| Answer: Devout Muslims of the sub-continent have always
taken a firm stand against impressions resembling living beings, whether
hand-drawn pictures or photographs by the camera. Many scholars of the
Middle-East, on the contrary, have lately tended to draw a line of distinction
between the two: they are equally averse to the former but have invariably shown
inclination towards the permissibility of photographs taken by cameras.
There are so many narrations of the Prophet (sws)
condemning the use of pictures considered reliable according to the traditional
criteria of authenticity that the direction certainly cannot be overlooked.
One such Statement attributed to the Prophet (sws), for
instance, warns thus: ‘On the Day of Judgement creators of images will be
chastised and asked to inject in them life and they will be unable to do so’. (Bukhārī).
This warning led many scholars, specially those belonging
to the sub-continent, to believe that it is basically the insult to the sanctity
of life in objects attempted to be captured through images that invites the
displeasure of the Almighty. There is therefore no difference whatsoever,
according to them, whether the images are photographs taken by a camera or
hand-drawn pictures. Ironically, however, most of them do not object to the
pictures of plants, which, it is well known, are equally living.
Many of the scholars belonging to the Arab world were led
to take a different stance on the issue because of some other narrations, one of
which can be translated thus: ‘Who does a greater wrong than one who tries to
create something like My creation. Let them create a particle or a seed or a
barley seed’. (Bukhārī & Muslim)
They contended that since the real cause of the Almighty's
displeasure appears to be the inaccurate and deformed results of pictures and
sculptures, and since camera helps in capturing the exact reflection of the
original object, the consideration in the narration doesn’t appear to be
applicable to photographs. The late Shaykh Muhammad Bakhīt a former Muftī of
Egypt, for instance, opined that photography is an art of capturing a shade or a
reflection by a special technique. He clarified that what is forbidden is to
create a likeness which has no previous existence in order to produce something
similar to what Allāh has created. Using camera to take a picture is, on the
contrary, no different from what we see in the mirror.
Contrary to the two opinions on the subject mentioned
above, we believe that a careful consideration of all the relevant narrations on
the subject leads one to believe that images were condemned not for any
intrinsic evil in them, but primarily because they contributed to the
polytheistic tendencies of the people of that time. It appears that idolatory
and picture-worship were rampant in that period and since the predominantly
monotheistic attitude of Islam couldn’t have tolerated even the slightest
deviation from the cause of Tawhīd (monotheism), all types of images were
condemned to start with. The condemnation was intended for the purpose of
blocking all ways leading to the evil. There are examples in some other areas of
Islam as well which lead us to believe that if once an extreme step helps in
obliterating an evil, and the condemnation of the mere cause is not needed for
the purpose, Islam does not insist on continuing with restriction on such cases.
When intoxicants were banned, for instance, the Prophet of Allāh (sws) had
commanded discontinuance of use of all containers traditionally used to serve
them even for othersiwe legitimate purposes. Once the extreme restriction helped
in erasing the obssession for intoxicants, the ban on the use of such containers
was lifted. We believe that the restriction on pictures and statues also falls
in the same category. Therefore, all images, whether paintings, statues, or
photographs which do not contribute to the cause of polytheism anymore are
permissible, if they do not violate other principles of Islam.
Statues and images carrying any religious sanctity, for
instance, would continue to be condemned for the same reason. Pictures
contributing to obscenity, likewise, would be disallowed though for a different
cause.
If the aforementioned point-of-view is accepted, the
naration quoted earlier would mean that the creators of images who used to
worship and pin all hopes of salvation on the lifeless gods would be asked to
inject life in their self-created deities to rescue them from the wrath of the
Almighty. The demand, naturally, would be meant only to add insult to their
injury. Unable to do so, they would curse themselves for their past behaviour as
mentioned in the Qur’ān:
And [the polytheists] will be told: ‘Invoke your
partners’. They will call on them but they will not answer, and they will see
the torment [and wish] if only they had come to guidance. [28:64]
|