Award Drawing Competition
Edip Yuksel
Purpose: To remind people that Muhammad was not an angel or a
superman, but was a human like us.
Tool: Pencil and/or black ink pen and paper. No color.
Dimension: Book size (between 5 x 6 to 6 x 8 )
Award: The winner receives $188 for transferring all of the
publication rights for the portrait.
Deadline: November 20th, 2004
Expectation: The ideal portrait would be an illustration of Muhammad
including his head, shoulder, and partial chest. He should be
portrayed as approximately forty years old, a charismatic leader, sun
tanned, long-haired, with an open head and a slight smile.
Organization: www.19.org.
Submission: Via email attachment. If original work mailed, it will not
be returned.
Contact: Edip Yuksel, edipy...@yahoo.com
P.S. You may post this notice to any forum and share it with anyone.
1MAN4ALL
Please do not do this. As you know already, for Muslims, ideas not
images are important. And false images are worse than no images. If
you believe that prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) was not "superhuman" why
make his picture which may not look anything like him? Why not just
publish some of his sayings taken from the Hadith, if you do believe
in them? Your organization is already very controversial, why make it
even more so? Or, like Salman Rushdie, are you trying to become even
more controversial in order to gain love and sympathy from Westerners
who just love to see Muslims or former Muslims doing or saying things
that are against Islam?
XpatriotgamesX
>From: fora...@hotmail.com (1MAN4ALL)
>Date: 9/30/2004 3:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <ba13f877.04093...@posting.google.com>
Sounds like a veiled threat to me. Sorry you're against this concept called
freedom of expression. It's one of those things you have to put up with when
you live in a democratic country. That's why Muslims are allowed to call Jews
and Christians pigs and dogs.
Edip Yuksel
I have thought well on this issue and I know very well what I am
doing. The illustration competition will have some surprise
consequences and ramifications. I think, that many of those
monotheists who criticize me now, then will be happy. The confusion
and surprise of the mushrik Sunnies will be multiplied by nineteen:)
I will not unveil the surprises embedded in this illustration
competition at least for several months. Even if you think that you
have discovered the surprise you might be still unaware of the
ultimate one. But, here I would like to briefly express the several
related arguments that will further expose the contradictory and
hypocritical nature of Sunny teachings. For instance the following
will be challenged.
1. Their traditional reason against depiction of animated objects, or
human face: fear of idolization of those who are depicted in
illustrations.
2. Their "authentic" hadith regarding vision of Muhammad in dreams.
That anyone who sees Muhammad in his or her dream would be actually
seeing him since according to the hadith devil cannot imitate his
vision. What if the illustration is based on such a dream?!
3. Their hypocrisy or double standard by not reacting to pictures,
sculptures, and statues of other prophets, such as Jesus.
4. Their hypocrisy in their idolworship. They, put Muhammad's name
next to God in Shahadah, while the Quran mentions La ilahe illallah
(there is no god, but the God) thirty times without adding Muhammad's
name to it, and the only Shahadah containing Muhammad's name is
attributed to hypocrites (63:1). In contradiction to the Quranic
injunction (72:18), they place Muhammad's name and the names of early
leaders next to God in places of worship. They promote Muhammad beyond
messengership and make him a partner with God in issuing and defining
islam (7:29; 16:52; 39:2-114, 42:21, 98:5) .... According to the Quran
there is no difference between associating a NAME to God or
worshipping a picture (53:23). (During Muhammad's time Meccan mushriks
did not worship statues as claimed by fabricated hadith. They believed
in intercession of angels and holy people.)
No one will worship the upcoming illustration if they were already not
ignorant idolworshipers. Since people worshiping Jesus should not stop
us mentioning his name or drawing an imaginary illustration of him,
similarly people worshipping Muhammad's NAME should not stop us
mentioning his name or drawing his picture. As we learn from the
Quran, prophet Solomon had pictures, statues and sculptures in his
mansion (34:13).
Interestingly, months after my posting about our project of producing
an animation film telling the struggle and message of Muhammad, the
Turkish media started discussing the issue of illustrating Muhammad.
