So apparently a Danish author had trouble getting artist to make cover works for his new book, because the artists were afraid some Muslim would come and do a van Gogh on them. So a Danish newspaper challenged Danish artists to send in depictions of Mohammed to them so they could publish them. Not that that the results were much good.. So the newspaper and the artists had to hear no end of whining and bickering from Muslims, including a number of death threats. And now, for the first time since 1945, had to hire bodyguards to protect the newspaper.
But now I see that not only have Muslims themselves for ages been depicting Mohammed.
But a Danish (Palestinian) politician says it’s only Sunni Muslims which have a problem with depictions of Mohammed, and Shia Muslims are absolutely ok with it. And that since Mohammed isn’t a God, it shouldn’t be a problem anyway.
So what is it? Can you depict Mohammed or not? And why are Muslims not crying for burning down Tehran Library and Cairo Museums if it is so bad?
Hey, don’t knock those drawings. They’re pretty good.
Incidentally, I heard that Muslims were not supposed to draw humans in general. Or is that just Sunnis? Maybe someone could address this related question as well :3
Muslims aren’t supposed to drink alcohol, either, but Omar Khayyam is best known for the verse:
“A Loaf of Bread, a Jug of Wine, and Thou
Beside me in the Wilderness’
Is Paradise Enow”
(forgive my quoting Fitzgerald’s translatyion from memory)
Surprise – Muslims are people, too, and in the course of some 1300 years of existence across a broad swath of the world some have been more liberal and others much stricter in their interpretation of things. Although there is, in general, a prohibition on depicting people or animals that derives from a strict reading of the Ten Commandments, some have relaxed this tyo the point where what we could call “schematic” representations are alowed, others have had no problems with depictions of animals, as long as no people, and others go so far as t allow people, as long as the Prophet wasn’t shown. Others would allow depictions of Mohammed, as long as his face was veiled. And an awful lot aren’t comfortable with any depictions at all, which is why Muslims are so big on tesselation, calligraphy, and abstract geometrical patterns.
Which doesn’t really tell me anything does it. Yes yes. People are different, and some people do some things other people do not. What I’m asking is that if there today in general (if not universal) is a prohibition amongst Sunni Muslims against depictions of Mohammed. And if there is a difference between how the Shia Muslims (generally) look upon it and how the Sunni (generally) see it.
And if (Sunni) Muslims look upon depictions of Mohammed with such disgust why aren’t they trying to burn those which are, and have been for centuries, on public display in the Muslim world - instead of getting their Burqa all in a twist over some Danish depictions of Mohammed.
For what it’s worth, it’s not just that the depictions are no good, it’s that many of them are deliberately racist and offensive. If I were a Muslim, I’d be pissed, too.
An expert on Islam I’m not, but I’bve never heard that there was a Sunni/Shi’ite split over depictions of The Prophet. I wlould, in fact, have supposed that the majority of people in both groups were against such depictions.
I note that when the movie mohammed, Messenger of God opened many years back, it carefully avoidsed any depictions of the title character – or even his shadow. Yet its showing in the US was halted by actions taken by Hanafi Muslims.
To be honest, that’s what I was brought up to believe – one never draws/depicts the face of Muhammad. I’m not entirely certain why however, since the same prohibition doesn’t apply to other prophets such as Moses and Jesus who are seen as just as important/holy as Muhammad.
As for never depicting humans/animals, certainly its not allowed in mosques or the Koran, but in other situations, its OK.
Long before Muhammad was born, Jews were forbidden to depict God in any way, because any picture, statue or other image of God seemed to be a first step down the slope toward idolatry.
Now, Islam is strongly rooted in Judaism, and Muhammad made Mosaic law a cornerstone of his own teachings. So, he taught that no one should create any images of Allah. But since Muhammad himself was only a human being, and never claimed to be anything else, he never forbade portrayals or depictions of himself.
Still, I think his followers, over the years, have taken his ban on portrayals of Allah and (unnecessarily) expanded it to include portrayals of Muhammad.
Hey Sal. No need to feel left out. Everybody can find something to be pissed at if they look hard enough. If you’re a Christian I can recommend this guy Gerhard Haderer He got sentenced two years for blasphemy depicting Jesus. That’ll teach him.
I would think that the splits on interpretations of what’s haram (forbidden) would extend to the specific readings of the Quran and hadith given the particular scholars of each sect, in smaller subcategories than Shi’a/Sunni. It’s very hard to make statements beyond great generalities at that level; one might as well ask “What do Protestants believe about…?”
On the whole I think it’s safe to say that very few Muslims living now belong to sects which would approve of depictions of Mohammed, a fair amount of people and small amounts even of animals, to the point where some rugs are produced in North Africa depicting animals through a geometric shorthand.
At a practical level I imagine that the number of Muslims who don’t own objects with some sort of depictions of people in their homes is quite small.
I do not think this is true. I understand they are revered figures, but I have never heard the “just as important as Muhammad” part, and have heard the opposite (Muhammad is the last/most important prophet).
Can’t answer your second part as I don’t know much about Shi’a, but yes, there is a general prohibition among Sunnis against making images of any human being.
Some of them would indeed like to destroy those images. However, generally speaking, it’s a prohibition on creating or possessing these images, not a commandment to scour the earth looking for images to destroy. I suspect that those doing the threatening in this case are just using the image as a pretext to rabble-rouse (although, I could almost have sympathy for them, as that is such a horrible picture of Muhammad).
I don’t think you can even say that. While the famed Mughal miniatures originated as a Persian art form, it was widely adopted and patronized by the predominantly Sunni Mughal court. Or on the opposite end of the Muslim world, the 14th century paintings of Nasrid kings in the Alhambra. You even find paintings depicting people from 9th century Abbasid Samarra ( nudes, no less ).
In general it comes down to just how strict you are ( as a Muslim ) in your interpretations. Idolatry is strictly forbidden and for some human representations in art presented an unacceptable slippery slope. But for others, as long as the images weren’t meant as a focal point of worship, they were just jim-dandy.
Muhammad is the last prophet yes. He is called the Seal of the Prophets, because he is the last of the Prophets, and was the bearer of the final message. However, rom what I was taught, as a child in the Muslim equivalent of Sunday School, and from what I’ve gleaned from my own reading, is that the founders of the Abrahamic religions (Moses, Jesus, Mohammad) are accorded a special status, precisely because they were the ones that were chosen to bring God’s message to the people in such a way as to found Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
“Here with a Loaf of Bread beneath the Bough,
A Flask of Wine, a Book of Verse—and Thou
Beside me singing in the Wilderness—
And Wilderness is Paradise enow.”
(First Edition. Fifth is a little different.)
Good old Omar. He bangs on about the joys of getting nicely sloshed for oh so many more verses.
Actually, there is a school of thought that suggests that alcohol per say is not prohibited, but rather becoming intoxicated and losing control of one’s faculties is what is forbidden.
So, pictures of Mohammed, people and animals are forbidden, correct?
How about flowers?
I’m asking because a [Dutch] Kindergarten teacher, working at an Islamic school [yes, she wore the hajib] made her students draw pictures of the first spring flowers and taped them to the wall.
When the principal of the school came into the classroom he tore the pictures off the wall and ripped them apart.
Is there any reason why little children are not allowed to draw a tulip?
As I said, it’s a general prohibition, which doesn’t mean it’s always followed. Alcohol is definitely prohibited, but you’d never know it watching the behavior of some Pakistanis I know.
).
