Reasons and Sources:
First and foremost, one must know that factually, based on data I received from practical research conducted by Rabbi M. D., may he be well, at present all types of artificial intelligence are still insufficiently accurate to provide an authoritative halachic answer. Even if they often produce an accurate answer—because information addressing that exact question appears in an article written by human beings—the questioner cannot rely on it, since he has no ability to know whether the answer is presently correct and accurate. Consequently, one can no more rely upon it for halachah than upon some sort of “lottery” (albeit one with improved odds). Furthermore, according to the data from the above research, in a small number of cases, artificial intelligence absorbs from various internet articles the impression that “halachah” is not, G-d forbid, truly objective, since there are differences between Sephardim and Ashkenazim and supposedly differences between Reform and Orthodox Jews, etc. Its “rulings” are produced on the basis of this heretical assumption.
Thus, the present question is theoretical, concerning the distant future, when technology may advance to the point where its answers appear far more accurate than they are today: would it then be possible to rely upon artificial intelligence in practice? In my humble opinion, the answer is emphatically negative, for several reasons:
A. The authority of artificial intelligence’s sources:
Artificial intelligence relies on all information found across the internet, without distinguishing whether it was written by a rabbi upon whom one may rely for halachah or not.
B. Halachic reasoning versus artificial reasoning:
The holy Torah in general, and halachah in particular, are not merely “information.” Halachah is not like, lehavdil, secular laws. Rather, Torah and halachah are exceedingly profound in every detail, and only one who understands their depth can render instruction in the word of Hashem—this is halachah. Indeed, our Sages warned us even more strongly: one may not rule halachah from the books of the Rambam without being expert in the Talmud[1], and they likewise prohibited ruling from the Shulchan Aruch without studying the Beit Yosef[2]. This is because one who has not studied the sources in the Gemara and Beit Yosef does not grasp the depth of the matter or the reasoning behind the halachah, and therefore cannot know how to apply halachic principles correctly to changing cases. Clearly, however advanced it may be, artificial intelligence can only calculate data; it cannot penetrate the depth of the matter. Even human beings do not attain the depth required to issue halachic rulings except after many years of Torah toil. Our Sages said[3] that one does not fully comprehend one’s teacher’s דעת until after forty years of study.
This second argument includes several subpoints:
- Halachah contains extremely subtle distinctions, and a minor detail can change the entire law[4]. Every law may also involve subsidiary details that require attention and are sometimes seemingly peripheral. There are even subtle nuances in halachah and its application that can only be known through constant association with Torah scholars, as Chazal said: “Serving Torah scholars is greater than studying from them”[5]. Even in the very distant future, it is unlikely that artificial intelligence can attain such precision.
- Halachah requires “comparing one matter to another”—drawing conclusions regarding matters not explicitly written, based on their similarity to others. A posek must know when to compare and when to distinguish. This is such a delicate art that Chazal[6] sharply criticized one who independently compared one case to another when he could have consulted his teacher. All the more so artificial intelligence, which is far from understanding when similarities warrant association and when they require distinction.
- Moreover, halachic reasoning often depends on a genuine “sense”—a sense that a posek acquires from the underlying spirit of the sugya, even where matters are not explicit, and which can be attained only through many years of study. At times, halachah also weighs considerations dependent on a scale of values, which is assessed not only through intellectual data but also through feeling—likewise acquired by extensive learning. Just as we understand that AI can answer questions in the exact sciences more accurately than questions in the social sciences and humanities, because the latter require a sense as well as information, so much more does AI lack the capacity to understand Torah wisdom, which demands a uniquely refined sense.
- Halachah has a concept called “the methods of ruling”: how to decide disputes and doubts in order to arrive at practical halachah. Halachic ruling is not a mathematical calculation, but the weighing of diverse data according to halachic rules. For example, where there is a dispute, one must know what constitutes a majority in stature and a majority in number; weigh the Torah greatness of the disputing poskim; determine whether greater weight should be given to the majority in stature or number; combine various factors and doubts, sometimes from entirely different areas, within one question; and consider secondary consequences of the ruling and whether other, unmentioned considerations militate against it. Only many years of study and discernment can provide all these judgments.
Above all, beyond everything stated, the truth is that Torah, including halachah, is not merely intellectual understanding, but spiritual understanding, since Torah is Divine[7], beyond talents and senses limited by physicality. Therefore Chazal said[8], “If one tells you there is wisdom among the nations, believe it; if one tells you there is Torah among the nations, do not believe it.” Thus, even a human being of exceptional talent who is not a member of the covenant cannot properly understand Torah. Certainly artificial intelligence, which does not even possess a living spirit, cannot understand at all the mode of thought of Torah and halachah, which, as noted, requires understanding of the soul and not merely intellectual understanding.