The issue has instantly become controversial. I am invited to
participate in TV debates and newspaper interviews... So, it will
inshallah provide us with another opportunity to deliver the message
of the Quran.
Again, there will be a surprise with the picture.
Peace,
Edip Yuksel
www.yuksel.org
www.19.org
1MAN4ALL
> Illustration of Prophet Muhammad will have some surpises
>
> I have thought well on this issue and I know very well what I am
> doing. The illustration competition will have some surprise
> consequences and ramifications. I think, that many of those
> monotheists who criticize me now, then will be happy. The confusion
> and surprise of the mushrik Sunnies will be multiplied by nineteen:)
Let me give you a 19-letter response to what you are doing: Cheap
publicity stunt.
> I will not unveil the surprises embedded in this illustration
> competition at least for several months. Even if you think that you
> have discovered the surprise you might be still unaware of the
> ultimate one. But, here I would like to briefly express the several
> related arguments that will further expose the contradictory and
> hypocritical nature of Sunny teachings. For instance the following
> will be challenged.
The word is "Sunni" not "Sunny." We do have a sunny temperament but
that's not what we want to be called by. In fact, I am perfectly happy
just being called a "Muslim."
> 1. Their traditional reason against depiction of animated objects, or
> human face: fear of idolization of those who are depicted in
> illustrations.
Not a problem for most Sunnis nowadays, but they do discourage
pictures of Prophets of God, as nobody knows what they looked like.
Muslims don't want to create false impressions and have so far avoided
the kind controversies that have plagued Christianity.
> 2. Their "authentic" hadith regarding vision of Muhammad in dreams.
> That anyone who sees Muhammad in his or her dream would be actually
> seeing him since according to the hadith devil cannot imitate his
> vision. What if the illustration is based on such a dream?!
There are several flaws in your argument:
1. If someone claims that he saw Allah in a dream, should he be
allowed to draw that picture as well? Where do you draw the line?
2. Having a dream_ which may all be symbolic_ is very different than
illustrating something that can create false impressions in the minds
of other people.
3. Your 'competition' is open to all people, not just those who may
have seen the Prophet in a dream. Using your own logic, shouldn't a
person who had a dream and can present a more 'accurate' picture win
the competition?
4. I do know a few things about dream interpretation, and a dream of
Prophet Muhammad simply means that you should trust your judgment. Why
should that become an illustration?
5. If you believe in the hadith that the "devil cannot imitate his
vision" then you should also believe the hadith where the Prophet
forbade people to draw his picture. You can't have it both ways,
unless of course you argue that one hadith is more accurate than the
other.
> 3. Their hypocrisy or double standard by not reacting to pictures,
> sculptures, and statues of other prophets, such as Jesus.
There is no hypocrisy. In most countries, Muslims are discouraged from
drawing pictures of other prophets. But since many Christians do use
icons in their churches, Muslims simply tolerate it.
> 4. Their hypocrisy in their idolworship. They, put Muhammad's name
> next to God in Shahadah, while the Quran mentions La ilahe illallah
> (there is no god, but the God) thirty times without adding Muhammad's
> name to it, and the only Shahadah containing Muhammad's name is
> attributed to hypocrites (63:1). In contradiction to the Quranic
> injunction (72:18), they place Muhammad's name and the names of early
> leaders next to God in places of worship. They promote Muhammad beyond
> messengership and make him a partner with God in issuing and defining
> islam (7:29; 16:52; 39:2-114, 42:21, 98:5) .... According to the Quran
> there is no difference between associating a NAME to God or
> worshipping a picture (53:23). (During Muhammad's time Meccan mushriks
> did not worship statues as claimed by fabricated hadith. They believed
> in intercession of angels and holy people.)
I never understood your objection that one shouldn't say
"muhammad-ar-rasul-allah." Do you believe that Prophet Muhammad was a
Prophet? If the answer is yes, then you should not have any problem in
saying that. If you don't then you shouldn't be saying the 'shahada'
in the first place! The phrase "muhammad-ar-rasul-allah" is taken
directly from the Quran, verse 48:29. So if you are a Muslim, why
should you hesitate in saying it?
