Images Of Muhammad (peace And Blessing Be Upon Him)

[Habdisullah 0]

Asalaam Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

Insha'Allah you are all in a high state of Imaan and Well-being

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Muhammad"]WIKIPEDIA[/url] has published the image of our prophet Mohammad :sl: . Please sign the petition (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetthepetitionsite(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia"]HERE [/url]to have it removed. 10,000 signatures are needed in order to rid the article of those images. Up to date, 84, 267 signatures have been obtained. Please act now!

Walaikum Asalaam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

[Joseph 0]

:sl:

 

WIKIPEDIA has published the image of our prophet Mohammad (saas). Please sign the petition HERE to have it removed. 10,000 signatures are needed in order to rid the article of those images. Up to date, 84, 267 signatures have been obtained. Please act now!

 

Um, sister, they already have over 80 000 signatures. The message you wrapped in a quote is self-contradictory.

 

"10 000 signatures are required - right now we have 84 267. Please act now!"???

 

Besides, it's not the non Muslims' fault. All of those images were depicted by Muslim artists throughout history.

 

Wa' salaam

[Habdisullah 0]

:no:

 

How could I miss that? :sl: Perhaps they needed 100 000...?

Wikipedia is still refusing to remove the images.

 

You don't think they should be removed brother?

 

:sl:

[Joseph 0]

:sl: sister,

 

Well I've clicked on the link and it shows that only ten thousand signatures are required, and they probably have close to a hundred thousand thus far.

 

You don't think they should be removed brother?

 

God forbid.

 

I think they ought to remove the images by now. If not, Wikipedia is always editable to all.

 

Wa' salaam

[muzur 95]

Well, i signed it anyway.

[Hasib 17]

:sl:

 

I just signed it. They already have over 100,000 signatures now. Its running close to 134,000!!

[Subhaanallaah 0]

Assalam Alaikum

 

I signed it already..

 

May Allah swt guide us all on the right path.. ameen

[.AMiiNA BiiNT CHRiiSPiiNE. 0]

:sl:

 

I just signed the petition but why are the images still on the site

[skibture 0]

Its come in and out of being OK to depict him.

 

Its like anything.

 

Remember, Islam is a religion of logic, right? Now, why is it wrong to depict muhhamed?

 

Becuase people may began to worship the image that the artists made, right?

 

Have you met a muslim recently that is willing to worship a cartoon, above Allah?

 

Even if its tasteless, it is just fact. Just reality. MUSLIMS made these things in the past. Look at them, dont make more if you don't want to.

 

Sign the petition if you believe that the image of muhhamed is harming your worship of Allah... otherwise...

[Mercyonmankind 2]

Its come in and out of being OK to depict him.

 

Its like anything.

 

Remember, Islam is a religion of logic, right? Now, why is it wrong to depict muhhamed?

 

Becuase people may began to worship the image that the artists made, right?

 

Have you met a muslim recently that is willing to worship a cartoon, above Allah?

 

Even if its tasteless, it is just fact. Just reality. MUSLIMS made these things in the past. Look at them, dont make more if you don't want to.

 

Sign the petition if you believe that the image of muhhamed is harming your worship of Allah... otherwise...

 

 

Not everyone is as smart as you..

Look what happened in India, what they worshiping? A man made idol, we want to avoid that and act now before it's too late...

The problem is that uneducated people might worship idols/picture, people like you smart wont worship image/idol, but rather The Source of Everything, if The Source wills..

[high 0]

Not everyone is as smart as you..

Look what happened in India, what they worshiping? A man made idol, we want to avoid that and act now before it's too late...

The problem is that uneducated people might worship idols/picture, people like you smart wont worship image/idol, but rather The Source of Everything, if The Source wills..

 

That sounds a bit far-fetched, don't you think? Who would worship a cartoon? We're not in the stone ages anymore.

[Odobknarf 0]

Its come in and out of being OK to depict him.

 

Its like anything.

 

Remember, Islam is a religion of logic, right? Now, why is it wrong to depict muhhamed?

 

Becuase people may began to worship the image that the artists made, right?

