Tasweer (making and keeping images, and the view on living beings)

Tasweer is making an image, and a likeness is what matches a thing and reproduces its form, either three-dimensional or flat, and may be fleeting, like a reflection or a shadow. ²

The jurists use the word image for what reproduces a thing's form, with or without shadow. ² Most jurists use timthal (statue) as the same word, though some confine it to living beings. ³ In modern use, rasm is a flat picture drawn by hand. ⁴

A three-dimensional image has bulk that can be felt, and a flat image has two dimensions and is only seen. ² Some images are fleeting: in a mirror, on water, in a shadow, or on a screen. ²

The entry treats the human image, the making of images, their keeping and use, and dealings with them. ⁴

It is good to beautify one's outward and inward form, and not lawful to mutilate the body or alter its created form; the Prophet ﷺ forbade looting and mutilation. ^{4 8}

Depicting man-made things, such as a house, car or ship, is lawful by agreement. ⁹ Depicting created inanimate things, such as mountains, the sun and the moon, is lawful with no dispute except from a fringe view, but making one for someone who worships it, such as sun-worshippers, is not lawful. ^{9 5} Depicting plants and trees is lawful for the majority; the view attributed to Mujahid against fruit-bearing trees was taken up by none, and Ahmad's school is on lawfulness. ^{5 6}

This is the kind that the general prohibition refers to. ⁶ The hadith of the church in Abyssinia, in which the Prophet blamed those who built places of worship on graves and made images in them, is cited. ^{6 10}

Jurists differ on images of living beings in three views. ¹⁰ The first holds it is not forbidden unless one makes an idol worshipped besides God, citing the verse on carving and the hadith on the sale of idols, the words «who vie with God's creation», and the reading that the hadith of the most severely punished makers refers to those who make images to be worshipped. ^{10 7} The second, that of the Malikis, some early scholars and Ibn Hamdan, forbids only images that have a shadow, that is three-dimensional, and are complete in their limbs; a flat image is disliked, not forbidden, and a figure missing a limb whose loss would kill the animal is not forbidden. ⁷ Ibn al-Arabi reported consensus that a three-dimensional image is forbidden. ⁷

Those who forbid images in general cite the hadiths of Aisha about the curtain and the cushion, the curtain the Prophet tore down, the hadith of Gabriel that angels do not enter a house with a dog or an image, the hadith of Abu Hurayra (may God be pleased with him) on the one who creates as God creates, Ibn Abbas's hadith that every maker of images is in the Fire, and Ali's order to efface images. ^{11 12 13 14} The reasons given are four. First, rivalry with God's creation, which some find too narrow, since it would allow images of the sun, mountains and trees and would not reach dolls for children; some read it as a challenge to God's power. Second, that images lead to excess and worship, as the Arabs made idols, so the law closed the way; the scope of this is disputed. Third, mere resemblance to the idolaters, which yields only dislike. Fourth, that an image keeps angels away, which is answered by the example of impurity. ^{14 15 16}

Making three-dimensional images is forbidden according to most scholars, except what is made as a child's toy, what is used in a demeaning way, what has a limb cut off whose loss would kill the animal, or what does not last, such as sweets or dough shapes. ¹⁶

The first view, that of the Malikis and their companions, allows making flat images with dislike; the dislike goes if the figure lacks a limb whose loss would kill, and there is no dislike for a demeaned image. They cite the hadith «angels do not enter a house with an image except a patterned cloth», that God created living things not as surfaces but in bulk, and that images were used in the Prophet's house, in the curtain of Fatima, and on the Persian and Byzantine coins. ^{16 17}

The majority of the Hanafis, Shafiis and Hanbalis, and many early scholars, forbid making flat images as they forbid three-dimensional ones, except the cut-off, the demeaned and some other things. They rely on the general hadiths cursing image-makers, and argue that using an image does not make it lawful to make one. ¹⁸

The Malikis and Hanbalis do not forbid an image missing a limb whose loss would kill, such as a head cut off or a belly torn. The Shafii view is that an image with its head cut off but its body whole is forbidden, and the reverse is in doubt. ^{18 19}

The Shafiis state that imagined images of a human or an animal, such as a winged man or an ox with a beak, are included in the prohibition. They exempt children's toys on the hadith about Aisha's winged horse. ¹⁹

Most scholars allow keeping and using three-dimensional and flat images, whole or cut, when they are demeaned, as on the floor, a rug, a bed or a cushion. On making such images the views differ: the Malikis allow them with lesser disapproval, the Shafiis have two views with the prohibition the sounder, the Hanafis forbid, and the Hanbalis do not state a view. ^{20 19}

The Malikis have two views on making images not meant to last, such as dough or melon-rind figures; the prohibition is the better known. The Shafiis forbid making them but not selling them. ²⁰

