 CE), founder of the , prioritized in fatwas, resisting speculative reasoning amid trials (833–848 CE) that tested doctrinal loyalty. By the 10th century, as madhabs consolidated, muftis within each school—such as those following Shafi'i principles—developed hierarchical qualifications, requiring mastery of transmitted knowledge (naql) and interpretive skills (diraya) to perform at varying degrees. This formalized ifta as a scholarly prerogative, with fatwas serving as adaptive tools for regional variations, though constrained by school doctrines to maintain doctrinal coherence. In later times, muftis also issued public and political fatwas that took a stand on doctrinal controversies, legitimized government policies, or articulated grievances of the population. In the medieval period, extending into the 14th–15th centuries under post-Abbasid dynasties like the Mamluks (1250–1517 CE), the mufti's role became more institutionalized, with appointments of chief muftis (shaykh al-islam or ra'is al-muftin) tied to specific madhabs in urban centers. In , for instance, four muftis—one per Sunni school—were officially recognized by the , handling public queries through emerging dar al-ifta structures and issuing on diverse issues from to ritual purity. Scholars like (d. 1111 CE) elevated ifta's ethical dimensions in works such as Ihya' Ulum al-Din, stressing the mufti's moral responsibility and , while Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328 CE) exemplified independent , critiquing and issuing controversial against practices like tomb veneration, influencing Hanbali thought amid Mongol invasions (1258 CE). Fatwa collections proliferated, such as those by (d. 1245 CE), preserving medieval precedents and enabling muftis to reference prior rulings, thus evolving ifta from responses to a documented, precedent-based practice that bridged classical theory and societal application. This institutionalization enhanced the mufti's societal authority, often intersecting with political spheres without formal state control, though reliant on caliphal or sultanic endorsement for legitimacy.

Pre-Modern Institutions and Practices

In pre-modern Islamic societies, the practice of ifta, or the issuance of fatwas by muftis, transitioned from decentralized scholarly consultations to formalized institutions integrated with state and educational structures. During the classical period under the (750–1258 CE), muftis operated primarily as independent jurists affiliated with mosques or early madrasas, providing non-binding legal opinions (fatwas) in response to individual or communal queries on matters ranging from ritual purity to commercial disputes, drawing on foundational texts like the and hadith collections compiled by figures such as al-Bukhari (d. 870 CE) and (d. 875 CE). These early practices emphasized personal (independent reasoning) by qualified scholars, with no centralized oversight, allowing for diverse opinions across emerging madhhabs (legal schools) such as Hanafi and Maliki. By the medieval era in regions like and (1250–1517 CE), muftiships gained official recognition within judicial frameworks. The established dedicated muftis for each of the four Sunni madhhabs in provincial appeals courts, enhancing the role of fatwas in appellate processes, while the primary official position was the mufti of the Dar al-Adl (Hall of Justice), who advised the on sharia-compliant governance during public audiences. Ifta sessions often occurred in madrasas, where muftis issued written fatwas documented in collections (majmu'at al-fatwa), serving as precedents for qadis (judges) without binding authority, thus maintaining a balance between scholarly autonomy and state utility. This institutionalization reflected the growing complexity of urban societies, with muftis supervising endowments (waqfs) and educational curricula to propagate madhhab-specific jurisprudence. In the (1299–1922 CE), considered part of pre-modern Islamic governance, the muftiship achieved peak bureaucratization, particularly from the onward. The Shaykh al-Islam, appointed as the empire's , headed a of Hanafi muftis who not only issued fatwas on private and but also oversaw networks, religious schools (madrasas), and qadi appointments across provinces. Provincial muftis, such as those in Akkirman, played key roles in local lawmaking by responding to istifta queries from officials, with their fatwas influencing the blend of and kanun (sultanic decrees); for instance, collections of these opinions shaped administrative norms without supplanting judicial verdicts. Practices included formalized dar al-ifta houses for processing queries, underscoring the mufti's function as a consultative authority rather than an enforcer, though state patronage sometimes aligned fatwas with imperial interests.

Qualifications and Functions

Requirements for Mufti Status

In classical Islamic jurisprudence, particularly within Sunni traditions, the primary requirement for mufti status is the attainment of mujtahid-level competence, enabling independent reasoning (ijtihad) to derive rulings from primary sources such as the Quran and Sunnah. This demands comprehensive mastery of Arabic grammar and rhetoric (balagha), essential for interpreting sacred texts accurately, as well as deep knowledge of the Quran's verses pertinent to legal rulings (ayat al-ahkam), prophetic traditions (hadith), scholarly consensus (ijma), and analogical reasoning (qiyas). Traditionally, a mufti was seen as a scholar of upright character who possessed a thorough knowledge of the Quran, hadith, and legal literature. Additionally, proficiency in usul al-fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) is mandatory to evaluate evidential weights and avoid erroneous derivations, often requiring years of study under qualified mentors. Muftis acted as independent scholars in the classical legal system. Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually incorporated into state bureaucracies, while Shia jurists progressively asserted an autonomous authority starting from the early modern era. Personal qualifications include being a free, adult Muslim of sound intellect and moral uprightness (adala), characterized by piety (taqwa) and fear of God (taqwa Allah), which classical scholars like al-Ghazali emphasized as safeguards against bias in fatwa issuance. While gender is not a formal barrier—female mujtahids like Aisha bint Abi Bakr were acknowledged historically—practical authorization has predominantly been male due to institutional traditions. In Hanafi and other schools, muftis may operate within taqlid (imitation of established madhhabs) rather than full ijtihad, requiring mastery of one of the four Sunni schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali) alongside awareness of divergences among them. In Shia traditions, particularly Twelver (Ithna Ashari), mufti-equivalent mujtahids must similarly excel in Arabic, , (with emphasis on narrators' reliability), and usul al-fiqh, but with greater focus on rationalist principles (usul) over transmitted reports, enabling derivation of rulings in the absence of the Hidden Imam. often involves endorsement by senior scholars or completion of advanced seminary programs, such as those at or , spanning 10–15 years. Self-proclaimed status without scholarly validation is widely rejected, as it risks invalid fatwas; historical examples include Ottoman muftis appointed via imperial ijazat (authorizations) after rigorous examinations. Modern institutionalization, as in Egypt's Dar al-Ifta (established 1895), formalizes these by mandating degrees in Islamic studies and supervised fatwa training, yet retains classical criteria to ensure credibility amid varying interpretive demands.

Process of Ifta and Fatwa Issuance

The process of ifta' (fatwa issuance) commences when a mufti receives a specific legal inquiry, known as istifta', from an individual or group seeking guidance on a matter governed by Islamic law. This non-binding opinion, or fatwa, is derived through rigorous application of jurisprudential methodology (usul al-fiqh) and requires the mufti to exercise independent reasoning (ijtihad) or specialized knowledge within a legal school. The procedure emphasizes verification of facts, contextual analysis, and adherence to primary sources to ensure the ruling aligns with Sharia objectives, such as preserving faith, life, intellect, lineage, and property. Key stages in the ifta' process include:
  • Clarification of the issue (tahqiq al-mas'alah or taswir): The mufti thoroughly investigates the questioner's circumstances, probing details related to time, place, individuals involved, and prevailing conditions to accurately conceptualize the scenario and avoid misinterpretation.
  • Examination of evidences (dirayat al-adillah): Relevant proofs from the Quran, Sunnah, scholarly consensus (ijma'), analogy (qiyas), and secondary sources are identified and analyzed, incorporating customary practices (urf) and public welfare (maslaha) where applicable.
  • Weighing and designation (tarjih or takyif): Competing interpretations are evaluated, with preference given to the most substantiated view based on evidentiary strength, while classifying the issue within established fiqh categories.
  • Formulation and delivery (ifta'): The final ruling is articulated clearly, citing supporting evidences, ensuring it does not contradict definitive texts or consensus, and remains adaptable to changing contexts; the mufti must retract erroneous fatwas upon discovering stronger evidence.
Fatwas issued through this process are advisory rather than judicially enforceable, though they carry significant moral weight and may influence personal or communal conduct. In classical Islamic , individual muftis handled ifta', but modern institutions often employ committees for collective deliberation to enhance accuracy and address complex contemporary issues. Rulings prioritize ease (taysir) and removal of hardship, reflecting Islam's emphasis on and , yet they remain subject to revision if circumstances evolve.