 

Have you met a muslim recently that is willing to worship a cartoon, above Allah?

 

Even if its tasteless, it is just fact. Just reality. MUSLIMS made these things in the past. Look at them, dont make more if you don't want to.

 

Sign the petition if you believe that the image of muhhamed is harming your worship of Allah... otherwise...

 

I didn’t sign the petition because we have more than enough signatures…but I think depicting the prophet Muhammad, pbuh, is potentially harmful to Islam and cannot be over emphasized.

 

So the question is why?

 

1. The Qur’an says God’s practice does not change with time…so your argument that it’s “come in and out of being okay to depict him†is misguided. If something is wrong, it’s wrong…it's past periodic practice is irrelevant in the face of God's unchanging decree.

 

2. If you allow something to start that’s incorrect, however small in scope it may presently be, there is a danger that it can evolve into something far worse over time. After all, that’s the whole reason God sent so many prophets…people just kept forgetting and going more and more astray. Today, if we allow ‘cartoon’ drawings of the prophet Muhammad, by tomorrow its not completely inconceivable we’ll end up making movies about him...such as ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’. As Muslims, we love and respect the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, far too much to risk leaving open even the smallest possibility for something as blasphemous as that…it is not only wiser but essential to ‘nip this in the bud’ and stop any pictorial depictions of the Prophet now.

 

3. Different artists will depict the Prophet in different ways. In the end, it will give a false impression of what the Prophet really looked like; and any false impression is a form of Untruth. If we, as Muslims, are so guarded about protecting the Truth of the Qur’an so that there is only one version of it, if we painstakingly go out of our way to determine which are the authentic Hadith, then do you not think it would be hypocritical to allow the circulation of false images of the prophet Muhammad? Our religion is about Truth; depicting false images of the prophet Muhammad would be a lie. The two cannot coexist.

 

For example, let's take the issue of the beard. Now why do many Muslims grow beards? There is only one reason...because the Prophet Muhammad did. So, what if artists draw the Prophet Muhammad, and depict his beard incorrectly; lets say too long or wrong shape or whatever. Now, I think it's not too improbable that some Muslims will follow this incorrect picture; and they would be following that which is false.

 

4. People worship Jesus Christ as son of God. If there weren’t so many images of Jesus, I think this would have been less likely because its much harder to worship a man whom you have no image of (I'm not talking about God, I'm talking about a man). Now consider that idol worship, or associating any partner to God, is the only thing God does not forgive. Think about that. That’s huge. Do we really want to risk going anywhere near that? I think not.

 

So, for the reasons given above, I strongly advocate to steadfastly pursue the removal of the prophet’s image from Wikipedia. God willing.

 

Peace. Odobknarf

[Mercyonmankind 2]

That sounds a bit far-fetched, don't you think? Who would worship a cartoon? We're not in the stone ages anymore.

Well you are not in stone age, how about others who have never seen any technologies, they will be victims of these types of problems.. and we cant say for sure that everyone on earth is at technological and advance level..some people maybe never will..

[skibture 0]

Well you are not in stone age, how about others who have never seen any technologies, they will be victims of these types of problems.. and we cant say for sure that everyone on earth is at technological and advance level..some people maybe never will..

 

I think it is more of a muslims repsonsibilty to bring those people up to the current world/real world, than it is to fight against an entire massive media that tries to represent the phrophet.

 

I mean... people can understand things now. Back in the day, paganism, etc. But now... if you sit down with someone for an hour and TALK to them, do you think they will be worshipping an image?

 

This isn't to excuse offensive people from doing offensive things, its just so that people don't HURT themselves trying to fight against someone being an idiot (see violent protests againts muhhamed cartoon).

 

Know what I mean?

[Mercyonmankind 2]

I think it is more of a muslims repsonsibilty to bring those people up to the current world/real world, than it is to fight against an entire massive media that tries to represent the phrophet.

 

I mean... people can understand things now. Back in the day, paganism, etc. But now... if you sit down with someone for an hour and TALK to them, do you think they will be worshipping an image?

