Rejoinder to “A Dialogue with Mr Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi: Islam, AI, and the Quest for Spiritual Depth”

By Naseer Ahmed, New Age Islam 19 May 2025 The recent article recounting a dialogue between Mr. Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi and Mr. Ghulam Rasool Dehlviattempts to contrast the use of modern technology, particularly Artificial Intelligence, with the spiritual traditions of Islam, especially as embodied by the Ṣūfiyāʾ (Sufi saints). While the concern for preserving the soul and sincerity of religious engagement is commendable, the framing of the argument is riddled with romanticised idealism, historical amnesia, and false binaries that ultimately undermine the depth and complexity of the discussion. False Dichotomy: Heart vs. Intellect The central premise of the article rests on an oversimplified and, frankly, misleading dichotomy: that one must choose between either a "spiritual, heartfelt" approach to Islam or a "mechanical, intellectual" one. This is a classic false binary. The Qur’an consistently appeals to both the heart and the intellect—afala ta'qilūn (Will you not reason?) is repeated throughout the Book. Reflection (tadabbur), reasoning (ʿaql), and knowledge (Ilm) are elevated alongside sincerity (Ikhlas), humility, and reverence. To suggest that technological tools like AI inherently promote a cold, soulless engagement with Islam is to misunderstand both the nature of technology and the integrative spirit of Islamic epistemology. Historical Romanticism and Selective Memory The article idealises the Ṣūfiyāʾ as figures wholly detached from intellectual pride or sectarianism. While many undoubtedly exemplified humility and piety, the historical record is far more nuanced. The Muslim world has long been plagued by theological schisms, sectarian hostility, and internecine polemics—often perpetuated, or at least unchallenged, by spiritual leaders. The romantic claim that the Ṣūfiyāʾ were somehow immune to arrogance, or that the existence of sectarian strife is irrelevant to this discussion, reflects a highly selective historical memory. If these revered figures had indeed transcended pride and malice, Islam would not have fractured into mutually anathematising sects. This cognitive dissonance goes unaddressed. Misplaced Critique of AI and Modern Tools The critique of AI is not only vague but also misplaced. Artificial Intelligence is a tool—neither inherently virtuous nor malicious. Its utility depends entirely on the intent and insight of its user. To compare the limitations of AI to the soullessness of contemporary religious discourse is a category error. AI is not replacing the heart; it is expanding the mind’s reach. It can assist in Qur’anic concordance searches, intertextual analysis, historical mapping of Tafasir, and even in detecting internal thematic coherence—tasks previously confined to a few elite scholars. To dismiss this as “copy-pasting” or “soulless engineering” is to confuse the medium with the motive. Indeed, many so-called “traditional” scholars have used the Quran itself as a rhetorical instrument, selectively quoting verses out of context to justify sectarian animosity, male dominance, or violence. The problem has never been with tools—whether the printing press, the translation of the Quran, the internet, or now AI—but with those who fear the erosion of their authority. Historically, the very people who now invoke spiritual purity once opposed the printing of the Quran, translations in vernacular languages, and digital access to Islamic texts. Their unease today with AI, like before, is more about losing epistemic monopoly than preserving spirituality. The Real Issue: Knowledge vs. Control The undercurrent of the article reveals a deeper anxiety, not about spirituality, but about power. As lay Muslims gain access to religious texts and scholarly works through technology, the intermediary role of traditional gatekeepers is being questioned. Mureeds are no longer beholden to Murshads who refuse to explain, clarify, or even admit fallibility. This democratisation of knowledge threatens the clerical status quo. The veneer of piety cannot mask the theological bigotry that many religious authorities have historically tolerated or, worse, promoted. It is not AI that “distorts” Islam; it is those who, in the name of “spiritual tradition,” never raised their voice against dehumanising doctrines, sectarian takfīr, or the vilification of non-Muslims. Such silence—especially from those who claim moral and spiritual insight—is far more spiritually hollow than any machine-generated analysis. On Iblīs and the Perils of Arrogance The use of the Iblīs narrative to caution against knowledge without humility is apt but misapplied. The real lesson from Iblīs is not a critique of reasoning but of pride and disobedience. His arrogance stemmed not from knowledge but from a false sense of superiority. If anything, this narrative underlines the danger of assuming one’s closeness to the Divine exempts one from scrutiny—a temptation that afflicts both scholars and spiritual leaders. One could just as easily argue that blind traditionalism, which discourages inquiry and suppresses dissent, is closer to Iblīs’ attitude than is humble exploration—even via AI. Conclusion: Not Soul vs. Software—But Soul with Software Rather than pitting spirituality against technology, we must reframe the question: How can we use technology with spiritual integrity? A spiritually grounded mind is not afraid of tools; it uses them responsibly. Islam is not a set of poetic metaphors to be “pressed close to the chest.” It is also a rational framework, a moral compass, and a call to justice—each of which benefits from analytical clarity. To invoke the Ṣūfiyāʾ as examples of pure-hearted devotion while ignoring the structures of exclusion, doctrinal intolerance, and social control that many of them upheld—or at least left unchallenged—is intellectually disingenuous. The quest for spiritual depth is real. But so is the demand for intellectual honesty and moral courage. In this new age, the real challenge is not AI replacing the heart, but whether those who speak of the heart are willing to answer the mind. ---- A frequent contributor to NewAgeIslam.com, Naseer Ahmed is an Engineering graduate from IIT Kanpur and is an independent IT consultant after having served in both the Public and Private sector in responsible positions for over three decades. He has spent years studying Quran in-depth and made seminal contributions to its interpretation. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/interview/rejoinder-dialogue-rasool-dehlvi-ai-spiritual-depth/d/135577 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism