Note: Although the concept of cyberspace is clear to many and its jurisprudential issues have been the subject of scholarly discussion for years, does this imply the existence of a distinct jurisprudential chapter called “Jurisprudence of Cyberspace”? In other words, does the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace encompass enough issues to constitute a standalone jurisprudential chapter? Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mohammad Reza Mahmoudi, a faculty member at the Qom Mahallati College and a researcher in the jurisprudence of media and cyberspace, raises a more fundamental issue. He considers the term “cyberspace” itself to be incorrect and, consequently, rejects anything derived from it, such as the “Jurisprudence of Cyberspace.” However, beyond the issue of terminology, he addresses various topics under the umbrella of the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace, which, in his view, does not constitute an independent jurisprudential chapter. The full text of this exclusive interview follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace, and what topics does it address?

Mahmoudi: The Jurisprudence of Cyberspace is one of the applied branches of jurisprudence that examines the religious rulings related to cyberspace and modern communication and information technologies. A key point here is the issue of naming cyberspace. It seems that this terminology is incorrect. When we discuss the jurisprudential topic of cyberspace, we place it within a scientific classification, whereas this title is flawed. If the naming is incorrect, the subsequent categorizations will also be erroneous. We do not have something called “cyberspace.” One of the issues causing confusion in concepts such as cyberspace, media, and other related domains is precisely this matter. The main divider and correct title for this discussion is “cyberspace.”

Unfortunately, in our country, this issue has received little attention and requires scientific scrutiny. In English-language sources, there is a clear definition of cyberspace, but in Persian sources, this concept has oddly been limited to the electronic cyber domain and technical infrastructure. If this definition is corrected, many other discussions will also be properly clarified.

For example, the overlap between cyberspace and media, the difference between the metaverse and artificial intelligence, and other similar concepts stem from the lack of a proper definition of this space. When we treat a component that is a subset of other sections as the main divider, we encounter confusion. Fundamentally, the term “cyberspace” is also an incorrect word for understanding and describing this space.

However, based on the framework you have presented, if we proceed, the core essence of the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace is to derive religious rulings and examine the issues of this domain using jurisprudential sources.

The jurisprudential topics of cyberspace are highly diverse and can be divided into several categories:

A. Worship-Related Rulings: Some topics related to cyberspace fall under worship-related rulings, such as sighting the crescent moon through virtual tools and fulfilling vows in cyberspace.

B. Transactional Rulings: Cyberspace is extensively involved in transactions and has now surpassed physical transactions in scope. Examples include transactions involving cryptocurrencies, electronic contracts, online banking, online purchases and sales, stock markets, and network marketing.

C. Criminal Rulings: These include cybercrimes such as online theft, fraud, spreading falsehoods, defamation, and violation of individuals’ dignity.

D. Family-Related Rulings: These cover issues like marriage and divorce in cyberspace, spousal relationships on social media, intellectual property rights, copyright, and intangible property in cyberspace.

E. Political and Social Rulings: These include freedom of expression in cyberspace, enjoining good and forbidding evil in cyberspace, virtual jihad, privacy, and ethics in cyberspace.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace an independent jurisprudential chapter, or is it a collection of issues from several jurisprudential chapters or newly emerged issues from certain chapters?

Mahmoudi: The Jurisprudence of Cyberspace cannot be considered a fully independent chapter. Some of its issues may be new, such as virtual jihad, but most of its topics have been addressed in other jurisprudential chapters and have merely found new manifestations in cyberspace. Therefore, this jurisprudence is a collection of various topics in a newly emerged framework.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the most important assumptions and foundations of the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace?

Mahmoudi: The Jurisprudence of Cyberspace follows the same foundations and assumptions as conventional jurisprudence, such as the four sources of evidence (Quran, Sunnah, consensus, and reason), and it does not have specific foundations or assumptions of its own.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace have its own specific jurisprudential rules? If so, what are these rules?

Mahmoudi: General jurisprudential rules such as La Darar (no harm), Nafy Sabil (negation of dominion), Maslahat (public interest), and Preservation of the System are also applicable in the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace. However, the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace does not have exclusive or specific rules of its own. Jurisprudential rules are determined based on Quranic verses and narrations, and cyberspace merely presents new manifestations of these rules.

Nevertheless, some jurisprudential rules have greater application in cyberspace, including:

• The rule of Nafy Sabil (preventing the dominance of non-Muslims over Muslims).

• The rule of La Darar (avoiding harm to others).

• The rule of Ghurur and Itlaf (responsibility for deception and destruction of others’ rights).

One of the significant issues in this regard is AI-based chatbots, which may strengthen the intellectual and scientific dominance of non-Muslims over Muslim societies.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is the difference between the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace and similar jurisprudential chapters, such as the Jurisprudence of Media, Jurisprudence of Art, and Jurisprudence of Computer Games? Are there issues in the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace that completely overlap with these other chapters? If so, in which of these jurisprudential chapters do these issues belong?

Mahmoudi: The Jurisprudence of Cyberspace has a relationship of general and specific correlation with the Jurisprudence of Media, Jurisprudence of Art, and Jurisprudence of Computer Games. The Jurisprudence of Media encompasses traditional media (such as print, radio, and television) and digital media. The Jurisprudence of Art addresses issues related to artistic productions in cyberspace. The Jurisprudence of Computer Games falls entirely under the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace. In some topics, there is overlap between these chapters, but the Jurisprudence of Cyberspace covers a broader range of issues. The Jurisprudence of Cyberspace is a newly emerged field that requires special attention from Islamic jurists and scholars. In this domain, in addition to individual issues, the dimension of governance and policymaking holds particular significance. Jurisprudential research in this field must be pursued with a deep and multidimensional perspective to address the religious and social challenges of this domain.