Comments on: Islamic Art & Wikipedia & Prophet’s (S) Picture http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/ A Traditional Muslim's Blog: Reality > Theory Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:55:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: brnaeem http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34467 brnaeem Sun, 10 Feb 2008 06:22:38 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34467 AA- Yursil, "I see no reason why we are so quick to judge this Seerat book, the pictures within it, or its free distribution of one of its pages on Wikipedia." "Personally I take issue with the attempt to wipe out Seyr-i Nabi from the history books." Either I'm misunderstanding your post or your misunderstanding the petition. I gathered that the issue is NOT with the Seyr-i Nabi pics (which, as you mentioned, have the face of the Prophet (saw) covered), but with the other two pics that fail to do the same (one is said to be from Jami Tawarikh and the other is from an Al-Biruni manuscript). AA- Yursil,

“I see no reason why we are so quick to judge this Seerat book, the pictures within it, or its free distribution of one of its pages on Wikipedia.”

“Personally I take issue with the attempt to wipe out Seyr-i Nabi from the history books.”

Either I’m misunderstanding your post or your misunderstanding the petition. I gathered that the issue is NOT with the Seyr-i Nabi pics (which, as you mentioned, have the face of the Prophet (saw) covered), but with the other two pics that fail to do the same (one is said to be from Jami Tawarikh and the other is from an Al-Biruni manuscript).

]]> By: MR http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34463 MR Sun, 10 Feb 2008 00:12:31 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34463 The petition is pointless. That's why I didn't blog it at all. Good post Yursil. Also check this post out: http://azeemkhan.info/2008/another-stupid-muslim-issue-wikipedia-petition/ The petition is pointless. That’s why I didn’t blog it at all. Good post Yursil. Also check this post out:
http://azeemkhan.info/2008/another-stupid-muslim-issue-wikipedia-petition/

]]> By: Danya http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34418 Danya Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:36:06 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34418 Jazak Allah. I agree totally. I got the Emails and petitions several times and I just don't see how this can be fruitful or even necessary. Jazak Allah. I agree totally. I got the Emails and petitions several times and I just don’t see how this can be fruitful or even necessary.

]]> By: Ilyas http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34416 Ilyas Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:06:32 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34416 All the more reason for them to leave Wikipedia alone. :) All the more reason for them to leave Wikipedia alone.
:)

]]> By: yursil http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34415 yursil Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:41:29 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34415 Definitely, although those that go down the haram route tend to make the images themselves as forbidden to all Muslim eyes as swine meat is to mouths. So while the perpetrator may have the sin, the viewer in their eyes participates with it. Definitely, although those that go down the haram route tend to make the images themselves as forbidden to all Muslim eyes as swine meat is to mouths. So while the perpetrator may have the sin, the viewer in their eyes participates with it.

]]> By: Ilyas http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34404 Ilyas Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:30:33 +0000 http://www.yursil.com/blog/2008/02/islamic-art-wikipedia-prophets-s-picture/#comment-34404 I think that equally important to note is that even if one is sure that drawing images of created beings is <i>haram</i> (sinful), that sin is incurred only by the artist himself. So long as the representation is not disrespectful, we cannot (should not) impose our religious views upon non-Muslims. It would be like petitioning them to wear <i>hijab</i> or abstain from alcohol. And even if disrespectful, it is best to be honest about the affront without becoming overly emotional. Afterall, the biggest offenders of the Prophet are the Muslims themselves, who've abandoned his <i>sunnah</i>, both externally and internally. Wallahu t'ala alam I think that equally important to note is that even if one is sure that drawing images of created beings is haram (sinful), that sin is incurred only by the artist himself.

So long as the representation is not disrespectful, we cannot (should not) impose our religious views upon non-Muslims. It would be like petitioning them to wear hijab or abstain from alcohol.

And even if disrespectful, it is best to be honest about the affront without becoming overly emotional. Afterall, the biggest offenders of the Prophet are the Muslims themselves, who’ve abandoned his sunnah, both externally and internally.

Wallahu t’ala alam

]]>