Furthermore, even among members of the covenant, success in issuing accurate rulings depends on one’s level of yirat Shamayim[9]. Torah is acquired through forty-eight qualities[10], and clearly a robot does not have fear of G-d before its eyes.
Chazal further said[11], “To establish one’s learning requires Heavenly assistance.” Mahar”i Pinto explained[12] that this means one needs siyata diShmaya to merit learning with correct understanding; the Ktav Sofer added[13] that this means arriving at the true practical halachah. In other words, Divine assistance is necessary to rule halachah, and this assistance pertains to Torah scholars, not artificial intelligence.
C. The limitations of artificial intelligence in interpreting the language of halachic sources:
There is also a limitation that may be termed a “technical problem” in AI halachic ruling. A program can locate material on websites and connect it in order to complete the “puzzle” required by a question, processing it into an answer suited to that question. However, when questions are not explicitly addressed online and must be ruled upon from the sources, there is a major language limitation. Even were it theoretically possible in the distant future for AI itself to rule from the sources—which in truth is impossible for the reasons above—halachah is based on the words of the earlier authorities, Chazal and the Rishonim. Because of their breadth of understanding, they were highly concise in expression. One must therefore always correctly interpret their words before deriving halachah from them. Only many years of learning provide the proper approach to their words. Indeed, a great part of the labor involved in halachic ruling consists of correctly understanding the earlier authorities, and this is the subject of many disputes among contemporary poskim. Moreover, each Rishon has his own linguistic style. For example, when the Rambam writes, “One should do such-and-such,” he means that it is permitted to do so[14], unlike most Rishonim, for whom such wording indicates an obligation. There are many such differences with no fixed rule; only context, understanding of the sugya, and sensitivity can illuminate the correct interpretation. Thus, if AI were to “rule halachah” from the root sources—as halachic ruling must be done, especially in matters not explicitly addressed on websites—failure would be nearly inevitable. This is particularly so since AI is programmed by non-Jews to understand the language of contemporary internet users, and leading Torah scholars will never sit down to program every possible way of understanding every form of expression used by the earlier poskim.
D. The permission to rely on a Torah scholar’s ruling, and whether this applies to artificial intelligence:
The Pri Megadim[15] considered it self-evident that the reason one may rely on a halachic authority who rules leniently is that one witness is believed regarding matters of prohibition. Accordingly, artificial intelligence, which has no status as a witness, may not be relied upon even if its ruling were correct. See the article by Rabbi David Ohayon shlit”a, a responding rabbi on this site, regarding the source of the authority to rule halachah. Although the Pri Megadim’s view is not universally accepted, it may nevertheless be joined as an additional reason to prohibit relying on artificial intelligence.
I have now also seen that in issue 39, page 39, of the journal Aspaklaria, published by the Institute for Science and Technology in Halachah, the head of the institute, Rabbi Avraham Moshe Halperin shlit”a, wrote a lengthy article on this matter and reaches the same conclusion presented here. See there.
Related Topics:
- Is it appropriate to say “thank you” to artificial intelligence?
- Kashrut of a cola beverage produced by artificial intelligence
Sources:
[1] Responsa Rivash, end of siman 44.
[2] Maharsha, Sotah 22a, who wrote severe words on this matter: those who rule from the Shulchan Aruch without studying the Beit Yosef are “destroyers of the world.” Maran Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef, of blessed and holy memory, frequently repeated the Maharsha’s warning and cited it in Responsa Yabia Omer, vol. 9, Yoreh De’ah, siman 27, end of section 2, and in many other places.
[3] Avodah Zarah 5b.
[4] As is known and evident to all who study the Gemara and poskim in depth. This matter is discussed at length in Sha’ar Nogah (Lissa, 1819), 57b.
[5] Berachot 7b.
[6] Yevamot 109b, concerning one who “thrusts himself into a matter of halachah”; see Rashi there.
[7] We elaborated on this, with Hashem’s help, in my small work Chazor VeShoshan on Chanukah, essay 7.
[8] Midrash Eichah Rabbah 2:13.
[9] For “the beginning of wisdom is fear of Hashem” (Tehillim 111:10). According to the size of one’s storehouse of yirat Shamayim, so may one be filled with wisdom; see Shabbat 31a and Rashi there, based on the verse “the fear of Hashem is His treasure.” See also Avot 3:11 and Nefesh HaChaim, Sha’ar 4, chapter 4, at length.
[10] Avot 6:5.
[11] Megillah 6b.
[12] On Ein Yaakov there. Rashi offers another explanation.
[13] In a letter printed in Otzarot HaSofer, vol. 27, p. 12.
[14] As we wrote elsewhere on this matter.
[15] In the general introduction at the beginning of Orach Chaim, in the section on the conduct of one asking and one answering questions of issur veheter, order 1, letter 4.
This response was translated automatically from Hebrew and has not yet been reviewed by a person. Therefore, it may contain inaccuracies and should not be considered a definitive reference.
