Painting of mother Aisha (ra) in the Tate Gallery in London

Assalâmu’alaikum. It has come to our knowledge that the Tate Britain in Millbank, London SW1, recently put up a painting of A’isha (ra), the wife of Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the daughter of Abu Bakr (ra). A’isha (ra) is recorded to have narrated around 12,000 traditions, of which 174 were accepted by Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Al-Muslim.

A painting of this great woman of Islam can be found hanging at a public gallery at the Tate Britain (Section 15 of the Victorian Art Collection), painted by artist Valentino Cameron Prinsep (1838-1904). The painting is labelled as ‘Ayesha exhibited 1887 (oil on canvas)’ without any mention of her relationship to the Prophet (saw). It was first displayed in 1887 at the Royal Academy in 1887, purchased by the president and council of the Royal Academy of Arts.

What is our objection to this painting as Muslims and what ought we do? When volunteers from the East London Masjid and Women’s Relief confronted the Tate management expressing their objections and disgust at the painting, the official response was that:

(a) the painting and others of the Prophet and his family members are displayed in Iran;
B. that there has not been much objection from the British Muslim community to warrant its removal; and
C. that the Tate was merely to trying to exhibit art from the Islamic civilisations.

Our objections:

  1. The vast majority of Muslims in Britain and abroad do not approve of paintings or sculptures generally on Islamic grounds, especially members of the Prophet’s family.

  2. The painting, albeit in good faith, is insensitive and can severely hurt British Muslims. We must not forget the Satanic verses which inflamed Muslim feelings world-wide.

  3. Whilst we do not wish to enter into Shi‘i-Sunni debate which will only serve to weaken our case, it needs to be noted that over 90% of British Muslims are Sunni and that even prominent Shi‘ah scholars object to paintings and sculptures of life forms.

  1. If Tate Britain sincerely wishes to promote art from the Muslim world and promote better understanding between faiths and communities, it should do so in consultation with representatives from the Muslim community in Britain.

What you should do?

Please call, fax, e-mail or visit the Tate Britain to politely register your objection to the painting of A’isha (ra). When we last spoke to the managers of the Tate, they said they had only received a few complaints complaints. If more complaints are filed the managers will be obliged to remove the painting.

Speak to Roger Miller (Visitor Services’ Training Manager) or Steven Deucher (Director of the Gallery).
Tel: 020 7887 8725
Fax: 020 7887 8788
E-mail: www.tate.org.uk

Nearest Tube: Pimlico
Nearest Rail: Vauxhall
Buses: 88, 77A, C10

Brothers and Sisters, we must not forget our duty and reverence for the Prophet and his family. Allah, the Exalted reminds us:
“And whosoever honours the Symbols of Allah, then it is truly from the piety of the heart.” (22:32)

Let us also take heed from the words of the Prophet (saw) where he reminds us in part of a hadith narrated by Yazid bin Haiyan, " .. I remind you (to be kind) to the members of my family. I remind you (to be kind) to the members of my family." [Muslim].

The least we can do to show our bond of affection and reverence for the Prophet’s family is to register our complaint from the comfort of our homes and offices. Please tell others.

Very bad, May Allah enable us Muslims to put an end to this, Ameen.

I have lodged my complaint in the Visitor's book and have also forwarded the message to those I know.

You're saying it doesn't mention the prophet. So why the objection to a painting? Don't you have pictures of other holy men and women of islam? Ayatola Komaini's picture even made mag covers.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by TomSawyer: *
You're saying it doesn't mention the prophet. So why the objection to a painting? Don't you have pictures of other holy men and women of islam? Ayatola Komaini's picture even made mag covers.
[/QUOTE]

Tom, according to a well known/popular hadith, muslims are not supposed to "recreate" animate beings with souls. This means no paintings. This includes men, women, animals, etc. This is the reason many muslims would object to it, apart from the fact that they feel it is inappropriate.

That would also include Ayatola, and any other muslim.

So Al Jazeera is a sin? no moslem has pictures of their kids and family at home? And those who do are sinners? Come on

Munni, I think what you have mentioned is in general and is true. However, trying to make impressions of the distinguised ones, e.g. Prophets :as:, Ummahat-Ul-Mo’mineen :razi:, Sahaba :razi: and Sahabiaat :razi:, is a case of elevated disrespect and is strictly prohibited.

