A MUSLIM CAN NOT DRAW ANIMALS OR PEOPLE OR ANY LIKENESSES THEREOF
Rafiq
Many consider this a fourth or fifth issue in Islam becuase they
think its so small or almst unimportant. But, a Muslim really can't
draw animals or peoples or any likenesses thereof. If you did, and
haven't stopped or repented, on the Day of Judgement, these picture you
have drawn will be showed to you and you'll be asked "can you you
breathe life into these?". Of course you're thinking right now that hey,
when I draw, I don't mean to give life to these, I jsut do it cause its
fun; I've got a talent for it; my art teacher makes me; or you can't say
I'm bringing life to it-I'm just trying to make it realistic- UH HUH,
realistic --> LIVELY--> ALIVE!!! Give it up those who persist. I used
to be a good drawer, won many awards, but when I found out its Haram,
I gave it up immediately. BTW, BTW, BTW!!! No more of those colons
followed by parentheses. You know what I'm talking about. Those little
smilies and frowns and stuff. No more of those either. Just stop these
drawings ok.
sma...@gnn.com
Rafiq wrote:
SM wrote:
Taken from "The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam" by Yusuf Al-Qaradawi:
"As for figures drawn or printed on wood, paper, cloth, rugs and carpets,
walls, and the like, there is NO sound, explicit, and straightforward text to
PROVE that they are FORBIDDEN. True, there are sound ahadith whcih merely
indicate the Prophet's DISLIKE for such types of pictures because they are
reminiscent of those who live in luxury and love things of inferior value."
(p. 111 - emphasis mine).
You probably know the hadith about the curtain with the pictures on it. The
Prophet (phuh) asked Aisha to remove it because it would distract him from
his prayers. She simply took it down and make pillows from it. Again, from
the book: " 'What is prohibited are FIGURES which cast shadows (meaning those
which are solid) and not those which do not cast shadows (meaning on plane
surfaces)' " (p. 112 - emphasis mine)
What Rafiq wrote above, "breathe life into these" is part of this hadith, I
think. "The makers of such figures will be punished and will be told, 'Bring
to life what you have created.' He continued, 'The angels do not enter a
house in which there are figures.' " (p. 113) "In the version of Muslim
there is the addition, " 'Aisha said that she then cut it and made two
pillows to recline upon.' " (p. 113)
This hadith appears to be contradictory for many reasons, too many to post.
Perhaps anyone interested should get the book and read for him/her self.
"Probably in the early period of Islam the Prophet (pbuh) was very strict in
prohibiting all pictures, as the Muslims had only recently come out of the
state of polytheism and idol-worship, and were prone to sanctifying figures
and statues. As the belief in the Oneness of Allah became deeply rooted in
their hearts and minds, he allowed them two-dimensional figures, that is,
drawings and prints. As for himself, he disliked having curtains or drapes
with figures and pictures in his house, not exempting even drawings or prints
on cloth, paper, or the wall." (p. 115)
So, there you go. Of course if there is any doubt in your mind, then don't
draw. But from what I read, it is okay as long as it isn't a statue, etc.
Rafiq
Yeah thats great and all, but if something is so controversial, and
one is unsure one should stay away from it. You said something about
pillows? Remember when A'isha (RA) bought pillows with animals on them
and the Prophet (pbuh) saw it and did not enter the room. She asked why
and he said the angels will not enter a room-with 2 dimensional animals
on the pillows. I mean to say that either way its wrong. Can you
draw a statue shadow and all? Its the same thing. My point is this leaves
you with more questions than answers, a lot like Christianity. I'd stay
away. I mean, would you like pictures of people or animals in a mosque?
Saniman
Rafiq <rafiq...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
[some stuff deleted]
>
>Yeah thats great and all, but if something is so controversial, and
>one is unsure one should stay away from it. You said something about
>pillows? Remember when A'isha (RA) bought pillows with animals on them
>and the Prophet (pbuh) saw it and did not enter the room. She asked why
>and he said the angels will not enter a room-with 2 dimensional animals
>on the pillows. I mean to say that either way its wrong. Can you
>draw a statue shadow and all? Its the same thing. My point is this leaves
>you with more questions than answers, a lot like Christianity. I'd stay
>away. I mean, would you like pictures of people or animals in a mosque?