 

This isn't to excuse offensive people from doing offensive things, its just so that people don't HURT themselves trying to fight against someone being an idiot (see violent protests againts muhhamed cartoon).

 

Know what I mean?

Ya i know what you mean ..

But we cant say for sure that one hour of talks will change human worshiping image..

Looks like you are here in this forum for long time, and let me ask you, are you changed?, if not, do you think those people worshiping images will change?.. Let me answer as well, only those will change whom The Creator wills..

[skibture 0]

Ya i know what you mean ..

But we cant say for sure that one hour of talks will change human worshiping image..

Looks like you are here in this forum for long time, and let me ask you, are you changed?, if not, do you think those people worshiping images will change?.. Let me answer as well, only those will change whom The Creator wills..

 

 

I can honestly say that this forum has changed the way I look at the world. Islam is such a big part of what is going on now, that just barely scratching the surface of it is as important as anything.

 

Personally. No I don't think illustrating the prophet has any detriments beyond people getting riled up. Stupid for the people to depict him, stupid for the people to get upset.

 

Yeah, its offensive and dumb to do, but honestly? Thats what happens in the world. Just... don't let it, waste your time. I see it as giving in if your willing to waste your timefighting against something that is only someone else being an idiot and not understanding.

[Odobknarf 0]

Yeah, its offensive and dumb to do, but honestly? Thats what happens in the world. Just... don't let it, waste your time. I see it as giving in if your willing to waste your timefighting against something that is only someone else being an idiot and not understanding.

But don't you think it's precisely because we didn't let it go that there is hardly any images of the Prophet floating around compared to Jesus. Look at the way Christians disgrace their own 'God' by allowing and tolerating the incorporation of his name in everyday frustrations like 'Jesus Christ!...this day isn't going well' (sorry God, I meant this only to illustrate). I'll be blunt, given a really bad situation, one can easily use a 4 letter word or use Jesus. That's the eventual danger.

 

Now compare that 'tolerance' for the use of their own 'God's' name versus the reverence we show for our own Prophet (pbuh)! We show so much respect for our Prophet (pbuh) that we try our best to put pbuh whenever we even mention his name. If you think we are going to do that...do you think we're going to have a laid back approach on any act that borders even a hair line close to disrespect?

 

Think again...and by the way, you didn't address any of my 4 points on my earlier post.

 

Peace.

[Yasnov 1]

Salam,

 

Think again...and by the way, you didn't address any of my 4 points on my earlier post.

Yes, he conveniently ignored it.

 

Wassalam,

Y

[skibture 0]

I didn’t sign the petition because we have more than enough signatures…but I think depicting the prophet Muhammad, pbuh, is potentially harmful to Islam and cannot be over emphasized.

 

So the question is why?

 

1. The Qur’an says God’s practice does not change with time…so your argument that it’s “come in and out of being okay to depict him†is misguided. If something is wrong, it’s wrong…it's past periodic practice is irrelevant in the face of God's unchanging decree.

 

I'm saying that culturally its come in and out of being okay to depict him. Different in different places around the world. I think Iran has some statues of the prophet acually... So you consider it wrong now, and consider it to have always been wrong, other don't. And at other times, others haven't. Not that that makes anything OK, its just good to have a wide perspective.

 

2. If you allow something to start that’s incorrect, however small in scope it may presently be, there is a danger that it can evolve into something far worse over time. After all, that’s the whole reason God sent so many prophets…people just kept forgetting and going more and more astray. Today, if we allow ‘cartoon’ drawings of the prophet Muhammad, by tomorrow its not completely inconceivable we’ll end up making movies about him...such as ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’. As Muslims, we love and respect the Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, far too much to risk leaving open even the smallest possibility for something as blasphemous as that…it is not only wiser but essential to ‘nip this in the bud’ and stop any pictorial depictions of the Prophet now.

 

I dont see a problem with a movie about him. I'm secular so I don't really care. I think there is enough momentum against it, for a movie to ever be made. I'm not saying that its dumb to tell people you feel its disrecptful, but I think it doesn't make sense to waste your time when somone else wants to do something you disagree with. Something that isn't hurting anyone, I mean.

