Isn’t it the most popular name in the world?
Why is, among some Muslims sects, the likeness of Muhammad considered blasphemous, but ordinary people are allowed to take his name?
More asking for opinions, really.
Off to IMHO.
I imagine it’s a way they honor him. Although making a likeness of him isn’t approved of, there is nothing about saying his name.
I am Catholic and know quite a few Marys and Josephs. Nobody named Jesus, though, but that isn’t really a thing for the people I grew up with. It is for others, though.
Because a name is different than a physical image (which has connotations of idol worship.)
It’s like asking why lemon juice is legal while LSD is not. even though they are both acids.
There sure are in Latin America.
People might worship an image of Muhammad the Prophet. But there’s little danger that they’ll start worshiping some guy down the street who happens to be named Muhammad.
Well, “Muhammed” was a name before the Prophet became the Prophet, obviously.
Arabic names always have a meaning, and at least nowadays the favorite names seem to be relatively few in number, which is one reason so many innocent people have gotten caught up in the do-not-fly list. It seems as if every other male of Arabic descent that one meets (and I’ve met a lot in my day) is named Mustafa, Sayeed, Taufik, Wahid, Adel, Abdul, Omar, Jamal, Ahmed, Rachid, or one of a few other options. Or Muhammed, which means “praiseworthy” (I guess - while I learned a bit of Arabic when I lived in Egypt I’ve forgotten virtually all of it, so I got that snippet of information from here:
Most of the SA Muslims I know are properly named either Muhammad Something or Abdul Something (those are the only two I’ve encountered), and go by that second name in daily life. So Muhammad Kashief would be Kashief, Abdul Zahir would be Zahir. Lots do go by the full or first name, but not the majority.
By the Great Horn Spoon!
There are plenty of Christophers, Christians, Kristens, Christinas, etc.
Old joke:
Q: How do we know that Jesus was Puerto Rican?
His name was Jesus!
Do you know any Emmas? Short for Emmanuelle, female form of Emmanuel aka Jesus.
Those are all derivative, though.
Within Islam, pictures of any animal are forbidden. You can make pics of plants, but not of “anything which moves by itself”. There is no ban about repeating names, though.
If Jesus is Jewish, why does he have a Mexican name?
ETA: I see someone else already gave another version of the joke.
because then name is not sacred, the view that images of prophets - any prophet including the Jesus - are forbidden comes from the aversion to the worship of idols. There is no aversion to names except a bit to giving someone the name of god, allah.
It is the verbal form of the praise, it is of the same root as Hamid or the phrase I am sure you know, al-hamdulliah (hamid allah).
**no **- the only thing that is clearly banned is the images of god. In fact there is a great although now forgotten tradition from the medieval period and the ottomans of illustrations to text, even including the prophet. But the aversion to images to avoid the potential of idol worship was very strong so the tradition grew.
That’s silly. Jesus was Jewish, of course.
He lived with his parents until he was 30. He went into his father’s business. His mother thought he was the messiah and he thought his mother was a virgin.
Isa (Jesus) is also a popular Muslim name, BTW
I don’t understand the analogy at all, personally.
The logic is still unclear: images are profane because they supposedly represent the idol, but naming millions of people after Muhammad is not worship of a different form?
We name people after those we venerate. What is the actual reasoning behind allowing millions of people to take the Prophet’s name but not depict him? The former seems, at the very least, a more omnipresent form of worship.
People have (and still do) actually worship via physical idols. In Mohammad’s time, quite a lot of people worshiped using statues that were considered to actually have divine properties and in some way to physically embody the relevant god. Idols have never really meshed well with monotheists, and they want to make really, really sure you aren’t tempted to go that way.
Nobody, on the other hand, has ever worshiped some random guy’s name.
Here you have the crux of the issue - veneration is fine, worship is not. You may think that is splitting hairs, but it really isn’t - it’s a pretty definite line drawn in the sand. Folks tend to conflate the two terms, but just ask any Catholic on the difference between venerating a saint and worshipping God :).
Know anyone named Joshua?
I’ve known plenty of Christians, Christophers, Josephs, Marys, Pauls, Simons, Peters (haven’t met a Simon that went by Peter yet though), Daniels, and a few Elijahs.