>
Is it really wise to stay away from something because it's controversial?
I believe that it is in the spirit of Islam to ask questions and find
answers.
If we decide to be cautious and decide against representing likenesses
then we are left with a few questions:
1. Photos? They are not drawings but they are likenesses. Must we do away
with them?
2. Movies, Documentaries, TV news ... All these would have to go too.
3. Education. eg A lot of kids books have drawings in them to help them
learn names of things. And what about medical textbooks?
4. Many other things like the police would not be able to sketch suspects
and this would help crime.
You might think this last point is no big deal. But think: Some kid is
kidnapped, someone sees the perp, he gives a description to the police, a
sketch is made and maybe someone in the public sees the creep. The guy
gets nabbed and punished. The kid is saved from whatever horrible thing
might have happened.
You'll see that this kind of art plays a very important role in society.
It is indispensable.
Jan
Syed Yusuf
Thus spake Saniman (san...@telepost.no):
drawing is an attempt at creation which God dislikes. the artists will be
among the most punised in the hereafter: they will be told to put life into
their creation but they will not be able to
q> 1. Photos? They are not drawings but they are likenesses. Must we do away
q> with them?
they are not an attempt to create
q> 2. Movies, Documentaries, TV news ... All these would have to go too.
they are not an attempt to create
q> 3. Education. eg A lot of kids books have drawings in them to help them
q> learn names of things. And what about medical textbooks?
childrens' toys are exempt
q> 4. Many other things like the police would not be able to sketch suspects
q> and this would help crime.
they are not an attempt to create either
q> You'll see that this kind of art plays a very important role in society.
q> It is indispensable.
credit cards and insurance are also indispensable. but also haraam
q> Jan
--
Syed Yusuf <yusu...@uidaho.edu> | http://www.uidaho.edu/~yusuf921
Keep me away from Wisdom that does not Cry, Philosophy that does not Laugh,
and Greatness that does not bow before Children
--Kalil Gibran
--
In God We Trust | Syed Yusuf | READ!
-Quran 67:29 | http://www.uidaho.edu/~yusuf921 | -Quran 96:1
sma...@gnn.com
[stuff about photos, movies...deleted]
Syed Yusuf wrote:
>credit cards and insurance are also indispensable. but also haraam
I *know* that this is going to open up a whole can of worms but...why are
credit cards and insurance haram? I can understand that the interest applied
to unpaid balances could be considered haram, but if one pays their credit
card balances off every billing, there is not any interest accrued, thus no
interest is being paid. I don't see in this case how a credit card can be
haram.
And insurance. What *type* of insurance is haram? Perhaps life insurance
could be considered haram, but what about dental/medical...?
I think it would be helpful when someone is saying something is "haram" to
cite reasons/references as to why that action is haram. Ever since I've been
Muslim, I and many "converts" have noticed that the word haram is thrown
around so liberally.
SM
mirza borogovac
I wonder if drawing fo pictures is forbidden by Koran. I know that Hadis is
not always reliable and that some parts of Hadis are written about 100 years
after prophets Muhameds (pbuh) death. I once heard from someone that It is not
good to whissel becouse it chases away Meleiks (angels) wich I think is
complete nonsense. Why shuld angels be anoyed by whissling and who said that
they are. this example proves that some of information someone belives in
might be from unreliable source. I wuld appreciate anybodys imput on this.
mirza
Syed Yusuf
Thus spake sma...@gnn.com:
> >credit cards and insurance are also indispensable. but also haraam
> I *know* that this is going to open up a whole can of worms but...why are
> credit cards and insurance haram?
When you sign the contract you are *agreeing* to pay reeba (interest)
It seems like you're scamming them, you only 'get into' interest if you're
payment is late BUT, are you just as willing to agree to kill your wife if
your payment is late? Of course not because no matter how small the odds are,
there is ALWAYS the possibility due to circumstances out of your control you
might miss a payment and you cannot say that once you make an agreement you
can break it because "you didn't anticipate this happening".
Credit cards wouldn't make _any_ money if everybody made their payments on
time.
> And insurance. What *type* of insurance is haram?
All. Insurance is a denial that what happens to you is from God.
secondly medical insurance seems like a good idea, pay a little and if
something happens to you you're not stuck with a devistating bill,
BUT, prices are only so high BECAUSE doctors are expecting the insurance
company to pay you're bill and not 'real people'. if there was no medical
insurance prices WOULD be 1000 times more reasonable
> Ever since I've been Muslim, I and many "converts" have noticed that the
^^^^^^^^
you can count me among them :)
> word haram is thrown around so liberally.
q> SM
--
Syed Yusuf http://www.uidaho.edu/~yusuf921
"Only a brave person is able honestly to accept, and fearlessly to face,
what a sincere and logical mind discovers." -Rodan of Alexandria
Joseph M. Emmanuel
On 10 Jul 1996 07:00:50 GMT, yusu...@goshawk.csrv.uidaho.edu (Syed Yusuf)
wrote:
In most religions, the idea of individual welfare is connected to the
welfare of the community. A society based on strong families will have
strong communities. It is the family and communities which are supposed to
protect the individual in times of hardship and need.
Present systems, have tried to replace the family and community. The
problem with such an arrangements are that greedy people will, eventually,
take advantage of others who give their savings and trust to bureaucratic
organizations. In the long run the insurance companies and banks will have
all the money and powers and the customers will have none, or little power.
There is nowhere in any religion that humanity should not be wise and
should not protect themselves against unpredicted disasters. It is how we
go about doing it which make a different. If we create strong families and
communities. If we teach people to be responsible and participate in
political endeavors, individuals will be empowered and we will not have a
society dependent on bureaucratic organizations which no longer care for
individuals.
Indeed it is a misconception by many Muslims that we should not be concern
about our welfare and should completely trust in God (EnshaAllah). It
reminds me of a the story of one of the disciples of Prophet Muhammed.
Prophet gave him His camel to look after. The camel got lost. Prophet
Muhammed asked him, what happened? He said well I trust in Allah and just
let the camel loose. Prophet MUhammed said: TRUST IN ALLAH BUT TIE THE
CAMEL AS WELL:).
EnshaAllah, does not mean not to do our best. It means to do our best and
after that trust in God's Grace and Mercy.
-Joseph (mait...@worldnet.att.net)
Unity Of All Under
One God
For more information send me an email
sma...@gnn.com
SMajdi wrote:
>>I *know* that this is going to open up a whole can of worms but...why are
Syed Yusuf wrote:
> When you sign the contract you are *agreeing* to pay reeba (interest)
>It seems like you're scamming them, you only 'get into' interest if you're
>payment is late BUT, are you just as willing to agree to kill your wife if
>your payment is late? Of course not because no matter how small the odds are,
>there is ALWAYS the possibility due to circumstances out of your control you
>might miss a payment and you cannot say that once you make an agreement you
>can break it because "you didn't anticipate this happening".
> Credit cards wouldn't make _any_ money if everybody made their payments on
>time.
SM wrote:
Okay. But what about the American Express card? The balance *has* to be paid
off every month, so I don't think they are expecting people to not pay off
their balance. Maybe that is why they charge a yearly membership fee, to make
up for lost interest payments. I don't think that a person who has a credit
card and then pays off the balance every month is "scamming" the credit card
company; the credit card company isn't Islamic, they don't understand, or
perhaps even know, the concept of "riba", so anyway. One time the payment to a
credit card was late, because the address had changed. All we had to do was
call the credit card company and the interest charged was removed. (I'm not a
man, so the "killing your wife" sentence doesn't apply).
>> And insurance. What *type* of insurance is haram?
>
>All. Insurance is a denial that what happens to you is from God.
> secondly medical insurance seems like a good idea, pay a little and if
>something happens to you you're not stuck with a devistating bill,
> BUT, prices are only so high BECAUSE doctors are expecting the insurance
>company to pay you're bill and not 'real people'. if there was no medical
>insurance prices WOULD be 1000 times more reasonable
>
I agree with you in some aspects; the insurance companies are pretty awful. For
instance, our dental ins. pays for regular cleanings and checkups. We are
paying for this coverage, so what is the harm?
Sarah Irani
Well, I'm no expert, I'm not a Muslim, but I asked a Muslim friend
about drawing people and animals. He told me that so long as you are
not trying to create something BETTER than God and so long as you
don't worship the image, it is okay to draw and paint. Now, some
Muslims will differ on this, but it just doesn't make sense to ME that
all artists will burn in Hell ONLY because they created art.
Anyway, this is what I've heard about the issue.
Sarah Irani
Syed Yusuf
I think it was either Ibn Abbas or Ali (RAA) who said if you must draw,
draw inatimate things so it seems the is a prohibition but not strict. Some
people draw, but omit the facial features. this seems good to me.
Joseph M. Emmanuel
On Thu, 11 Jul 1996 17:51:29 GMT, duo...@concentric.net (Sarah Irani)
wrote:
The idea is that the image would not become the subject of your worship.
God is formless, invisible and eternal. Any object in manifested world, if
it become the source of worshipping, will divert the attention from the
Highest form of God.
So, as far as the drawings (pictures, symbols, animals, humans, etc.) are
looked at as human creation and are not worshipped, there is no restriction
on them. Such objects, however, are prohibited in the place of worships
(such as Musques). That is why the decorations on Islamic Musques are
mostly symmetrical drawing (no animal, human or animate object). The idea,
again, is to focus on God instead of statues, paintings, pictures,
drawings, etc.
user
Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>looked at as human creation and are not worshipped, there is no restriction
>on them. Such objects, however, are prohibited in the place of worships
>(such as Musques). That is why the decorations on Islamic Musques are
>mostly symmetrical drawing (no animal, human or animate object). The idea,
>again, is to focus on God instead of statues, paintings, pictures,
>drawings, etc.
So what you are saying in effect is that other cultures who have
elaborate nature art in their religious places cannot be as effective
in their devotion and religious fervor ? Or that only nature art can
be distracting but not geometrical patterns ? Is there any basis for
any conclusions you might have drawn ?
If complete removal of distraction is the key here, why not remove ALL
forms of art (nature/geometrical/surreal whatever ..) or perhaps have
only a dark room to pray in ?
IMO, prohibition of art in muslim cultures were probably whimsical
fatwas of deranged fanatic mullahs which they somehow managed to have
established .. and the continuing subservience to these notions against
art is only further evidence that modern muslims will only attempt to
justify past notions using sophistry and faulty logic rather than have
the guts to rectify those notions.
Syed Yusuf
Thus spake sma...@gnn.com:
q> > Credit cards wouldn't make _any_ money if everybody made their payments
q> > on time.
q> SM wrote:
q> Okay. But what about the American Express card?
If you agree to pay interest for a late payment, it's riba.
> The balance *has* to be paid off every month, so I don't think they are
> expecting people to not pay off their balance.
doesn't matter. only thing that matters is if you agree to pay interest for a
late payment.
> Maybe that is why they charge a yearly membership fee, to make
> up for lost interest payments.
why burn your money like that if you can get free checking?
The credit card company isn't Islamic, they don't understand, or
perhaps even know, the concept of "riba", so anyway.
They know what it is. they just don't know/believe it's forbidden.
> (I'm not a man, so the "killing your wife" sentence doesn't apply).
wife, husband, child, mother, anyone who is dear to you. (wife was the first
concept that came to my mind) you still wouldn't agree to killing them.
> >All. Insurance (is forbidden because it ) is a denial that what happens to
> > you is from God.
> I agree with you in some aspects; the insurance companies are pretty awful. For
> instance, our dental ins. pays for regular cleanings and checkups. We are
> paying for this coverage, so what is the harm?
What is the harm in drinking alcohol? or eating pork? just because we can't
see the immediate harm doesn't mean it isn't harmful (or harmful _anymore_)
Insurance (is forbidden because it ) is a
above and beyond dening that what happens to you is from God, it artificially
inflates prices the same way riba does. ie the rich get richer because they
have money while the poor get poorer because they have to pay more than the
actual cost.
for example a
rich person buys a $50K home with cash on hand: total cost 50K
poor person buys a $50K home, they don't have 50K so they go to a bank
and borrow it with interest: total cost 50K+10K interest=60K
by letting poor people borrow to by a limited number of houses (supply vs
demand) they artificially inflate the price of the house, then the ONLY way to
buy the house is to borrow. those who have money accumulate more, while those
without suffer.
There is an hadith, there are 70 different types of riba, the _least_
offensive is the same as zina (fornication) with your own mother.
IF riba is so wrong, why even come near something which is doubtful?
Joseph M. Emmanuel
On 12 Jul 1996 17:34:57 GMT, user wrote:
>Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>looked at as human creation and are not worshipped, there is no restriction
>>on them. Such objects, however, are prohibited in the place of worships
>>(such as Musques). That is why the decorations on Islamic Musques are
>>mostly symmetrical drawing (no animal, human or animate object). The idea,
>>again, is to focus on God instead of statues, paintings, pictures,
>>drawings, etc.
>
>So what you are saying in effect is that other cultures who have
>elaborate nature art in their religious places cannot be as effective
>in their devotion and religious fervor ?
Religious fervor has nothing to do with truth of a religion. Humans are
very good in having fervor for many things which lead to destruction, wars,
etc. Are they all good (God, or from God)?
>Or that only nature art can
>be distracting but not geometrical patterns?
Geometrical patterns are used as a representation of creation. They have
much artistic value since they have been designed and drawn by great
artists. They just are not worshipped as some religions worship their
arts.
>Is there any basis for
>any conclusions you might have drawn ?
Apparently whatever conclusion I draw you would not be interested as you
have already made you mind (below) that what I am saying is fanatical and
based on some "fatwas of deranged fanatic mullahs." That tells me that
your cup is full and no matter what I poor into it, it will over flow and
you will not receive any great benefit from it.
>If complete removal of distraction is the key here, why not remove ALL
>forms of art (nature/geometrical/surreal whatever ..) or perhaps have
>only a dark room to pray in ?
Probably you will benefit greatly if you do that. The point, however, was
not to oppose art. The point was if art became the object of worship
instead of God.
>IMO,
Why did not you say IMHO? Aren't you H!
>prohibition of art in muslim cultures were probably whimsical
>fatwas of deranged fanatic mullahs which they somehow managed to have
>established .. and the continuing subservience to these notions against
>art is only further evidence that modern muslims will only attempt to
>justify past notions using sophistry and faulty logic rather than have
>the guts to rectify those notions.
Again these was nothing opposing art in my post. I guess you are looking
for anything you think you can use to attack Islam (or whatever you do not
like). It is too bad since you may have learned something instead of being
so eager to oppose that you missed the whole point!
Joseph M. Emmanuel
user
Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Geometrical patterns are used as a representation of creation. They have
>much artistic value since they have been designed and drawn by great
>artists. They just are not worshipped as some religions worship their
>arts.
Wait a minute! Who said anything about art in religious places being
worshipped. We are talking about the art on the walls, ceilings, doors
and windows, aren't we? The only art worshipped in other religions is
the *main* diety/cross whatever and not the decorative arts all over.
I find the geometrical patterns in mosques just as fascinating as the
nature arts in chruches and temples and I haven't seen the devotees
being distracted away from their prayers by these arts. Would you agree
that there should be no objection to such arts ?
>> IMO,
>Why did not you say IMHO? Aren't you H!
Not always :)
>Again these was nothing opposing art in my post. I guess you are looking
Your post disagreed with all art in places of worship as you implied they
would become the object of worship. Now, if you had meant only the art
(statue, painting whatever) that was worshipped and not the decorative
arts adorning the structures of these temples/churches, then I *humbly*
concede I jumped too soon.
PS: Some of the geometrical patterns in mosques look pretty similar
to the *natural* snow-flakes under a microscope.
Joseph M. Emmanuel
On 14 Jul 1996 21:36:33 GMT, user wrote:
>Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>Geometrical patterns are used as a representation of creation. They have
>>much artistic value since they have been designed and drawn by great
>>artists. They just are not worshipped as some religions worship their
>>arts.
>
>Wait a minute! Who said anything about art in religious places being
>worshipped. We are talking about the art on the walls, ceilings, doors
>and windows, aren't we?