Most scholars except making dolls for girls from the prohibition, as the Malikis, Shafiis and Hanbalis do; al-Qadi Iyad reported permission from most scholars. They cite the hadith of Aisha playing with dolls before the Prophet and the curtain episode with the winged horse. The Hanbalis require the dolls to have no head or a limb missing; the others do not. The majority explain the exemption as training girls in raising children; al-Halimi as delight and healthy growth in children. ^{20 21}

The jurists say nothing on making images for teaching beyond what they say of children's dolls; an image made to teach stands under the same rule. ²¹

Most scholars hold that forbidding the making of an image does not forbid keeping or using it. The strong texts concern the making and the maker, not keeping; the reason of rivalry with God's creation is not present in use. The hadiths on keeping mention no punishment, so keeping a forbidden image is a lesser sin, unless one persists in it. An-Nawawi and al-Shibramalisi distinguish making from keeping. ²² On the other side, the use of images by the Prophet and his Companions and Successors is reported; the ring of Daniel had a lion and a lioness with a child, and it came to Umar and was given to Abu Musa al-Ashari (may God be pleased with him). ²²

The phrase is in the two Sahihs from Aisha, Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar, and in other books from Ali, Maymuna, Abu Said, Abu Talha and Zayd ibn Khalid. An-Nawawi explained that angels avoid it because making images is a gross sin and rival to God's creation, and al-Qurtubi because it resembles the unbelievers who keep images. Ibn Hajar held that only an image displayed upright, not demeaned or cut, keeps the angels away. The Hanafi view is that what may be kept does not keep the angels away. ²³

The hadith «angels do not accompany a company with a bell» was read by some as limited to the Prophet's time and to the angel of revelation, since pilgrims do not travel without bells; Ibn Hajar reports this from al-Dawudi and Ibn Wadhdhah. ²⁴

It is lawful to keep and use images of man-made things, of inanimate nature and of plants, whether upright, hung or demeaned, carved on walls, ceilings or floors, flat or three-dimensional (artificial flowers, models of ships, cars and houses, the models of the planetarium), for use or for decoration, unless it becomes wasteful. ^{24 25}

All agree that the image of an idol worshipped besides God is forbidden. Otherwise there is disagreement, but the jurists nearly agree on forbidding an image that is: of a living being and three-dimensional; complete in its limbs; hung or upright in a place of honour and not demeaned; not small; not a child's toy; and not perishable. ²⁴

The Malikis and those with them hold that using flat images is not forbidden but disliked if they are upright, and against the better course if demeaned; for others flat and solid images are alike in prohibition when the conditions are met. ²⁵

An image missing a limb whose loss would kill, solid or flat, may be used, by most Hanafis, Malikis, Shafiis and Hanbalis, and may be kept. A slit in the chest or belly is enough; a removed eye, brow or hand is not. The basis is Gabriel's word to cut the head of the figure so that it is like a tree, and the curtain made into two cushions. The Shafii view is that a headless body is forbidden while the head alone is in doubt. ^{25 26}

The majority hold that a solid living image hung or upright is forbidden while a demeaned one is not; the Hanbalis and Malikis do not dislike demeaned ones, though the Malikis call them against the better course. The reason is that upright images resemble idols, while demeaned ones do not. Ikrima disliked upright figures but not those trodden by feet, and al-Qasim ibn Muhammad leaned on a cushion with pictures. ^{26 27} Some Shafiis took any upright display as forbidden, others only what shows honour; al-Rafii allowed images in a bath or a passage but not in a majlis or a place of honour. A dish, tray or cover is a demeaned use. Ar-Ramli held the Byzantine dinars with images lawful, since they are used in trade. ^{27 28} An image that shows neither honour nor demeaning, such as one in a printed book or a drawer, may be worn, trodden on, or put in a box or a covered place. Ibrahim said there is no harm in images on a ceiling, and Salim ibn Abdallah leaned on a cushion with birds and beasts. ^{28 29}

Using them is lawful a fortiori, since making them is allowed. Al-Qadi Iyad reported permission from the scholars, and that it is allowed for young girls; al-Khattabi said it was for Aisha while she was not of age, but Ibn Hajar doubted that and said the permission continues while the need lasts. The reason is training girls for raising children, and also giving joy and growth to children, so it covers boys too; Abu Yusuf stated that a toy may be sold and played with by children. ²⁹ They cite the hadith of Rubayyi bint Mu'awwidh, who said the children were given woollen toys on the day of Ashura to keep them from food. ²⁹ The Hanbalis alone require the toy to be headless; they also allow a guardian to buy non-figured toys for the girl in his care. ²⁹

The Hanafis and Malikis dislike wearing clothes with images; for the Hanafis the dislike goes if another garment covers the image. The Shafiis allow it, since wearing an image demeans it, and the better view is that an image on a garment laid on the ground is not a wrong. The Hanbalis have two views: forbidden, or only disliked, the latter preferred by Ibn Tamim; the proof of lawfulness is the hadith «except a patterned cloth». ³⁰

The Hanafis state that small images are not covered by the prohibition on keeping and using, since idol-worshippers do not use them that way; they set the smallness by various measures, such as not showing its features to a standing viewer. Abu Hurayra's ring had two flies, and a silver ring with small figures is not disliked. Outside the Hanafi school there is no difference between small and large; the Shafiis allow images on coins because they are demeaned by use, and the Hanbalis say it is not fit to wear a ring with an image. ^{30 31}

The Malikis and Shafiis forbid looking at forbidden images, but not demeaned or cut ones, since looking at what is forbidden is forbidden. The Hanbalis do not forbid looking at a forbidden image as such. Ali entered a church with the people when Umar was fed there and looked at the images. The Shafiis do not forbid looking at an image even with desire. ³¹

Entering a place in which the entrant knows there are upright images in a forbidden setting is lawful; the Hanbalis say one need not leave, since the Prophet entered the Ka'ba where there were images of Abraham and Ishmael. The Shafiis take it as forbidden in the better view, and dislike it in the other, with a distinction between sitting places and passages. ^{32 33}

Accepting a wedding feast is obligatory for most jurists. If the host has forbidden images displayed in the place, and the guest knew before he came, the jurists agree that acceptance is not obligatory, and the Shafiis say it is forbidden; if the images can be removed, attendance is obligatory. ³³

The image should be moved from its forbidden setting, and not necessarily destroyed; if it is upright it should be taken down; if it must stay, the head may be cut from the body, the chest or belly split, the face scraped or obliterated with paint, or washed off. Ali was sent to erase every image, and the curtain was made into cushions. ³⁴

All agree that a forbidden image in the direction of prayer makes it disliked, as it resembles the prostration of unbelievers before their idols. Elsewhere the Hanafis dislike an image above the head, in front or beside, or on the place of prostration, but not one below the feet or on the seat, or in the hand, or hidden, or small. The Shafiis dislike wearing a cloth with images and praying toward or on it. The Hanbalis dislike praying toward an upright image, but not behind or above. ^{34 35}

Places of worship should be kept free of images, lest they lead to worshipping them, as Ibn Abbas explained the origin of the idolatry of Noah's people. The Prophet entered the Ka'ba and found images of Abraham and Mary, and ordered them removed. The hadith of the church in Abyssinia, «those are the worst of creation», shows that images in mosques are forbidden. ^{35 36}

Churches made lawful in Muslim lands by treaty are not interfered with for the images inside, and the Muslim may enter them by the majority. The Hanbalis allow entering and praying in them without dislike in the sounder view; a Hanbali and Hanafi view dislikes entering, as the haunt of devils; most Shafiis forbid entering a church with images hung in it. ³⁶

Images whose making is lawful, such as flat images for the Malikis, cut images, toys, and sweets, may be sold, bought, ordered, and hired for, and the price and hire are lawful; a guardian may buy toys for the child in his care from her money. Forbidden images may not be hired for, paid for, ordered or helped with. Al-Mawardi alone allowed the maker a fair wage. ³⁶ A forbidden image may not be sold, given, deposited, pledged, endowed or bequeathed; money taken for it is unclean and must be given in charity and not returned to its owner. ³⁷ If the image can be made useful after change, the Shafiis disagree on the sale; ar-Ramli held the sale valid, and the Durr held that a clay horse bought for a child is not a valid purchase. ³⁷

The destruction of forbidden images is compared with the breaking of crosses, since both were worshipped besides God. Yet the Prophet told Aisha about the curtain «take it away from me», and ordered it made into cushions, which shows that an image is not destroyed if it can be used lawfully. If the forbidden image cannot be removed except by destroying it, destruction is required, a rare case such as a solid figure fixed into a wall; its destroyer owes nothing, since the wrong can end only by destroying it. ³⁸ Whoever destroys an image that could be used lawfully owes its value without the forbidden craft; this is the Hanafi school, the sounder Shafii view and the apparent Maliki view. The analogy of the Hanbali school is that destruction is lawful without liability, though one narration requires compensation. ³⁸

No hand is cut for stealing images whose broken value is nothing or below the nisab. In other cases the Hanafis, the less favoured Shafii view and the Hanbali view that is the school's view hold that stealing a musical instrument or a forbidden image is not punished by amputation, even if the broken value reaches the nisab, since its lawfulness has become a doubt. The Hanbalis add that stealing a cross or an idol of gold is not punished. The Malikis and the sounder Shafii view require amputation if the broken value reaches the nisab. Most jurists hold that stolen coins with images are punished, since money is for wealth and has no doubt; one Hanbali view distinguishes whether the thief meant to break it. ^{38 39}

The Sheikh reports that some muftis say the television image is imagination; his own view is not clear in the recording (needs_source). ⁴⁰