 

 

3. Different artists will depict the Prophet in different ways. In the end, it will give a false impression of what the Prophet really looked like; and any false impression is a form of Untruth. If we, as Muslims, are so guarded about protecting the Truth of the Qur’an so that there is only one version of it, if we painstakingly go out of our way to determine which are the authentic Hadith, then do you not think it would be hypocritical to allow the circulation of false images of the prophet Muhammad? Our religion is about Truth; depicting false images of the prophet Muhammad would be a lie. The two cannot coexist.

 

Would it be OK if the artist first acknowledged that it was a cartoon he was making? Just something that isn't acually how it is. Just admit it? Like when people act in movies, its acting. Its not real. Its not the lying, its them just doing something for creative reasons. Just to create/express etc.

 

For example, let's take the issue of the beard. Now why do many Muslims grow beards? There is only one reason...because the Prophet Muhammad did. So, what if artists draw the Prophet Muhammad, and depict his beard incorrectly; lets say too long or wrong shape or whatever. Now, I think it's not too improbable that some Muslims will follow this incorrect picture; and they would be following that which is false.

 

Heaven help us all if someone mimics a cartoon and grows a funny beard. Just kidding--I understand your arguement.

 

4. People worship Jesus Christ as son of God. If there weren’t so many images of Jesus, I think this would have been less likely because its much harder to worship a man whom you have no image of (I'm not talking about God, I'm talking about a man). Now consider that idol worship, or associating any partner to God, is the only thing God does not forgive. Think about that. That’s huge. Do we really want to risk going anywhere near that? I think not.

 

The problem with me considering this argument is that I don't think there is a god. And any book that claims god has certain rules and regulations, is just a creation of man.

 

So, for the reasons given above, I strongly advocate to steadfastly pursue the removal of the prophet’s image from Wikipedia. God willing.

 

OK. But, its just so much better if people pick the right targets and use the right methods. Signatures to get rid of it--good. Killing the people that drew the picture--bad. I don't know. I mean, there is nothing I can say that will change the way you think. Especially if you are so devoted to your beliefs. I just see some things that are ridiculous...

 

I remember there was a report in newsweek that someone had put the Koran in a toilet in Cuba. There were protests in afghanistand where people DIED. About a week later Newsweek retracted the story. it wasn't true, or they didnt have enough information to stand by it. But still, people DIED. A whole life is gone, the people killed may have gone on to cure cancer, cure aids, spread Islam across the world, etc. This is a little off topic.

 

Another thing is when Muslims stopped buying things from Danish companies. As if punishing a private company is punishment for the government. As if a country shares a collective guilt becuase some people put out a magazine with cartoons in it. The entirety of YOUTUBE is blocked in Pakistan right now, becuase there is a trailer for a film that makes Islam (how its practiced in one part of the world at one time [now]) look bad.

 

Are these reasonable things?

 

Just for a history lesson though, there have been plenty of religious extremeists on the christian side (see 500 years ago). Where they had NO depictions, even crosses were considered sinful. Laughter was wrong. Fashion, etc. Its not new. It was crazy back then for people to make thier lives so miserable becuase of some abstract principle, its crazy now.

 

Target the people that look at theimages--make sure they understand. I bet word would travel a lot quicker through a peaceful pamphlet saying, hey muslims, these are cartoons and ignore them, or understand the arguemnt--then it would if people go crazy and DIE in protests in afghanistan.

[dot 353]

Peace upon those who follow the guidance,

 

Dear Questioner,

First, no one called for a fight here. Its only a couple of mouse clicks :sl:

We should all go for and support civilized reactions. Signing up petitions, sending emails, posting and writing articles are all fine and peaceful means, as long as we do not call for any acts of violence.

At the same time, Muslims have all the right to protect their values, and protest any mockery or ill and/or ignorant intentions against Islam.

 

With regards to the topic here, there is another aspect to it. Depicting any prophet is prohibited in Islam, and there is good wisdom behind that. I see it like something similar to printed literature compared to movies. I'm sure you agree that many novels, when they turn them into movies, they lose a great deal of their charm, grace and beauty. The human mind has an interesting imaginary power. Reading a novel frees your mind as a bird, and allows you to reflect much more beautifully that when you see that same novel on the screen, where you watch fixed boxed figures and scenes. Besides, standards of beauty for example is highly relative to each individual's preferences.

