Pictures- in the light of islam

[Capitol]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@SalmanNY

Before both of you open your sarcastic mouth, living being is condiered who has a sole.

My shoe is condiered to have a sole too. Is it a living being?

[mAd_ScIeNtIsT]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@SalmanNY

Years ago, I said to one of them, By the same token, you could allow idols which have not been carved but have been made by pressing a button on some machine that turns out idols by the dozen. What do you say to that?"

That argument has a fault. That machine would simply be the tool with which the engineer who created it carves the idols.

In other, words, instead of using a blade and chisel to craft the idol, the engineer uses a machine to craft it. It is merely the tool that does the carving. he has already decided in his mind what to create, and the machine makes a reality of what is in his mind.

You, as the presser of the button that triggers the process of creating the idol, would have the same effect as ordering a sculptor to create the idol.

[Pinstripe_Danda]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Capitol

My shoe is condiered to have a sole too. Is it a living being?

hahahah..

How do you know trees don’t have a soul?

[mAd_ScIeNtIsT]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Pinstripe Danda

Until the advent of Renaissance in Europe and it’s pressures on to the islamic world, painting lifelike protraits was haram, so was havin glive models haram. Taking pictures would have gotten you killed. Islam forbade drawing in the likeness of a person/living thing because of perfection being only in the hands of allah..(read my signature). SO for 85% of islamic history, portraits, pictures etc were haram. Evil western influence changed that and now you have muslims running around taking/posting thier pics, drawing animals and birds and people…without a care for what Allah has to say. You all should be ashamed. :nono:

I think you’ve been miseducated.

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ho/07/wam/ho_57.51.21.htm

You can see here that by 1224, under the Abbasid Khalifat in Baghdad lifelike portraits of persons/living things were being produced.

At the school which I went to, we were taught that 1224 significantly preceded the Rennaisance.

Also, this means that for at least the past 60% of Islamic history, the Khalifs and thus the ultimate religo-political leaders of Islam tolerated life-like paintings and considered them permissible.

Don’t get me wrong… I do think that this tolerance was incorrect. I’m merely delighting in the opportunity to prove you wrong

[SalmanNY]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Capitol

My shoe is condiered to have a sole too. Is it a living being?

hahah, man I like people like you who concentrate on the misspellings rather than the actual meaning of the sentence. But I don’t blame you when some one get’s their —dissed and have no answer to the original query, they pinpoint that persons grammar/spelling mistakes rather replying the addressed issue. Its ok mate, not your fault I understand you had no answer.
-Salman

[SalmanNY]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@mAd_ScIeNtIsT

That argument has a fault. That machine would simply be the tool with which the engineer who created it carves the idols.

In other, words, instead of using a blade and chisel to craft the idol, the engineer uses a machine to craft it. It is merely the tool that does the carving. he has already decided in his mind what to create, and the machine makes a reality of what is in his mind.

You, as the presser of the button that triggers the process of creating the idol, would have the same effect as ordering a sculptor to create the idol.

that’s exactly what I understand as well… I guess we are on the same page…

[bao_bihari]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

Salman- Very good decision-Yes it is better to stay away from some thing which have slightest of chance of ALLAH ta'ala's narazgi.

And apart from socalled moderated scholars- their arevery few authentic Aalim if any-who have opposed this view. However what i have read is that taking picture of body parts ( not face) do not have the same ruling.

[Capitol]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@SalmanNY

hahah, man I like people like you who concentrate on the mispellings rather than the actual meaning of the sentence. But I dont blame you when some one get’st their dissed, they have nothing better at hands but to pinpoint that persons grammer/spellng mistakes. Its ok mate, not your fault.
-Salman

Soul and sole are completely different words with completely different meanings. This was more than a misspelling. So a living being is one who has a SOUL? So what are plants and trees according to your Islam? Dead?
This is why science is greater than Islam, and Islam is a backwards religion.

[SalmanNY]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Capitol

Soul and sole are completely different words with completely different meanings. This was more than a misspelling. So a living being is one who has a SOUL? So what are plants and trees according to your Islam? Dead?
This is why science is greater than Islam, and Islam is a backwards religion.

Dude either I am stupid or you are plain dumb. If you are telling me that you mistook my spellings of soul for sole in that pretext of that sentence, then may god help you understand english better.
-Salman

[Capitol]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@SalmanNY

Dude either I am stupid or you are plain dumb. If you are telling me that you mistook my spellings of soul for sole in that pretext of that sentence, then may god help you understand english better.
-Salman

Yep, you’re stupid, Mr. Plants-are-not-living-things-because-they-have-no-SOLE

[SalmanNY]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Capitol

Yep, you’re stupid, Mr. Plants-are-not-living-things-because-they-have-no-SOLE

Haha you did it ! You did it again. Its OK to accept when you do not have a legit answer rather writing whatever you wrote above.

[Capitol]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@SalmanNY

Haha you did it ! You did it again. Its OK to accept when you do not have a legit answer rather writing whatever you wrote above.

Did what again? You say plants are dead things because they have no soul. I’m sorry but the world of academia (those are the people who don’t blow themselves up) disagree with you. Plants are living things, and just because a backward 7th century philosophy says otherwise, does not make it true. The burden of proof is on you, to prove, scientifically, that plants are indeed, dead things.

[Pinstripe_Danda]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@mAd_ScIeNtIsT

I think you’ve been miseducated.

http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ho/07/wam/ho_57.51.21.htm

You can see here that by 1224, under the Abbasid Khalifat in Baghdad lifelike portraits of persons/living things were being produced.

At the school which I went to, we were taught that 1224 significantly preceded the Rennaisance.

Also, this means that for at least the past 60% of Islamic history, the Khalifs and thus the ultimate religo-political leaders of Islam tolerated life-like paintings and considered them permissible.

Don’t get me wrong… I do think that this tolerance was incorrect. I’m merely delighting in the opportunity to prove you wrong

Google boy, these are not portraits but miniatures. No LIFELIKE renditions of living art. Until the early 18th centtury islamic art was focused on miniatures coming out of three schools of islamic art, Herat, Isfahan and Istanbul. For an srtist to draw a horse for example, he had to make imagine it in his head. Ever see even mughal art, notice the fat necks and fat legs on mughal horses…it is because the artists were forbidden from looking at live models i.e the basis of portraits.

You know nothing, you learn little and your ability to illustrate knowledge through ravaneous e-searches only exemplifies that. Spend sometime in a museum.

Go read essays by Orhan Pamuk on this. Read something worthwhile about your own history and people.

[Sharaabi]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Pinstripe Danda

Ofcourse I know more. I am all knowing son!!

yet deaf and blind

[AQ]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@Sharaabi

yet deaf and blind

and Quran says:

2:171 The parable of those who reject Faith is as if one were to shout Like a goat-herd, to things that listen to nothing but calls and cries: Deaf, dumb, and blind, they are void of wisdom.

[RashGuy]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

To all those of you who believe that taking a picture of living beings is haraam One question

On your passport and driving license dont you have your own photo.

So guys why dont you destroy these unislamic artificats and declare so..

Homeland security will have some work with you guys soon

[ammarr]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

^-- thats a necessity.. why compare something done for the heck of it and something that is a MUST for national security? Do you also know that in Islam maintaining peace/security is a top priority, or that a person must follow the rules of the nation he lives in?

Man.. people who argue just for the bleeding heck of it are annoying.. if you wanna take pictures, go ahead and do so.. why all the sarcasm and **** aimed at people who dont agree with you?

[SalmanNY]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@ammarr

^-- thats a necessity.. why compare something done for the heck of it and something that is a MUST for national security? Do you also know that in Islam maintaining peace/security is a top priority, or that a person must follow the rules of the nation he lives in?

Man.. people who argue just for the bleeding heck of it are annoying.. if you wanna take pictures, go ahead and do so.. why all the sarcasm and **** aimed at people who dont agree with you?

Well put. :k:

[Basit]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

What is the historical context 'not to take pictures' or have it at home?
If in the mind of some, it's like having an idol, then what's the historical context of an idol. My understanding is that people were worshiping idols, which had to cease. So if I have a picture of my dad or my mom or any one, they are not idols to me and I dont worship them. Cos, a muslim only worships ALLAH.

Now if we look at era of Prophets and not only Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him) there were people who had idols and pictures of so called 'PEOPLE' whom they were worshiping like during the time of Prophet Abraham or Prophet Moses. And perhaps to cease the practise of worshiping 'MAN' or 'People' it may have been told to the people not to have pictures. Let say if there is a picture available today of Prohet Muhammed peace be upoh him, which muslim wouldn't have it? Perhaps everyone would attempt to have it, not because we Worship Prophet Muhammed BUT because we LOVE him...The role of intellect is pivotal to interpret hitory with it's context.

[PakistaniAbroad]

Re: Pictures- in the light of islam

@ammarr

^-- thats a necessity..

no it’s a cheap cop out..

the absurd rulings can’t be followed in their entirety so the pseudo religious have to find excuses to carry on with their daily lives without appearing hypocritical or in violation of the very rulings they’d slit other’s throats over.