AI for Halacha
by R. Daniel Mann
Question: To what extent is it responsible and wise to use AI models for guidance or information on questions of practical Halacha?
Answer: This discussion is for those for whom AI is already part of their practical, intellectual, and/or professional lifestyle. What follows is in line with the broad consensus amongst rabbanim in our communities. Hopefully the presentation will clarify somewhat and highlight distinctions and nuances.
A futuristic possibility – Someday, machines might surpass humans in sheer memory, analysis, and application of Halacha (if they do, it will happen later than for most other intellectual endeavors). We must distinguish between halachic information and p’sak halacha. When a halacha is clearly established and a non-expert does not remember facts or know how to “connect clear dots,” the future AI will be trusted. For time immemorial, we do not ask our posek such questions, but ask a more knowledgeable acquaintance. However, when a new question or a unique dilemma including conflicting factors or personal sensitives arises, this requires a p’sak halacha. The process that the Torah describes for deciding such matters (Devarim 17:8-11) involves human talmidei chachamim, which outweighs even a divine omen (Bava Metzia 59b). There is also something to be said for siyata d’shmaya of a yarei shamayim toiling over an answer.
Current AI capabilities – As many know, while AI does certain things in the realm of Torah impressively, its level of reliable scholarship pales in comparison to even a basic-level talmid chacham. AI summarizes straightforward, basic halachic text well. (One AI model retrieved for me my positions on a variety of topics quickly and impressively.) Some of its most impressive feats are plagiarism – summarizing articles by talmidei chachamim without citing them. It can follow Talmudic and halachic logic and notice distinctions. One can get a broad, brilliant answer on a halachic question.
However, it is totally unreliable. It can “quote” non-existent sources. It can “miss” a part of the question and apply an answer in its “grasp” about a similar case; i.e., the answer is wrong for the actual case. It can give an answer based on one source it understood correctly, but fail to realize that most opinions disagree. I compare it to having an absolutely brilliant chavruta who is new to the world of Torah. When it gets something right, it can be breathtaking. However, when that lack of proper background causes it to err, it can say things that sound great but are totally off. My impression is that on “cookie-cutter” clear matters, where there is little complexity and no machloket, it usually gets things right. The chances are higher when one knows how to ask AI in the right way. Moments ago, I asked three AI models the berachot on 7 foods (quite straightforward). They all were accurate about the foods that have one correct answer. The answers for foods upon which there are machlokot differed from model to model, as did the level of accuracy.
Here is my practical summary. A talmid chacham who lacks encyclopedic knowledge, but knows how to check everything before believing anything, can, if he desires, use AI to get to opinions and approaches. He can be aided faster and sometimes more efficiently than by using a Google search to find and read articles or reading through classical sources, which he might find “the old way” or with the help of Bar Ilan Responsa, Otzar Hachochma, etc. It serves more like a halachic anthology sefer with an “automatic index” when you don’t look up the sources cited in footnotes. The researcher must avoid the danger of falling into the horrible habit of believing too much, which already exists regarding some anthology sefarim; it certainly exists for AI. To quote one AI model’s disclaimer: “XXX is AI and can make mistakes. Please double-check cited sources.”
For those who are not talmidei chachamim, using AI to get Torah information is usually highly irresponsible. (This is true for non-experts regarding other intellectual or professional fields.)
לעילוי נשמת יואל אפרים בן אברהם עוזיאל זלצמן ז”ל
I am not sure if the pessimistic state of AI Torah research applies to Rav Dicta out of Dicta: The Israel Center for Textual Semantics in Bar Ilan U, which is headed headed by Dr Moshe Koppel. (Dicta has some nice other tools, like a citation finder, a niqud adder, etc.. https://dicta.org.il/tools?lang=en
I do not know the name of the researcher(s) involved in the particular Rav Dicta project. It differs from other AI in that (1) it includes Torah texts in its training data. The language it is modeling is Torah-speak! (2) It can look up sources (“RAG” in AI parlance) with an access to the full Bar Ilan library. (3) It is agentware (think Claude, not Opus or Sonnet) that has guidelines based on Othodox (Mod-O, yeshivish and chassidish) rabbinic input. (4) It is designed to give reasoning over conclusions. If there is no one consensus, you will know.
That last one is a biggy, since you can know if the question is one that it’s okay to ask friends about, or one you should ask your rabbi.
The result is that if you ask in Hebrew, you get a result that really reads like something out of a book of teshuvos. But with a disclaimer about not relying on AI provided answers. (And if you ask in English, the English result isn’t as startlingly authentic-seeming, but it does read like a translation of a teshuvah.)
See it here at https://rav.dicta.org.il/
I am not affiliated with Bar Ilan or Dicta in any way. Just an e-friend of Dr Koppel. But I realize this would read like an ad, if they charged for the service.