Are you trying to make Islam into plain monotheism in order to bring
more non-Muslims unto the fold of Islam? If that is the case, I think
you are sadly mistaken. People are very clever and they are not
impressed by lowest-common-denominator religions. That's like selling
a generic car; it won't sell.
Regarding verse 6:31, the following verses disprove your own point!
[63.1] When the hypocrites come to you, they say: We bear witness that
you are most surely Allah's Apostle; and Allah knows that you are most
surely His Apostle, and Allah bears witness that the hypocrites are
surely liars.
[63.2] They make their oaths a shelter, and thus turn away from
Allah's way; surely evil is that which they do.
[63.3] That is because they believe, then disbelieve, so a seal is set
upon their hearts so that they do not understand.
[63.4] And when you see them, their persons will please you, and If
they speak, you will listen to their speech; (they are) as if they
were big pieces of wood clad with garments; they think every cry to be
against them. They are the enemy, therefore beware of them; may Allah
destroy them, whence are they turned back?
The verse does not mean that anybody who says, "We bear witness that
you are most surely Allah's Apostle," is a hypocrite. As the following
verses clearly state, it means that LIKE OTHER MUSLIMS, the hypocrites
do bear witness but "THEN TURN AWAY FROM ALLAH'S WAY."
I think you are having a reading comprehension problem.
Verse [72.18] says, "And that the mosques are Allah's, therefore call
not upon any one with Allah." I don't think any Sunni is 'calling' on
Prophet Muhammad, and if he is, he is committing 'shirk.' Prophet
Muhammad's name is obviously mentioned in the Quran, so it is natural
that when one is reciting the Quran, his name would come up.
Regarding Prophet's name in mosques, I don't have any problem with it
if it's there as a calligraphic element. But if it's there for the
purpose of worship, then it's 'kufr'. I think what we are discussing
is the 'intent', which the two us cannot judge.
Now let's look at the verse references that you have given as evidence
for not making prophet Muhammad a partner in the divinity just because
he explained Islam. Let's look at these verses:
[7.29] Say: My Lord has enjoined justice, and set upright your faces
at every time of prayer and call on Him, being sincere to Him in
obedience; as He brought you forth in the beginning, so shall you also
return.
[16.52] And whatever is in the heavens and the earth is His, and to
Him should obedience be (rendered) constantly; will you then guard
against other than (the punishment of) Allah?
[39.2] Surely We have revealed to you the Book with the truth,
therefore serve Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience.
[11.4] To Allah is your return, and He has power over all things.
[42.21] Or have they associates who have prescribed for them any
religion that Allah does not sanction? And were it not for the word of
judgment, decision would have certainly been given between them; and
surely the unjust shall have a painful punishment.
[98.5] And they were not enjoined anything except that they should
serve Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience, upright, and keep up
prayer and pay the poor-rate, and that is the right religion.
Now where in these verses does it say that Prophet Muhammad should not
explain Islam? Even a child can see that these verses do not prove
your false assertion/red herring.
On the contrary, there are plenty of verses that disprove you:
[5.19] O followers of the Book! indeed Our Apostle has come to you
explaining to you after a cessation of the (mission of the) apostles,
lest you say: There came not to us a giver of good news or a warner,
so indeed there has come to you a giver of good news and a warner; and
Allah has power over all things.
[14.4] And We did not send any apostle but with the language of his
people, so that he might explain to them clearly; then Allah makes
whom He pleases err and He guides whom He pleases and He is the
Mighty, the Wise.
[2.213] (All) people are a single nation; so Allah raised prophets as
bearers of good news and as warners, and He revealed with them the
Book with truth, that it might judge between people in that in which
they differedů [That means that the good news and warning is separate
from the Book].
[3.81] And when Allah made a covenant through the prophets: Certainly
what I have given you of Book and wisdom-- then an apostle comes to
you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you
must aid him...
[4.69] And whoever obeys Allah and the Apostle, these are with those
upon whom Allah has bestowed favors from among the prophets and the
truthful and the martyrs and the good, and a goodly company are they!
3.49] ůand I inform you of what you should eat and what you should
store in your houses; most surely there is a sign in this for you, if
you are believers.
[15.49] Inform My servants that I am the Forgiving, the Merciful,
Your last statement that Meccans didn't worship statues is untrue.
Even Herodotus states that the Arabs of his day had two gods, Orotal
and Alita. And besides Hadiths, Ibn Ishaq's "Sira" has plenty of
information on this subject. Are you suggesting that all of Islamic
literature is false?
The concept of "intercession" is a separate subject and requires
another debate.
> No one will worship the upcoming illustration if they were already not
> ignorant idolworshipers. Since people worshiping Jesus should not stop
> us mentioning his name or drawing an imaginary illustration of him,
> similarly people worshipping Muhammad's NAME should not stop us
> mentioning his name or drawing his picture. As we learn from the
> Quran, prophet Solomon had pictures, statues and sculptures in his
> mansion (34:13).
You are confusing several issues and making false analogies. The issue
of drawing ANY human or animal figures has nothing to do with drawing
pictures of Prophets of God. I am not against photography or art, but
I do think that drawing pictures of Prophets of God is wrong, as
nobody knows what they looked like and one should not create false
impressions and encourage image-worship.
> Interestingly, months after my posting about our project of producing
> an animation film telling the struggle and message of Muhammad, the
> Turkish media started discussing the issue of illustrating Muhammad.
> The issue has instantly become controversial. I am invited to
> participate in TV debates and newspaper interviews... So, it will
> inshallah provide us with another opportunity to deliver the message
> of the Quran.
As I said above, it is simply a publicity stunt. One reason we Muslims
are so far behind is that the so-called progressives and modernists
are more concerned with cheap thrills and controversies that would get
them the attention of their Western masters than with real change such
as promoting education, democracy, scientific discovery, Islamic
concepts of brotherhood and charity.
> Again, there will be a surprise with the picture.
There is nothing new under the sun:-)
Edip Yuksel
> yuk...@yuksel.org (Edip Yuksel) wrote in message news:<ea04e1d6.04100...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > Illustration of Prophet Muhammad will have some surpises
> >
> > I have thought well on this issue and I know very well what I am
> > doing. The illustration competition will have some surprise
> > consequences and ramifications. I think, that many of those
> > monotheists who criticize me now, then will be happy. The confusion
> > and surprise of the mushrik Sunnies will be multiplied by nineteen:)
>
> Let me give you a 19-letter response to what you are doing: Cheap
> publicity stunt.
Well, what is wrong with it! Did you want me to launch an expensive
publicity stunt:-) Joke aside, this is a symbolic yet important issue
and I have some other reasons that you will learn later.
> > I will not unveil the surprises embedded in this illustration
> > competition at least for several months. Even if you think that you
> > have discovered the surprise you might be still unaware of the
> > ultimate one. But, here I would like to briefly express the several
> > related arguments that will further expose the contradictory and
> > hypocritical nature of Sunny teachings. For instance the following
> > will be challenged.
>
> The word is "Sunni" not "Sunny." We do have a sunny temperament but
> that's not what we want to be called by. In fact, I am perfectly happy
> just being called a "Muslim."
Thanks for correcting the spelling error. I think I did not mention
your name in my posting. If you are a Muslim, rather than Sunni,
that's a good news. Mashallah.
> > 1. Their traditional reason against depiction of animated objects, or
> > human face: fear of idolization of those who are depicted in
> > illustrations.
>
> Not a problem for most Sunnis nowadays, but they do discourage
> pictures of Prophets of God, as nobody knows what they looked like.
> Muslims don't want to create false impressions and have so far avoided
> the kind controversies that have plagued Christianity.
Picture in general is prohibited by hadith and sunni jurisprudence. It
seems that you are not aware of the sources of sunni sects.
> > 2. Their "authentic" hadith regarding vision of Muhammad in dreams.
> > That anyone who sees Muhammad in his or her dream would be actually
> > seeing him since according to the hadith devil cannot imitate his
> > vision. What if the illustration is based on such a dream?!
>
> There are several flaws in your argument:
>
> 1. If someone claims that he saw Allah in a dream, should he be
> allowed to draw that picture as well? Where do you draw the line?
You missed my point. I do not believe such a hadith. I am just using
their own teaching against their reaction to this announcement.