 

In addition, depicting a prophet would take away much of the reservation. It could make you more 'at ease' with him, and less graceful. Eventually, you may find it ok to say something funny about him, or probably laugh when someone does. That's why they started to use prophet Jesus in inappropriate ads, and that's why the west, particularly in Europe, find it ok to insult prophets, even see it as a demonstration of their right to free speech.

 

So, comparing both the Muslim and Christian world, you can easily conclude that the prohibition of depicting prophets worked, and that it did help in maintaining the respect that all prophets deserve.

[Russ of Vespuccia 0]

Wikipedia also shows the dutch cartoons. Shouldn't you be petitioning those instead? The paintings shown of Muhammad on Wikipedia are crafted with care, respect and reverence by faithful muslims centuries ago. Certainly this is nowhere near as offensive. All wikipedia is doing is accurately depicting history. Why do we blame them for that?

[Lars 0]

Not everyone is as smart as you..

Look what happened in India, what they worshiping? A man made idol, we want to avoid that and act now before it's too late...

The problem is that uneducated people might worship idols/picture, people like you smart wont worship image/idol, but rather The Source of Everything, if The Source wills..

 

Hindus and Buddhists dont worship idols. its merely a tool for some people, like the kaba. When the taliban blew up the standing Buddhas not one muslim was harmed and there were no riots. those statues were the oldest standing Buddhas in the world. What do you think would happen if the Al-Aqsa Masjid were blown up? I doubt people would show such restraint. peace.

-Lars.

[al faqeer 2]

Hindus and Buddhists dont worship idols. its merely a tool for some people, like the kaba. When the taliban blew up the standing Buddhas not one muslim was harmed and there were no riots. those statues were the oldest standing Buddhas in the world. What do you think would happen if the Al-Aqsa Masjid were blown up? I doubt people would show such restraint. peace.

-Lars.

 

 

I dont think you know what you talking about Lars sorry . What do you mean Like the Kaaba ?

 

What do you think the Kaaba is to muslims first of all ? b4 i set your facts straight ? :sl:

[skibture 0]

I dont think you know what you talking about Lars sorry . What do you mean Like the Kaaba ?

 

What do you think the Kaaba is to muslims first of all ? b4 i set your facts straight ? :sl:

 

It's a good point about buhhdism that if you destroy gigantic world heritage sites that were created in reverence to the buhhdist religion--no one DIES. I wouldn't like to see it happen, but I wish I could really know for sure what would happen if a western nation had a holy, holy Masjid in it, and decided to blow it up.

 

My guess is violence and outrage.

[al faqeer 2]

It's a good point about buhhdism that if you destroy gigantic world heritage sites that were created in reverence to the buhhdist religion--no one DIES. I wouldn't like to see it happen, but I wish I could really know for sure what would happen if a western nation had a holy, holy Masjid in it, and decided to blow it up.

 

My guess is violence and outrage.

 

Not really - you see Muslims Proved what they are capable of with the Cartoon fiasco , all muslims from all Schools of thought and sects all united with no united nations resolution or EU or whatever and boycotted Denmark , so we are talking about Millions and Millions of Muslims here .

 

As for those who rioted , they were in the thousands out of Anger to these Narrow minded low live Danes but they did not represent the rest of the Muslims who were actually boycotting .

 

Now the problem with ppl is they want to see what the few thousands did and ignore what the Masses did :sl:

 

As for the Taliban and the statues - first of all the Taliban do not represent Islam or did they speak on behalf of Muslims , thats like Saying G Bush and the white house represents Christianity :j: . a little thinking with the brains goes a long way :sl: .

 

The Taliban however ruled that those Statues be demolished according to their interpretation , and they did it .

 

As for the west it has done much worst , It has Mass murdered close to a Million Iraqis in a matter of 5 years through lies and a WMD hoax that never existed , so you see muslims taking revenge ? :no: