The Islamic prohibition against any depiction of Mohammed

[kwassa]

It is not just about the satire. It is against the religion to create an image of Mohammed.

In Islamic art, from the Sunni Arab areas, not only is there no depiction of Mohammed ever, there are no depictions of people at all. The art and decorations are either geometric designs or calligraphy. Further east, there are depictions, but sometimes show him behind a veil.

The prohibition again illustrating the Prophet Mohammed began as a attempt to ward off idol worship, which was widespread in Islam's Arabian birthplace. But in recent years, that prohibition has taken on a deadly edge.

A central tenet of Islam is that Mohammed was a man, not God, and that portraying him could lead to revering a human in lieu of Allah.

"It's all rooted in the notion of idol worship," says Akbar Ahmed, who chairs the Islamic Studies department at American University. "In Islam, the notion of God versus any depiction of God or any sacred figure is very strong."

In some ways, Islam was a reaction against Christianity, which early Muslims believed had been led astray by conceiving of Christ, not as a man but as a God. They didn't want the same thing to happen to Mohammed.

"The prophet himself was aware that if people saw his face portrayed by people, they would soon start worshiping him," Ahmed says. "So he himself spoke against such images, saying 'I'm just a man.' "

In a bitter irony, the sometimes violent attacks against portrayals of the prophet are kind of reverse idol-worship, revering -- and killing for -- the absence of an image, said Hussein Rashid, a professor of Islamic studies at Hofstra University in New York.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/07/living/islam-prophet-images/

[arcane1]

1. The standard "no graven image or any likeness" commandment that most religions ignore.

I wonder if that arose as a superstition based on Egyptian beliefs about the power of statues?

[kwassa]

3. you are correct!

Muslims are more or less unanimous on the subject of Allah—he can't be drawn under any circumstances. The prohibition on depicting God extends throughout the Judeo-Christian tradition. The Second Commandment instructs the faithful not to make "any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth." Jews have for the most part avoided visual representations of the deity, although there's been a great deal of Jewish figurative art throughout history. (Some Reform synagogues have stained-glass windows depicting figures from the Old Testament. More conservative Jews won't even write down the word "God.&quot

Christian attitudes vary widely. The Orthodox Church uses religious icons for worship: Since God became embodied in Jesus, you can represent Jesus and other holy figures. You can't draw a picture of the Lord above, though. Catholicism assigns religious imagery a more pedagogical role, interpreting the Bible to say that religious images are allowed as long as you don't worship them. That's why you'll find that white-bearded fellow on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Some Protestant traditions—like Calvinism—banned images outright. Today, you won't find much imagery in Baptist churches. Lutherans and Anglicans tend to be more accepting of religious images, believing that a picture can be used to teach an idea as long as it's not being worshipped.

Many Eastern religions make liberal use of imagery—pictures of the Buddha and of Hindu gods are particularly widespread. Some historians theorize that early Buddhists banned religious imagery: You can find ancient art that uses symbols—like a tree, a wheel, or a footprint—where a picture of the Buddha would normally go. Sikhism, which merges elements of Islam and Hinduism, prohibits the depiction of God. Sikhs do allow images of their most important spiritual figures for inspiration.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2006/02/graven_images_101.html

[longship]

69. It is "under any circumstances" which is the problem here.

And some (indeed many) who would use violence to enforce it on those who don't abide by such prohibitions.

If Islam is to be seen as a religion of peace I suggest that they all get better public outreach. Right now, they appear to have a fair share of thuggish lunatic murderers in their midst.

Over a perceived insult because somebody painted a picture?

[FrodosPet]

77. In Arabic, Islam translates to: “submission to the will of God”

Salaam ( سلام ) is the word for peace.

[on point]

2. That is for those IN the religion that want to follow it. Has no importance for anyone else.

In other words, don't force your religious nonsense on anyone else.

If you want to believe that in that private, go for it, but don't expect anyone else to support it.

[kwassa]

8. I could see how this would be seen as a desecration by those who believe it as wrong.

After all, it is their religion, and an outsider creating the image in the first place would be construed as an insult.

disclaimer: this is in no way an attempt to justify these murders by these fanatics. It is simply an attempt to point out the cultural and religious differences in perception.

[melman]

13. But they don't get to decide for everybody else

How hard is that to get?

[kwassa]

20. I know. I am merely pointing out a point of conflict I haven't seen mentioned yet.

from my standpoint as an art teacher. This is a conflict of cultures, and it is worth knowing how the other side thinks.

