Permissibility of Images.

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

Asalamualikum,

I’ve heard different views regarding the permissibility of images. Some scholars think they’re ok since their present day usage does not equal to worship or shirk. Other scholars have decided that due to the strict commands from the sunnah, images can not be allowed unless extremely necessary.

But what about images which have inanimate objects? Like landscapes? I’ve worked in 3d image editing programs such as Bryce which allow one to fashion an artificial sort of landscape, are those considered ok?

Please no sidetracking comments, just answers directed strictly towards the initial question.

Thanks :slight_smile:

2

The Companion 'Abdullah ibn Abbas (r) said: "If you must do it, make pictures of trees and things that do not have a soul (ruh) in them." (Sahih Muslim #5272)

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal

3

imageless desert has something to do with these ideology.
people in lush green tropics and in the land of flowing rivers
thinking is more image based.

4

i agree i think we are not allowed to draw images of people an dl hings tat have rooh in tehm. and another thing i dont think we are even alloweed to take pics of ourselves or any humans

5

eddy jee, sorry but did you post your pic with your little nephew a while back? now why would you preach something you obviously dont care to practice?

6

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rvikz: *
imageless desert has something to do with these ideology.
people in lush green tropics and in the land of flowing rivers
thinking is more image based.
[/QUOTE]

not everyone is as small minded as u to narrow down his thinking to his surrounding ONLY....

try to put more sense in ur words if u claim to be an intelligent being....

7

I was told ..Object in 3D -statues of human being is not permissible.

8

Images are of various kinds & you have to be a little more specific.

For example, photographs are also images, yet they are exact copy of the original. More so like a Mirror & AnHazoor (saw) owned a mirror (as far as I can remember) & that's part of his sunnah.

The very gupshup that you are using have images. :) Look on the top look at the bottom. When you hit reply, that very option is made possible as an "image".

9

i dont know about yours thoughts on michelangleo's beutiful
painting and the greek scluputures. i think there should be separation between dogma and art.

10

I agree with you rvikz. The banning of images was not equivalent to banning art, but to banning the worship of images.

For example, if someone makes a portrait of a leader, its hung up everywhere to "honor" the leader after death. And this basically amounts to a form of worship. After all, what makes this one person so better than the corner paanwala or the local postman that we should be honoring his image? Honoring good deeds would be different though.

However, a photograph depicting an event for the purpose of informing and educating is something different, no? I mean, could you imagine medical books without the pictures of patients?

11

jesus on cross and medtitatin bhudda have objective of spirtual
focus and devotion. every religen has its own way of praying and devotion.

12

13

14

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Iqbal1089: *
The Companion 'Abdullah ibn Abbas (r) said: "If you must do it, make pictures of trees and things that do not have a soul (ruh) in them." (Sahih Muslim #5272)

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal
[/QUOTE]

with all due respect , teh companion was not god or the prophet. Now how do we know that trees dont have soul in them, they are alive are they not?

if the purpose is so people do not start worshipping these things as they did in arabia back then, we should also be mindful of the reverence placed upon things like taveez or even ayyats hung on walls.