As for you TomSawyer, no one would expect you to understand this as you are not related to this faith. So, its ok.

^ there is nothing complicated here to understand or not understand, Just inconsistency. If the rule is true, that makes most moslems sinners (because most moslems have pictures of their loved ones). If the rule is wrong then all these objections are ill motivated chicanery.

Yes, Aanhazoor :saw: discouraged to draw pictures of live things. The most you can do is to draw, according to a hadith, trees or similar things if your earnings depend on it. Therefore, drawing pictures and getting into painting and all would be a sin. Muslims should try to avoid it as much as possible.

At the same time, this is considerabley of smaller importance as compared to other issues in a Muslim’s life (such as Salaat or Saum). The conditions these days have become so much complex that it is almost impossible impossible to void getting involved in the matters of this nature. e.g. it is not possible to have a passport without a picture. Therefore, it is recommended to focus on major things (muhkamaat) and try to stay away from such issues (mutashaabihaat) as much as possible. Allah is forgiving and merciful when someone has tried his best.

Wallahualam!

So why waste time objecting to a painting and in the process ruin someone's pleasure?

If all moslems can be as pragmatist, the world will be a better place

there is a difference in opinion about the issue of equating photograph (camera snaps) to paintings....

TomSawyer, although I see you have so many questions about the faith of Islam and Muslims make every effort to educate you, however I believe to explain anything to you is useless and fruitless...It's like trying to flog a dead horse...Not beacause you are stupid or ignorant but you just refuse to learn anything...

It is evident by the fact that you have been on this board for so long and yet you still haven't learnt to properly spell 'Allah' and 'Muslims...

Why do you do it? It's not like you don't know English, because I can see your grammar is correct, your spelling is correct and you come across with your with your opinions very clearly...

Is it because by spelling Allah as 'alla' or Muslims as 'moslems' you extract a certain perverse pleasure by bellittling us? That's very cheap...

this is a fabrication! no member of the prophets family ever had their painitng or portrait ever made its a big jhoot honest and real muslims should pay no attention to it but wat we must do is make sure its taken down by lodging complaints and if dat dont work take it forward by forming some sort of a islamic front & taking lega action

Tom, just as their are several inconsistencies with Hindus, Christians and Jews, there are with Muslims as well. You seriously cannot tell me for one moment that everyone follows religious principle to the letter, uniformly across the globe. My roomate was hindu, she by no means expresses the exact same views you do concerning her faith.

I remember a day when she told me she had emailed some hindu friends of hers of your elephant god with a computer in his lap. Her friends were outraged at what she did, and she was perplexed as to why.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Lajawab: *
TomSawyer, although I see you have so many questions about the faith of Islam and Muslims make every effort to educate you, however I believe to explain anything to you is useless and fruitless...It's like trying to flog a dead horse...Not beacause you are stupid or ignorant but you just refuse to learn anything...

It is evident by the fact that you have been on this board for so long and yet you still haven't learnt to properly spell 'Allah' and 'Muslims...

Why do you do it? It's not like you don't know English, because I can see your grammar is correct, your spelling is correct and you come across with your with your opinions very clearly...

Is it because by spelling Allah as 'alla' or Muslims as 'moslems' you extract a certain perverse pleasure by bellittling us? That's very cheap...
[/QUOTE]
Well Said ! And i have the same exact feelings for him.

I copied and sent this post to my emailgroups, and I got an update, thought I'd share:

TATE MODERN APOLOGISES TO MUSLIMS AFTER MPAC ALERT!

Let us also take heed from Yazid bin Haiyan who reported: "One day Messenger of Allah (PBUH) stood up to deliver a Khutbah at a watering place known as Khum between Makkah and Al-Madinah. He praised Allah, extolled Him, and exhorted (us) and said, Amma Bad. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I will respond to Allah's Call, but I am leaving with you two weighty things: the first is the Book of Allah, in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it.' …He exhorted (us to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said, `The second is the members of my household, I remind you (to be kind) to the members of my family. I remind you (to be kind) to the members of my family.
[Muslim].

After MPAC Alerted Muslims to object to the painting allegedly to be of Hardrat Aisha (rta), muslims from right around the world picked the phone up and emailed the Tate Gallery. As a result we can say you have succeeded in protecting a member of the Prophet's (PBUH) family. Once again this proves that when Muslims do even a simple thing like pick the phone up or write an email, change occurs. We can longer convince ourselves that we cannot make a difference!

We received this letter from members of the muslim community. Please see below.

Statement regarding Ayesha by Valentine Prinsep (exh. 1887) by Stephen Deuchar, Director of Tate Britain

28 October 2003

Tate has received a number of complaints regarding the display of a portrait by the Victorian painter Valentine Prinsep. The portrait entitled Ayesha was first exhibited in 1887 at the Royal Academy, has been on display in Britain many times since, and is part of a temporary display at Tate Britain installed in September.

The wall label written by Tate to accompany the recent display of the portrait suggested that the sitter was the figure of Ayesha who was one of the wives of the Prophet Mohammed. Many branches of Islam see the making of images of the Prophet's family as an unacceptable imitation of actions only God can perform. Therefore, since receiving these complaints, Tate has been consulting widely with relevant authorities, including Sheikh Dr M. A. Zaki Badawi, Chairman of The Muslim College of the United Kingdom. During these consultations Dr Badawi expressed doubt that the portrait was intended to portray the Prophet's wife and suggested that Tate should undertake more detailed research on the work and its provenance.

Our new research indicates clearly that this portrait was not in fact intended to be a representation of the Prophet Mohammed's wife, and that the unsubstantiated suggestion that she was derives from speculation made in our picture records some decades ago. We greatly regret that this unfounded speculation was repeated on the wall label. Princep's portrait may be best understood as a response to the widespread Victorian taste for 'exotic' subject matter drawn from life in the Middle East. He may have chosen the name Ayesha because of its wider associations with traditional poetry, but may also have had in mind a more specific literary source. In the same year that the painting was publicly exhibited, 1887, the book She by Rider Haggard was published; it included the fictional character of Queen Ayesha, "a tall and lovely woman, instinct with beauty in very part".

In light of this new research the work will continue to be displayed and the accompanying label has been re-written. Tate did not intend to offend its Muslim visitors and sincerely apologises for the upset that the previous misidentification has caused.
Tate Britain Director's Office

JazakAllah!

I feel so happy that Allah provided me and all of us a chance to contribute in this.

Nice,

From the orginial email it looked as if the portrait did not mention Prophet mohammed sws and I agree with others that what's the big deal...it isn't saying it is The prophet or his wife. however, in the appology the it seems as if TATE actually did incorrectly allude to Ayesha wife of the prophet, ...glad to know they changed their discription of the picture.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Lajawab: *
TomSawyer, although I see you have so many questions about the faith of Islam and Muslims make every effort to educate you, however I believe to explain anything to you is useless and fruitless...It's like trying to flog a dead horse...Not beacause you are stupid or ignorant but you just refuse to learn anything...

It is evident by the fact that you have been on this board for so long and yet you still haven't learnt to properly spell 'Allah' and 'Muslims...

Why do you do it? It's not like you don't know English, because I can see your grammar is correct, your spelling is correct and you come across with your with your opinions very clearly...

Is it because by spelling Allah as 'alla' or Muslims as 'moslems' you extract a certain perverse pleasure by bellittling us? That's very cheap...
[/QUOTE]

When I point out the obvious inconsistency you tell me I don't understand, Simple - most moslems have pics of their family. Are you telling me then they're sinners?

Don't take refuge in diversions such as my spelling alla or Allah.

This is nothing new they always try and attack islam in one way or another be it Salman rushdie and his sicko book or painting of the prophet(saw)

The Tate Gallery is the elite gallery in the UK, they are not idiots they know what they are doing and its not a mistake they research there subjects inside out!

This is a clear attack on islam i dont see any other reason for them to display this painting for any other reason then to poke fun at muslims.

So let the kafirs do there little games we got bigger fish to fry!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
This is nothing new they always try and attack islam in one way or another be it Salman rushdie and his sicko book or painting of the prophet(saw)

The Tate Gallery is the elite gallery in the UK, they are not idiots they know what they are doing and its not a mistake they research there subjects inside out!

This is a clear attack on islam i dont see any other reason for them to display this painting for any other reason then to poke fun at muslims.

So let the kafirs do there little games we got bigger fish to fry!
[/QUOTE]
Well said....