Besides, even if I believed that nonsense your counter argument has no
relevancy, since the hadith limits such a thing about Muhammad, not
God.
> 2. Having a dream_ which may all be symbolic_ is very different than
> illustrating something that can create false impressions in the minds
> of other people.
Again, go and read my statements again. THEIR "authontic"...
> 3. Your 'competition' is open to all people, not just those who may
> have seen the Prophet in a dream. Using your own logic, shouldn't a
> person who had a dream and can present a more 'accurate' picture win
> the competition?
Irrelevant question for a claim that I did not make.
> 4. I do know a few things about dream interpretation, and a dream of
> Prophet Muhammad simply means that you should trust your judgment. Why
> should that become an illustration?
>
> 5. If you believe in the hadith that the "devil cannot imitate his
> vision" then you should also believe the hadith where the Prophet
> forbade people to draw his picture. You can't have it both ways,
> unless of course you argue that one hadith is more accurate than the
> other.
That's enough. It appears that you do not understand what you are
reading. Where you got the idea that I believed in hadith?
Isn't it a fact that Moses too was God messenger. In fact, this fact
is repeated in the Quran many more times than Muhammad's
messengership. Then, how many times did you uttered Moses name in your
Shahadah? Furthermore, the expression you quote from 48:29 is not a
complete statement. The correct translation is this: "God's messenger
Muhammad and those with him..." Furthermore, through juxtaposition we
might dilute and even change the meaning of a sentence. What is your
problem in not being happy with mentioning God's name alone in
Shahadah that emphasized the oneness of God? Aren't you concerned to
be challenged by 39:45?
> Are you trying to make Islam into plain monotheism in order to bring
> more non-Muslims unto the fold of Islam? If that is the case, I think
> you are sadly mistaken. People are very clever and they are not
> impressed by lowest-common-denominator religions. That's like selling
> a generic car; it won't sell.
No, that is my least concern. Besides, I think majority of people are
attracted to idolworship. That is the reason why sunni, shiite,
chatolic, hindu, ... mushriks are in billions.
> Regarding verse 6:31, the following verses disprove your own point!
>
> [63.1] When the hypocrites come to you, they say: We bear witness that
> you are most surely Allah's Apostle; and Allah knows that you are most
> surely His Apostle, and Allah bears witness that the hypocrites are
> surely liars.
>
> [63.2] They make their oaths a shelter, and thus turn away from
> Allah's way; surely evil is that which they do.
>
> [63.3] That is because they believe, then disbelieve, so a seal is set
> upon their hearts so that they do not understand.
>
> [63.4] And when you see them, their persons will please you, and If
> they speak, you will listen to their speech; (they are) as if they
> were big pieces of wood clad with garments; they think every cry to be
> against them. They are the enemy, therefore beware of them; may Allah
> destroy them, whence are they turned back?
>
> The verse does not mean that anybody who says, "We bear witness that
> you are most surely Allah's Apostle," is a hypocrite. As the following
> verses clearly state, it means that LIKE OTHER MUSLIMS, the hypocrites
> do bear witness but "THEN TURN AWAY FROM ALLAH'S WAY."
You do not get the miraculous, the prophetic language of the Quran. Is
it a coincidence that in THIRTY verses the expression of LA ILAHE
ILLALLAH is mentioned without the addition of Muhammad and the
Shahadah of believers and the knowledgeable people is described as LA
ILAHE ILLA HU alone (3:18). And the ONLY verse that refers to Muhammad
in relation SHAHADA attributes such a shahadah to hypocrites. Past
hypocrites, I admit, uttered that statement for a different reason.
Modern hypocrites utter it for another reason. Modern hypocrites, by
accepting Muhammad as the co-source of Islamic law, by hoping his
intercession, by praising him day and night, etc, in fact, BELIEVE
that Muhammad is God's partner. But, they do not utter what is in
their deep heart directly.
> I think you are having a reading comprehension problem.
Bumerang!
I do not have time to address all your sectarian dogmas. If you have
time and desire, please find the 19 Question For Muslim scholar on the
net and after reading it contact me.
Peace,
Edip