Discussion of images and the great degree of laxity that has occurred among Muslims regarding them, and clarification of the Islamic ruling on them.

The Shaykh: Because images must be cut off from the Islamic world, except where there is a dire necessity or at least a pressing need. Today, image-making has become a general calamity, to the point that even Islamic magazines do not escape this sin against the Shari'ah.
I have been following the disagreement among scholars regarding images, both old and new, since my youth. In the past, there was a disagreement about the type of images: one would say that the forbidden images are the three-dimensional ones, while another would say that all images are forbidden, whether three-dimensional or not. The opinion settled on this latter view, which is the correct one, and there is much evidence for it from the hadiths of the Messenger (peace be upon him), but that is not the point here. We have entered the modern era, and means of image-making have appeared that were not known in the previous time when they disagreed about whether the forbidden images are the three-dimensional ones or not. Today, we face the camera, which has become a source of amusement even for small children.
So here a question arises: Are these images permissible, or are they like the previous images, even if the means differ?
In this issue, there are two opinions, as is the case with most issues among Muslims. They were still disputing this issue, after they had agreed that manual image-making is forbidden, but they differed regarding photographic image-making. The majority of people came to hold that this photographic image-making is permissible. The caravan moved behind this opinion, and some people began publishing photographs of some scholars and lecturers at the top of articles. This continued for years, and now we are going backwards: we are returning to publishing imaginary images. Religious magazines are filled with images drawn with a brush and paint, and the like. So where is what we used to say before the existence of this machine, the camera, that manual image-making is forbidden, while mechanical image-making is lawful? The matter has become confused, and we have come to permit even in religious magazines, let alone magazines that do not adhere to the rulings of the Islamic Shari'ah. We do not limit ourselves to publishing the images we claim are permissible because they are machine-made; rather, we go further and draw an image of a noble, righteous scholar with a brush and pen in red, blue, and the like.
What does all of this indicate? It indicates that the Muslims will not return to their glory and honor except as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in a hadith I mentioned in a previous seminar, where he says: If you do such and such and such . If the scholars and Islamic callers do not return to their religion, but are instead progressing in their ideas, so that what was forbidden half a century ago has become lawful today, or at least permissible; what made it permissible? It is that it became widespread and pervasive, meaning it became so common that many people cannot live without these images. So how can the Muslims be saved, when the Messenger prescribes the medicine for them: , and yet as time passes for us, we go backwards with new fatwas every day?
In summary: All images, whether manual or mechanical, are forbidden, falling under the generality of the many hadiths of the Messenger (peace be upon him), among which is: . Is there a difference, I wonder, between ...