[WinkyDink]

36. OFGS, WE ALL KNOW WHAT MUSLIMS THINK. And the U.S. Bill of Rights ain't on their list.

[uppityperson]

59. And how, pray tell so "MUSLIMS THINK"? Those I know believe in the US Bill of Rights. Have you a

clue how bigoted that statement is, that "WE ALL KNOW WHAT MUSLIMS THINK"? As if there is one way "they" think?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

70. I think there's an OP discussing that.

[FrodosPet]

78. And I have a tea party cousin who brags about his mixed race grandchild

So the Tea party doesn't have racists.

Is it something like that?

[JustAnotherGen]

76. Thank you kwassa

[on point]

24. That's their personal problem. They need to learn about the enlightenment.

Time for them to learn about the modern world.

[WhiteAndNerdy]

71. This is the bottom line.

These attacks against cartoonists and other people who say things that Muslims don't approve of are nothing more or less than an attempt to force ALL of us to live by their rules. It could almost be said to be a sneaky kind of forced conversion. Other people can cower and make concessions if they want, but "as for me and my house," AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.

[Nye Bevan]

4. And I have a feeling that the image below would be prohibited by the Catholic religion.

As blaspheming the Holy Trinity, or something.



So what?

[arcane1]

9. Exactly. Catholics don't take the commandments nearly as seriously.

And that's a good thing

[Fred Sanders]

19. Except for the commandment against same sex sex, that they take seriously.

Oh, and no women priests, very seriously.

Seriously?

[arcane1]

23. Funny how that works, isn't it?

[WinkyDink]

31. Do you know what a "commandment" is, as opposed to church teachings? (Hint: There are only 10 of the

former.)

[Fred Sanders]

34. A teaching is learning something, a commandment is...a command? So you disobey the commandments

or "Commandments", delivered by a man in a near death trance straight from the hand of God, on a small mountain, if you insist, 10 if memory serves, but you zealously must obey the teachings?

[WinkyDink]

41. WHAT are you talking about? I never said the 10 C. were okay to break.

Well, go for it. I'm a lapsed Catholic at best, haven't been to a Mass that wasn't for a funeral in eons, so whatever.

[Fred Sanders]

44. Explicitly implying something that was not implied is a sin. Which Commandment is that, or is that a

teaching?

You might recall my intial comment was to another poster, not you.

[FrodosPet]

80. Do you remember when those Opus Dei gunmen opened fire at the offices of "The Advocate"?

I don't either.

[Fred Sanders]

81. I remember when the Bundy ranch couple went and shot 2 police officers in Utah, also incited by

hate speech...and yes, sure, I will disprove our hypothetical negative as soon as pigs can fly.

Keep an eye out for me.

[FrodosPet]

82. Las Vegas is in Utah now?

Did they move the Nevada/Utah borders or the whole city?

Are they going to keep the "Sin City" nickname?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/las-vegas-jerad-miller-unraveling-infowars-alex-jones

Inside the Unraveling of Las Vegas Shooting Spree Suspect Jerad Miller

—By Dana Liebelson | Mon Jun. 9, 2014 2:46 PM EDT

Two years before Jerad Miller and his wife, Amanda, allegedly gunned down two police officers and a third person in a Las Vegas shooting spree, before taking their own lives, he pondered when it might be justified to kill law enforcement officers on the website of conspiracy-peddling radio personality Alex Jones. In a May 28, 2012, post titled, "The Police (To Kill Or Not To Kill?)" Miller wrote on Jones' Infowars.com website: "I live in Indiana and recently a law was passed named the right to resist law. As i can make out from it, if a police officer kicks in my door and is not there legally, then I may shoot him."

His posts on Infowars depict an angry, down-on-his-luck man who blamed his woes—decaying teeth, lack of health insurance, and inability to find work—on the tyranny of government. (Alex Jones has insisted the shooting spree Miller and his wife allegedly carried out was "absolutely staged" by the federal government.) The justice system became a focus of Miller's wrath following his arrest for selling marijuana. "Before I got arrested I had 2 jobs and was selling weed to my friends and family on the side," he wrote. "Now I cannot find a job. My probation officer states that if I protest that my probation will be violated. They have tried to tell my fiance, who has no criminal record, that she may not own a firearm if I live in the house. Now, i face a dire problem."

~ snip ~

In a post on June 26, 2012, Miller discussed how his life had unraveled since his arrest and how he couldn't afford dental care for a decaying wisdom tooth that had become a "painfull[y] infected hole":

I have not seen a dentists in 14 years. I take good care of my teeth. The job market has been horrible. The few temporary jobs i find havent been able to earn me enough money to go see a dentist. Since I dont have insurance or medicaid the cost is around 500 to 1000 dollars. So as I sit here in agony, taking the penasilin the ER perscribed me I contemplate the state of things here in the good old USA. How the Gov. spends billions of dollars on the war on drugs and all these missles and bombs to kill people. I think about all that money that could do to helping people instead. Creating jobs, creating happy, healthy people. I dont want a hand out. I just need a foundation to stand on. One that wont be pulled out from under me as soon as i step up on it. I’m a 29 year old american who has never once had a good enough job to have health insurance……………. I dont know what else to say.

~ snip ~

So were they Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, or what?

[Fred Sanders]

83. Thanks, yes, Las Vegas...in the information age hate speech spreads fast.

they were already crazy and they were driven over the edge by hate speech, it can happen to anyone crazy about religion, politics, the environment, hate speech is not just about religion.

Your linked story proves that.

[FrodosPet]

84. So he was a hard luck pot dealer motivated by Alex Jones, not Jesus Christ

Or is Alex Jones the second coming of Christ?

"And He shall reign with beef jerky and colloidal silver for ever and ever. Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Ha Lay Lou, Ya!"

[Fred Sanders]

85. Someone, please, help me...why do I bother?

[WinkyDink]

38. WTH are you on about? Ever heard of the sacraments of Confession and Absolution? Catholics

take the 10 commandments and other church-sanctioned sins VERY SERIOUSLY, enough to have CLASSES: VENIAL AND MORTAL.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

[arcane1]

50. I'm referring specifically to the Bible's firm prohibition on images in Exodus 20:4

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."

I'm not aware of any Christian denomination that obeys this; maybe the Amish? I think some orthodox Jewish people follow it, but that's all I'm aware of

[Jesus Malverde]

21. No pope or bishop would issue a fatwa against the author.

They might protest, but they are confident enough in their own selves not to threaten murder.

The crusades were a long time ago and the religion has evolved to be grown up and part of civil society. Islamic cults like whahabism and shiite extremists haven't evolved at all, if anything encouraged with Saudi billions it's flourished and spread like a cancer regresysing to the traditions of yesteryear.

It's all a cynical effort to keep the Sunni Arab royal families in power.

[WinkyDink]

35. Clearly, since it exists, the magazine was not "prohibited." (There is no such thing in Catholicism.

Even the movie "forbiddens" ended decades ago---and they were only for adherents, and could not be enforced.)

P.S. The Trinity is part of Protestantism, as well.

[kwassa]

49. No, the movie production codes were enforced for everyone for more than 30 years

The advent of talking pictures in 1927 led to a perceived need for further enforcement. Martin Quigley, the publisher of a Chicago-based motion picture trade newspaper, began lobbying for a more extensive code that not only listed material that was inappropriate for the movies, but also contained a moral system that the movies could help to promote - specifically a system based on Catholic theology. He recruited Father Daniel Lord, a Jesuit priest and instructor at the Catholic St. Louis University, to write such a code and on March 31, 1930 the board of directors of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association adopted it formally. This original version especially was once popularly known as the Hays Code, but it and its later revisions are now commonly called the Production Code.

However, Depression economics and changing social mores resulted in the studios producing racier fare that the Code, lacking an aggressive enforcement body, was unable to redress. This era is known as Pre-Code Hollywood.

An amendment to the Code, adopted on June 13, 1934, established the Production Code Administration (PCA), and required all films released on or after July 1, 1934 to obtain a certificate of approval before being released. For more than thirty years following, virtually all motion pictures produced in the United States and released by major studios adhered to the code.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_censorship_in_the_United_States

[Jesus Malverde]

5. We saw what the Taliban did to the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan.

It's reactionary BS from the Middle Ages. Who cares what they think.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1326063/After-1700-years-Buddhas-fall-to-Taliban-dynamite.html



Monsters and madmen

[kwassa]

11. That was a massive crime.

but I still care what the non-fanatic Muslims think.

I am just as infuriated by ISIS blowing up ancient mosques in Irag, great cultural sites.

[uppityperson]

16. "Why learn about another religion, who cares what they think" says the poster named Jesus?

Because learning about things increases knowledge of why people act like they do? The Taliban are indeed assholes of the highest order while there are many Muslims who decry the destruction and harm of other people.

[Jesus Malverde]

27. It's "jesus" a Spanish name

The learning about cultures.... I suspect I know more about Islam than most.

The name "Jesus malverde" is a Spanish name. It comes from a Mexican cult popular in Sinaloa Mexico and has nothing to do with Jesus the Christian icon. He was a Robin Hood type figure popular with the downtrodden and smugglers.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesús_Malverde



Jesus

[uppityperson]

28. I know it's spanish/mexican etc, we had a turkey named Jesus, and yes pronounced properly

I didn't know about Malverde, thought it was bad green (translating using my old latin) and just a name. Thanks for letting me learn more, about why you named yourself that. Indeed, learning about other cultures is a good thing, thank you. And good example as to why, as you asked. Thank you for letting me learn something new during this sad time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jes%C3%BAs_Malverde

Did the "Jesus" part originate from the 0 BC/AD guy? I wonder if it was a common name then?

[Jesus Malverde]

75. The name is actually had some parallels to this op.

It's extremely common name in Spanish, however if some gringo parents in the US named their boy Jesus it would be amongst the religious a somewhat controversial name.

Thanks for your nice reply.

[Bonobo]

6. The origin of the word "iconoclast" for those who don't know.

I suggest those who aren't familiar, do a search and study the deep, deep history of this debate in the Catholic Church and how it related to the Byzantine Empire as well.

[grahamhgreen]

7. I've been told there is no such prohibition in the Koran...?

[kwassa]

14. It is in the hadith, a collection of sayings ...

that is second only to the Koran in authority, from what I have been reading.

[Control-Z]

25. So it is second to the Koran

that says no such thing? It kind of sounds like you're defending the behavior. I'm just telling you how it sounds to me.

[kwassa]

39. I'm just trying to understand where the behavior comes from.

[Control-Z]

60. Did you not just write:

"It is in the hadith, a collection of sayings ...
that is second only to the Koran in authority, from what I have been reading." ??


It sounds like you're already pretty solid on where the behavior comes from because you just told me where it comes from.

[kwassa]

62. I am now because I went and googled it and read up on it.

I knew about the prohibition on the portrayal of Mohammed many years ago, but I didn't know where it originated from. I spent a couple weeks in Morocco and saw some outstanding things.

I approach art from a visual standpoint, and consider the background much later.

[uppityperson]

67. Thanks for educating us about this.

And yes, I meant it seriously.

[delta17]

10. Islam also prohibits alcohol.

Should we follow that rule also? Which other religious rules should non-believers be subject to?

[Luminous Animal]

12. There is no direct prohibition agains depiction of Mohammed in the Koran.

None. What is prohibited is the faces of humans and animal in places of worship. That is that.

[kwassa]

17. from the original article I quoted:

The passages relating to a ban on creating images of the prophets come from the hadith, a record of the sayings of the Prophet Mohammed and his closest companions. The hadith is considered secondary only to the Quran in terms of textual authority, but the sometimes contradictory accounts have led to centuries of debates within the umma, or global Muslim community.

[Luminous Animal]

40. Thus, my post is accurate.

[Fred Sanders]

42. Catholics have Commandments and they have teachings. The teachings are like Commandments,

like no same sex sex and only male priests...you see how that works?

I learned the difference today, learning is good, being determined to be right is not always the goal.

[Luminous Animal]

46. Having been raised a Catholic and went to Catholic school and attended

services 6 days a week. And instruction after Sunday services, I am acutely aware of how an institution can, and often will, pervert text, manipulate by omission, and outright lie in order to keep a stranglehold on their adherents.

[Fred Sanders]

47. And this is different than any other major religion.....how? I know they are all flights of fantasy,

but I see no need for vulgar and repetitive insults. Just keep your fantasies to yourself and out of my government.

Mockery, fine, vulgar insults....why?

[Luminous Animal]

54. Because religion is dangerous bunk. It is the biggest fomenter of turning human against human

as the "other". The leaders are grifters amassing great wealth pandering to weak and fearful.

Standing up to the religious can be dangerous. From the boy or girl who is gay and can find no succor from their family and community so they commit suicide… and those others who are proudly out in a community that preaches not acceptance and are harmed or killed. To the women who are forced, by law, to be subject to expensively prohibitive and humiliating and rape trigger procedures in order to procure and an abortion. And the women who are admonished from the pulpit to subsume their autonomy to the penis a deviation which may result in accepting physical "punishments." And those who perform abortions are under threat.

That which seeks to curtail my innate co-opreration and love for my sisters and brothers deserves to be soundly mocked; repetitively and yes, sometimes with vulgarity. Vulgar language may induce the response of, "Oh my, we shouldn't have that!"