Distinctions from Judicial Roles

The role of a mufti in Islamic centers on issuing fatwas, which are non-binding legal opinions derived from scholarly interpretation of sources, providing guidance to individuals on permissible actions or rulings in specific scenarios. In contrast, a (judge) presides over formal court proceedings, adjudicating disputes between parties with binding decisions (qada) that enforce principles through evidence and testimony. This fundamental separation ensures that muftis focus on advisory (independent reasoning), while qadis apply established in litigated cases, often consulting muftis for clarification on complex points of . Authority distinguishes the two further: fatwas lack coercive power and serve as voluntary counsel, relying on the recipient's adherence, whereas qadi rulings carry state-backed enforcement, including penalties for non-compliance in matters like contracts, , or criminal offenses. Muftis typically qualify through rigorous self-attained expertise in (jurisprudence), without formal appointment, allowing broader, hypothetical queries from the public; qadis, however, are appointed by political or religious authorities, bound by procedural constraints such as adversarial hearings and evidentiary standards. In classical systems, this division prevented overlap, with muftis historically assisting qadis informally but not substituting for judicial finality. Scope of engagement also varies: muftis address proactive or ethical dilemmas outside litigation, such as personal conduct or emerging issues, issuing opinions that may evolve with new evidence or contexts, while qadis resolve concrete conflicts post-facto, prioritizing equity (adl) and precedent within their madhhab (legal school). Overlap occurs when qadis reference fatwas as persuasive authority, but the qadi's verdict supersedes, underscoring the mufti's consultative rather than decisional role. This structure, rooted in early Islamic legal theory, maintains scholarly independence for muftis from state influence, though in practice, prominent muftis have occasionally wielded indirect judicial sway through influential opinions.

Sectarian Variations

Muftis in Sunni Traditions

In , muftis function as jurists authorized to deliver fatwas—non-binding interpretations of —primarily through or adherence to the established methodologies of the four orthodox schools of : Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali. These schools, originating from the 8th and 9th centuries CE with founders like (d. 767 CE) for Hanafi and (d. 855 CE) for Hanbali, provide structured frameworks for deriving rulings from primary sources including the , authenticated , ijma' (consensus), and (analogy). Muftis within each madhab apply its specific usul al-fiqh (principles of ), such as the Hanafi emphasis on (juristic preference) or the Maliki reliance on Medinan practice ('amal ahl al-Madina), ensuring consistency in legal opinions across diverse Sunni communities. Distinct from Shia traditions, which vest interpretive authority in a hierarchical line of Imams or without equivalent madhabs, Sunni muftis lack infallible guidance and instead prioritize textualist fidelity and scholarly debate, fostering pluralism but also occasional contention over validity. This decentralized approach historically empowered muftis to address local customs and emerging issues independently, as seen in the Hanbali school's stricter literalism influencing Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi-influenced since the . Fatwas remain advisory, binding only if endorsed by a () or community consensus, underscoring the mufti's role as a rather than . Institutionally, Sunni muftis gained prominence in empires like the Ottoman (Hanafi-dominant, 1299–1922 CE), where the Shaykh al-Islam—appointed from 1453 onward—served as chief mufti, issuing fatwas to validate sultanic decrees, oversee qadis, and head the ulema hierarchy, thereby integrating with state kanun (secular law). Local provincial muftis, numbering over 100 by the , supervised madrasas, certified scholars, and resolved disputes, amassing influence that occasionally checked executive power, as in fatwas deposing sultans like in 1807. This bureaucratic model persisted in post-Ottoman states, with Egypt's (established 1895) advising on both religious and civil matters through , issuing thousands of fatwas annually on topics from finance to .

Muftis in Shia Traditions

In Twelver , the predominant branch comprising approximately 85-90% of Shia Muslims, the role analogous to that of a Sunni mufti is performed by mujtahids, scholars qualified through rigorous study to engage in —independent reasoning to derive legal rulings from primary sources such as the , traditions of the Prophet Muhammad and the , consensus (ijma'), and intellect (). These mujtahids issue fatwas as authoritative opinions on religious and practical matters, binding upon their followers (muqallids) who practice , or emulation of a qualified living scholar. The term "mufti" itself, derived from ifta' (fatwa issuance), is infrequently used in Shia contexts, as authority stems from personal scholarly attainment rather than institutional appointment or adherence to fixed madhabs (legal schools). The hierarchy culminates in marja' al-taqlid (sources of emulation), senior mujtahids selected by popular consensus for their superior knowledge (a'lamiyya), whose s guide the community on issues ranging from ritual purity to contemporary ethics. Unlike Sunni muftis, who typically interpret within one of the four established schools (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, or Hanbali) and issue non-binding opinions often reliant on classical precedents, Shia s emphasize ongoing , allowing adaptation to new circumstances while rooted in the Imams' interpretive tradition. Lay Shiites are obligated to follow the of their chosen marja' on specific matters, with precedence given to the most learned if conflicts arise, ensuring a dynamic yet structured authority. Shia fatwas have historically wielded substantial influence, mobilizing ; a notable example is the 1891-1892 tobacco fatwa by Mirza Muhammad Hasan Shirazi, who declared tobacco use tantamount to war against Imam , sparking a nationwide that forced the Qajar to annul a British tobacco monopoly concession after widespread compliance reduced consumption by over 90% within months. In other Shia branches, such as Zaydi (prevalent in ), the role aligns closer to Sunni muftis through emphasis on rational and less rigid , but Twelver practices dominate global Shia scholarship. This system underscores Shia emphasis on clerical independence from state control, contrasting with state-sanctioned muftis in many Sunni contexts.