I hope so:). I was just saying that it is not done in Islam. When you see
in a Catholic church people lit candle in front of statue of Christ, it
gives the appearance that you are lighting the candle for the statue
(worshiping it). Or decoration and statues in Hindu religion, etc.
>The only art worshipped in other religions is
>the *main* diety/cross whatever and not the decorative arts all over.
>I find the geometrical patterns in mosques just as fascinating as the
>nature arts in chruches and temples and I haven't seen the devotees
>being distracted away from their prayers by these arts. Would you agree
>that there should be no objection to such arts ?
No I do not:). Although I have found that it is difficult for humans to
forgo statues, pictures, ideals, etc. I believe the less images are used in
human life is the better. Even in some Islamic countries they have
pictures they claim to be of prophet Muhammed and/or Ali (His son in law).
>>> IMO,
>>Why did not you say IMHO? Aren't you H!
>
>Not always :)
:).
>>Again these was nothing opposing art in my post. I guess you are looking
>
>Your post disagreed with all art in places of worship as you implied they
>would become the object of worship. Now, if you had meant only the art
>(statue, painting whatever) that was worshipped and not the decorative
>arts adorning the structures of these temples/churches, then I *humbly*
>concede I jumped too soon.
I surely have much less objection to the decorative arts. I am absolutely
opposed to arts on the alters. And in general, as I mentioned above,
prefer as little images in human life as possible.
>PS: Some of the geometrical patterns in mosques look pretty similar
>to the *natural* snow-flakes under a microscope.
Ah, is that where they got them from:). They do don't they!
user
Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>I surely have much less objection to the decorative arts. I am absolutely
>opposed to arts on the alters. And in general, as I mentioned above,
>prefer as little images in human life as possible.
While your opposition to the worshipped images on alters is another
debate entirely and which I know is only due to your religious affiliation,
your objection to the decorative arts in places of worship seems to be
nothing more than a personal objection (to which you are of course entitled)-
since you have not yet provided any reasoning as to why you think such
objections should be universal.
Hence, I still do not comprehend why muslims abhor life-form arts ?
PS: Anyone know of a better term to refer to art imitating life forms?
Joseph M. Emmanuel
On 15 Jul 1996 17:18:24 GMT, user wrote:
>Joseph M. Emmanuel <mait...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>I surely have much less objection to the decorative arts. I am absolutely
>>opposed to arts on the alters. And in general, as I mentioned above,
>>prefer as little images in human life as possible.
>
> While your opposition to the worshipped images on alters is another
>debate entirely and which I know is only due to your religious affiliation,
>your objection to the decorative arts in places of worship seems to be
>nothing more than a personal objection (to which you are of course entitled)-
>since you have not yet provided any reasoning as to why you think such
>objections should be universal.
Fair assesment. Here is why my objetion has a deeper reason behind it. I
am not even sure that my explaition would make sense to you at all. That
was the reason I was hesitating to go farther in explaining my position.
I, however, try my best:). Here we go:
God is subtle and creation is crude. Mind takes the form of the object of
worship. The more you direct it toward the Formeless, Invisible, Nameless,
and Eternal (FINE), the more your mind (or Consciousness) will have the
shape (Quality) of the Subtle Spirit Of God. Direct the Mind towrd worldy
object, no matter how beautifull they may look, Mind will astray from the
Highest Form Of God (FINE).
That might be the reason many who seek God have adupted a simple life and
some even have left socity to go to the mountains, etc. (seculosion) that
they may be close to Him. So the least we can do, while living in society,
is to keep distracting images away from object of our worship (God, Who is
FINE).
.
>Hence, I still do not comprehend why muslims abhor life-form arts ?
Prophet Muhammed realized this and directed the Mind of His followers
toward a Fomrless, Invisible, Nameless (Allah=God), and Eternal (FINE).
Christ also knew that. He also told the woman on the well that God is
neither in the mountains, nor is He in Jerusalem. That she should worship
God in Her Spirit (FINE).
Or course as I said before, man LOVES images (pictures, etc.). Even in
MUslem countries thay have pictures they claim to be Prophet Muhammed (or
in some countries Hazrat Ali). They at least do not display them in the
center of the Musque which is supposed to be the most Holy. And they
acknowledge a God beyond any form, etc.