keel is not a fatwa engine — the governance boundary, in one post

[eaitbrahim]

The one-sentence version, also on the README's first screen:

keel is not a fatwa engine. It is an enforcement engine for a ruling you supply.

What that means in practice:

• keel never derives a Shariah classification from market data. You record one — with a source and your name on it (keel assets attest --source ... --attested-by ...) — and keel enforces what was recorded, deterministically, rejecting anything unattested.
• The ruling lives in your attestation, not in the code. Two operators following different schools get different answers from the same codebase, by design, and neither is wrong.
• For contributors, this splits pull requests in two (see CONTRIBUTING.md, "Governance: rulings vs. machinery"): a PR changing a default classification is a ruling in code's clothing — it needs a cited source and discussion before review. A PR changing the mechanism is ordinary engineering.
• If you disagree with a classification, do not litigate it in a pull request. Attest your ruling locally and run the engine under it. The project does not adjudicate fiqh and will not become a court with a merge button.

Questions about how a ruling should be recorded and enforced — and what others have attested — belong in the Compliance & classification category. Disparaging a madhhab, a school, or another contributor's practice belongs nowhere; see the CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md note on religious disagreement.