Political and Societal Roles

Historical Public and Political Fatwas

![Tobacco Protest Fatwa issued by Mirza Shirazi][float-right] In the , the chief mufti, or Sheikh ul-Islam, played a key role in providing religious legitimacy to state policies through public solicited by sultans for military campaigns and administrative reforms. These often framed political actions within Islamic jurisprudence, such as declarations of against rival powers like the Mamluks. During , on November 14, 1914, Sheikh ul-Islam Mustafa Hayri Efendi issued a prominent proclaiming against the Entente Powers—Britain, , and —urging globally to engage in combat against these "enemies of ," with the aim of inciting uprisings in Allied-controlled Muslim territories. This , disseminated via efforts including multilingual pamphlets, sought to unify Muslim support for the but achieved limited mobilization due to competing loyalties and colonial controls. In Shia contexts, muftis equivalent to marja' issued public s that influenced political resistance against perceived foreign encroachments. A landmark example occurred in on December 28, 1891, when Grand Mirza Muhammad Hasan Shirazi, the preeminent Shia authority, decreed that consuming equated to waging war against the Hidden Imam, in response to Shah Nasir al-Din Shah's concession of a monopoly to a British company. This triggered widespread boycotts, with merchants shuttering shops and consumers destroying stocks, paralyzing the market and forcing the shah to annul the concession on January 8, 1892, after violent protests that killed over 100 demonstrators. The event underscored the political potency of clerical s in mobilizing public opposition to monarchical decisions perceived as compromising sovereignty. Other historical instances include provincial Ottoman muftis issuing fatwas on local and , which shaped legal interpretations of sovereignty and loyalty to the . For example, fatwas from figures like Vani Mehmed Efendi addressed provincial authority and taxation, influencing Ottoman administrative practices in the . These public and political fatwas demonstrated muftis' capacity to bridge religious doctrine with statecraft, often amplifying or constraining rulers' actions through communal adherence.

Influence on Governance and Society

Muftis have historically influenced governance by issuing fatwas that provided religious legitimacy to rulers' policies, economic innovations, and penal reforms, thereby integrating Sharia principles into state administration. In the Ottoman Empire, the Sheikh al-Islam, as the chief mufti of Istanbul, advised sultans on religious and legal matters, validated governmental actions through fatwas, and functioned as a cornerstone of the administrative system, overseeing judicial and educational spheres aligned with Islamic law. This role extended to legitimizing or challenging executive decisions, reinforcing the sultan's authority while constraining it within doctrinal bounds. Public fatwas by muftis have also shaped societal responses to policies, often mobilizing communities against perceived injustices. A prominent example is the 1891 tobacco fatwa issued by Shia scholar Mirza Muhammad Hassan Shirazi against a British tobacco monopoly concession granted to the Qajar , declaring tobacco use tantamount to war against the . This ruling prompted a nationwide , including among court officials, compelling the to annul the concession on January 8, 1892, after widespread protests and economic disruption. The event underscored muftis' capacity to leverage religious authority for , altering state economic decisions and highlighting tensions between clerical influence and monarchical power. Beyond specific incidents, muftis' interpretations have molded social structures by guiding communal adherence to Islamic norms on issues like , , and public conduct, fostering stability or prompting reforms in response to evolving conditions. Their opinions, disseminated through fatwas, often served as non-binding yet persuasive directives that informed legal precedents and public , bridging traditional jurisprudence with practical challenges across Islamic societies.