But it is nothing compared to the vulgarity of dead and/or suffering.

[Fred Sanders]

55. And combining vulgar language with pornographic imagery and images of death to the religious?

All repeated year after year and on a preannounced annual schedule for vulgar imagery and two or three word comments regarding Islam? Remember this was an annual Christmas thing with the publication.


We still good to go with that because as much as I reject religion I reject vulgarity for the sake of vulgarity, which a number of the cartoons were. In my opinion.

[Luminous Animal]

58. You do understand, that their vulgarity was not limited to Islam.

It was an equal opportunity vulgarity spread across all the dominate religions.

Anyway. I don't care about the vulgarity of the message. There are a multitude of non-prurient creativity that has been and continues to be deemed vulgar and burned and destroyed. Boo fucking hoo who can't get past the vulgarity and grasp the message.

[Codeine]

15. So?

That has no relevance at all.

[kwassa]

18. Relevance to what?

[Codeine]

22. You tell me.

You're the one trying to make a point.

[kwassa]

29. I made the point. You seem to think it needs to be relevant to something.

like the NFL playoff brackets?

[Historic NY]

26. So how do they know what he looked like....??

No one knows what Jesus looked like. Most early stuff is a depiction based on what? What someone thinks.

[WinkyDink]

45. Rather like King Arthur, Robin Hood, the Buddha (was he really roly-poly?), etc.

[WinkyDink]

30. And images of any other person. Hence, the beautiful geometric art.

[kwassa]

33. exactly!

[brooklynite]

32. Funny, it's against the Jewish and Christian religions to do it as well...

...somehow they've gotten over it.

[WinkyDink]

43. What? Where is this in Christianity?

[brooklynite]

48. Exodus 20:4 "“You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above...

...or on the earth beneath or in the waters below". Last time I checked, the Old Testament was still a part of every Bible.

[WinkyDink]

52. Yes, and so is the CONTEXT, which is about "having other gods," to wit:

3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/how-can-the-church-allow-statues-when-exodus-20-forbids-it

[kwassa]

37. Some Islamic art

[MohRokTah]

51. There is no such prohibition in Shia and Sufi Islam.

It's a Sunni specific prohibition.

[kwassa]

53. and these extreme fanatics are from the Sunni tradition

by way of the wahhabism and the salafi movement out of Saudi Arabia.

[Lobo27]

56. I don't really give a damn what their religion might demand.

I don't live by their rules. Why should we bow to them. Don't depict our prophet. I see a lot people saying we shouldn't to not cause problems or to be nice. Then should we say its ok for Catholics to be against the LBGT community because you know we have to be nice?

[Dawson Leery]

57. Too bad.

The enlightenment trumps their primitive beliefs.

There was no justification for what happened yesterday and I fully support bringing down the sledge hammer on these bastards.

[uppityperson]

61. Which Bastards do you mean? Just those 2 murderers or Islam, Muslims in general?

[Control-Z]

63. From what I understand,

most Muslims do not believe in murdering over a cartoon made by someone outside their religion. In fact, most would not do such a thing to someone within their own faith.

[Dawson Leery]

64. Obviously the two survivors who committed this atrocity.

[uppityperson]

66. Thanks for clarifying and unfortunately it isn't obvious, been reading comments like that on other

sites.

[geek tragedy]

65. They are free to voluntarily follow that if they so choose.

But it should not be binding on anyone else.

[Albertoo]

68. This thread is mistaken: muslims have represented muhamad for centuries

Here is an Afghan illumination of 1436 depicting muhamad





So much those who go about saying representing muhamad was one of Charlie Hebdo's 'crimes'

[kwassa]

72. I am not mistaken; read the sources I've quoted from ...

and there are depictions of Mohammed further east in the Muslim world, simply not from Sunni Arabs.

[Albertoo]

73. The title of your thread is just wrong.

The Islamic prohibition against any depiction of Mohammed

It has clearly NOT been an Islamic prohibition for nearly one millenium.

As my pic of a XVth century Afghan image demonstrated.

Other than that, you were right.

[kwassa]

74. There has been such a prohibition in a large part of the Islamic world

Are you quibbling over "large part" vs. "all"?

and if you read the article in the OP, it fully acknowledges those more eastern areas, such as Afghanistan, and Persia, that did show images of men.

[brentspeak]

79. Bloodthirsty radical Islamists turned Muhammad into a cartoon long before

Western satirical cartoonists ever did.