Modern Developments

Institutionalization in Nation-States

With the spread of codified state laws and Western-style legal education in the modern Muslim world, muftis generally no longer play their traditional role of clarifying and elaborating the laws applied in courts. In the 20th and 21st centuries, many Muslim-majority nation-states formalized the mufti's role through centralized institutions under oversight, shifting from decentralized, independent scholarly to state-sanctioned positions that align religious with national policies. However, muftis have continued to advise the general public on other aspects of sharia, particularly questions regarding religious rituals and everyday life. Some modern muftis are appointed by the state to issue fatwas, while others serve on advisory religious councils. This institutionalization often involves appointing grand or chief muftis via executive decree, integrating them into ministries of religious affairs or dedicated fatwa councils to issue official rulings on contemporary issues, regulate mosques, and represent domestically and internationally. Such structures enable governments to legitimize policies, curb unauthorized s, and manage sectarian diversity, though critics argue they subordinate to political expediency. In Saudi Arabia, the Grand Mufti serves as the kingdom's highest religious authority, appointed by royal decree and heading the Council of Senior Scholars, which deliberates on fatwas binding within the Hanbali-Wahhabi framework. The position was established post-1971 unification, with the mufti overseeing judicial religious committees and advising the monarchy on Sharia compliance; Sheikh Saleh bin Fawzan al-Fawzan was appointed to the role on October 22, 2025, succeeding Abdulaziz Al ash-Sheikh amid ongoing social reforms. This setup exemplifies state control, as fatwas must align with royal directives, contrasting with pre-modern muftis' autonomy. Egypt's , founded in 1895 but institutionalized under the Ministry of Endowments, exemplifies bureaucratic integration, where the Grand Mufti is nominated by Al-Azhar University's scholars and appointed for life by the president. The office issues thousands of s annually on topics from to , with Nazir Mohammed Ayad assuming the role on August 12, 2024, emphasizing state-vetted interpretations of the four Sunni madhhabs. Similar models appear in , where the king appoints the Grand Mufti to lead the Ministry of Awqaf and advise on s, and in Malaysia's state-level muftiates under royal or federal authority, handling localized rulings while deferring to national fatwa committees. These frameworks prioritize administrative efficiency and political stability over pluralistic debate, often sidelining non-state muftis.

Adaptations to Contemporary Challenges

Muftis have increasingly employed —independent reasoning grounded in Islamic sources—to issue addressing novel challenges posed by scientific advancements, globalization, and ethical dilemmas in fields like and . Still others issue fatwas in response to private queries on television or over the internet, with modern public fatwas addressing and sometimes sparking controversies in the Muslim world and beyond. This adaptive approach allows for the application of principles to unprecedented scenarios, such as and digital finance, while maintaining fidelity to core texts like the and . For example, Singapore's Fatwa Lab, established to evaluate emerging issues, has conducted studies on , finance, food science, and biomedicine, producing guidance that integrates empirical data with methodologies. In , muftis have ruled on assisted reproductive technologies (), permitting IVF under conditions that preserve lineage and prohibit third-party gametes or to avoid ethical violations of human dignity and family structure. is generally endorsed as permissible if it adheres to principles of without financial incentives, reflecting a balance between saving lives—a Quranic imperative—and preventing exploitation. These positions draw from Islamic bioethical frameworks that prioritize maqasid al-sharia (objectives of the law), such as preservation of life and progeny, amid debates over biotechnology's risks. Technological disruptions, including (AI), have prompted fatwas emphasizing human oversight in ethical decision-making, as AI lacks the moral intuition required for nuanced rulings. Egypt's Dar al-Ifta has extended e-fatwas to cover AI's implications in healthcare , , and even religious doubt, adapting traditional ifta processes for diaspora Muslims facing secular environments. Scholars critique AI fatwa tools for their inability to embody or contextual (God-consciousness), underscoring muftis' role in safeguarding interpretive authority. Globalization and secularism present ideological challenges, with muftis countering perceived cultural erosion by reaffirming Islam's compatibility with rational inquiry while rejecting unqualified Western as incompatible with divine sovereignty. Responses include fatwas promoting economic adaptations like Sharia-compliant to navigate global markets, and educational initiatives to fortify Islamic identity against materialism. Malaysia's Federal Territories Mufti's Office exemplifies this by bridging classical with policy on social issues, fostering resilience in pluralistic societies. The legal methodology of modern ifta often diverges from pre-modern practice. While the proliferation of contemporary fatwas attests to the importance of Islamic authenticity to many Muslims, little research has been done to determine to what extent the Muslim public continues to acknowledge the religious authority of muftis or heeds their advice.

Recent Appointments and Shifts

In October 2025, appointed Sheikh Saleh bin Fawzan bin Abdullah Al-Fawzan, aged 90, as the new and Chairman of the Council of Senior Scholars, succeeding Abdulaziz Al ash-Sheikh who died on September 23, 2025, after serving since 1999. The royal decree issued by King Salman emphasized Al-Fawzan's longstanding role as a member of the Council of Senior Scholars and his scholarly contributions in and . This appointment maintains a conservative Salafi orientation at the apex of Saudi religious authority, despite the kingdom's recent social reforms such as allowing women to drive and opening cinemas, which the previous mufti had endorsed; analysts note it signals continuity in doctrinal rigor amid modernization efforts. In Egypt, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi appointed Nazir Mohamed Ayyad as Grand Mufti on August 12, 2024, for a four-year renewable term, replacing Shawki Allam whose tenure ended after a decade. Ayyad, previously Secretary-General of Al-Azhar's Islamic Research Academy, holds a doctorate in comparative fiqh and has focused on interfaith dialogue and countering extremism in his prior roles. The selection process involved recommendations from Al-Azhar's senior scholars, underscoring the position's integration with state institutions under Egypt's constitutional framework, where the mufti advises on Islamic law while aligning with government policies on social stability. These appointments reflect ongoing state oversight in mufti selections across major Muslim-majority nations, with prioritizing scholarly seniority and emphasizing alignment with priorities; no major doctrinal shifts were announced in either case, though public discourse highlighted tensions between traditionalism and reformist pressures.

Controversies and Critiques

Extremist and Politicized Fatwas

Haj Amin al-Husseini, appointed in 1921, issued a in a radio broadcast from on May 1, 1941, urging Muslims worldwide to wage holy war against amid the pro-Axis coup. This declaration framed British forces as infidel occupiers, aligning with his broader anti-colonial and anti-Zionist campaigns, including a 1921 declaring the sale of land to Zionists as a betrayal of Islamic trust, rendering sellers and brokers as apostates. Husseini's fatwas drew on his authority as mufti to mobilize against perceived imperial threats, but critics, including postwar analyses, highlight their role in fostering alliances with , where he sought support for anti-Jewish violence, including broadcasts inciting pogroms in . Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an influential Egyptian-born scholar and head of the , issued fatwas endorsing Palestinian bombings against Israeli civilians as acts of "defensive " rather than prohibited , provided they targeted combatants or occurred in occupied territories. In works like of (published around 2010) and statements during the Second Intifada (2000–2005), Qaradawi argued such operations fulfilled religious duty under conditions of oppression, citing over 1,000 Palestinian deaths in Israeli operations as justification, though he condemned indiscriminate attacks on non-combatants elsewhere. These rulings, disseminated via Al Jazeera and Qaradawi's website, influenced militant groups by framing tactical terrorism as martyrdom, contrasting with fatwas from other scholars prohibiting bombings outright; Qaradawi's position persisted despite international condemnation, including his 2004 fatwa specifying minimal harm in such acts. Islamic State's self-appointed muftis, operating through a council and research committee, produced over 30 fatwas between 2014 and 2015 justifying enslavement of Yazidi women (citing historical precedents in 7th-century conquests), immolation of prisoners as retaliation, and taxation systems under rule. These edicts, issued by figures like , politicized apocalyptic eschatology to legitimize territorial expansion and atrocities, such as the 2014 where thousands were killed or enslaved, drawing on selective Hanbali interpretations while ignoring mainstream prohibitions on targeting civilians. Unlike state-sanctioned muftis, fatwas prioritized insurgent ideology over consensus , fueling recruitment among 30,000 foreign fighters by 2015, though countered by global scholarly refutations labeling them deviant. In , the Grand Mufti's office under ibn Abdullah issued statements in warning against dissent as tantamount to , echoing Wahhabi traditions that politicize obedience to rulers as ayn (individual duty), with over eight such fatwas reinforcing monarchical legitimacy amid arrests of clerics like . This state monopoly on fatwas, formalized since 1971, has suppressed independent muftis but also enabled rulings against extremism, such as 2014 condemnations of ; however, earlier politicized fatwas under previous muftis supported in (1980s), mobilizing 35,000 Arab fighters. Critics argue this duality reflects causal ties between official religious authority and geopolitical strategy, where fatwas serve regime stability over unqualified scriptural fidelity.

Clashes with Modernity and Secularism

Muftis have frequently encountered tensions with secular reforms that subordinate religious authority to state legislation, as seen in the Ottoman Empire's Tanzimat period (1839–1876), where modernization efforts to centralize legal authority clashed with the ulema's traditional interpretive role, including muftis who viewed such changes as eroding Sharia's supremacy. In the early Turkish Republic, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's abolition of the Şeyhülislam office—the chief muftiate—in 1924 and replacement of Sharia courts with a secular civil code in 1926 directly dismantled muftis' judicial influence, prompting resistance from conservative religious scholars who deemed these measures a rejection of divine law in favor of Western-inspired positivism. Similar dynamics unfolded in Egypt, where muftis affiliated with Al-Azhar resisted 19th-century secular legal codes modeled on French civil law, arguing they undermined fiqh's applicability to contemporary governance. Ideologically, many muftis maintain that secularism inherently conflicts with tawhid (divine oneness), positing human sovereignty over God's as shirk (polytheism), a view articulated by scholars like Mufti Taqi Usmani, who critiques modernity's secular reasoning for lacking grounds to refute core Islamic imperatives such as hudud punishments. This stance manifests in fatwas opposing democratic mechanisms that permit legislation contradicting Sharia, such as provisions for riba (interest) or apostasy leniency, with Salafi-oriented muftis explicitly deeming popular sovereignty haram for elevating man-made laws above revelation. In practice, alliances between state-appointed muftis and authoritarian regimes have reinforced this friction by prioritizing Sharia compliance over liberal human rights norms, hindering transitions to pluralistic governance in countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, where councils of muftis vet laws and often veto reforms advancing gender equality or religious freedom. These clashes persist in contemporary settings, as evidenced by muftis' endorsements of theocratic models over secular nation-states, which describes as structurally incompatible due to Sharia's comprehensive claim on public and private spheres, rendering mufti authority to positivist legal systems that exclude religious . Empirical outcomes include stalled in Muslim-majority states where mufti-influenced bodies resist secular constitutions, contributing to models that integrate fatwas into policy, thereby subordinating individual to religious obligations.

Internal Debates on Authority and Reform

Within Islamic , a primary internal concerns the mufti's to perform ijtihad—independent reasoning from the and —or adherence to taqlid, the emulation of rulings from established juristic schools (madhabs). Traditional scholars, drawing on historical precedents, argue that ijtihad requires exceptional qualifications in Arabic, sciences, and analogical reasoning, limiting it to elite mujtahids and promoting taqlid for broader stability to prevent erroneous interpretations. Reformists counter that excessive taqlid fosters stagnation, as evidenced by 18th- and 19th-century critiques from figures like Shah Wali Allah in and Muhammad al-Shawkani in , who advocated direct engagement with sources over blind imitation to revive authentic Islamic governance. This tension intensified in the modern era, with scholars like (1849–1905) in urging the "reopening" of ijtihad's gates—challenging the contested 10th-century notion of its closure—to address colonial-era challenges, such as reconciling with state law and science. Critics of unrestrained ijtihad, including some Salafi-leaning muftis, warn it risks subjective innovation (bid'ah), favoring a return to early prophetic methodologies without madhab constraints, as articulated in critiques by Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 1350), whose works influence ongoing discussions on mufti discretion. State institutionalization has amplified these disputes, as appointed muftis often navigate government oversight, prompting accusations of compromised autonomy. In , the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), established in 1975, issues fatwas that shape policy on pluralism and , yet faces internal pushback from reformists viewing it as overly conservative or state-aligned. Similarly, in , a 2024 parliamentary bill mandating muftis adhere exclusively to Ash'ari and Maturidi theology drew rebukes from intellectuals like for potentially curtailing diverse and intellectual renewal. In , muftiates' alignment with state narratives on "traditional " sparks debates among believers over representation, with younger Muslims favoring global or online scholars over institutionalized figures perceived as echoing official policies. These contentions underscore causal linkages between authority structures and viability: unchecked state control may suppress adaptive fatwas, while unchecked risks fragmentation, as seen in divergent positions on or where muftis cite varying weights. Proponents of reform emphasize empirical adaptation—evidenced by historical in peripheral regions yielding resilient legal evolutions—over nominal fidelity, arguing it better serves causal realities of societal change without diluting scriptural primacy.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.