Reading the chapter "Incomplete and Distorted Statues" from the book *Al-Halal wa al-Haram* by al-Qaradawi, and Shaykh al-Albani’s response to it.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"Incomplete and Distorted Statues:
It is reported in the hadith narrated by Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i, up to its end.
A group of scholars have used this hadith as evidence that the forbidden images are those that are complete." Pay attention to this research, for it is good.
"A group of scholars have used this hadith as evidence that the forbidden images are those that are complete, while those that lack a limb without which life is not possible are permissible." The author adds, saying: "However, the correct and sincere view regarding what Jibril requested, namely cutting off the head of the statue until it becomes like a tree, indicates to us that the criterion is not the effect of the missing limb on the life or death of the image, but rather the criterion is its distortion, such that its appearance no longer suggests its veneration after this part of it is removed."
In any case, although his statement is good, he still ties it to three-dimensional statues and what was worshipped besides Allah (Mighty and Majestic). As for us, based on our established principle of generalization, and adding to it, we say: The criterion in altering the image is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) explicitly stated, namely that it becomes like a tree, meaning its features appear and it becomes another reality, like a tree. This alteration is what takes the image out of being forbidden. As for the ingenuity of some later scholars in saying that the image is altered by the simplest thing, this is in reality a deviation that has affected some of the later scholars, which falls under the category of legal stratagems. We have mentioned to you many examples of such stratagems, which they unjustly call legal stratagems, and they are undoubtedly innovations. Among these is the issue of altering the forbidden image until it becomes... The author pointed to a type of alteration, meaning whether the image is a half-statue. Does a person live like that? Of course, a person does not live without intestines or a stomach. So this image is permissible. And thus some of them were ingenious and expanded, saying: If there is an image and a line is drawn on the neck, like glue, or rather tar, then the image has been altered, so it... was forbidden before this line... is multiplied because of this line. And thus, as time recedes, the trials and stratagems in following what Allah has forbidden, including images, increase. Until I read with my own eyes a very strange research by one of the scholars of al-Azhar, in the magazine *Nur al-Islam*, which became a magazine that is not light, no, *Nur al-Islam*, *Nur al-Islam* in the past, but it was published by the Sheikhdom of al-Azhar, and then it became titled *Al-Azhar Magazine*. *Nur al-Islam* published an article by one of the scholars on exactly this research. First, he went to what the author went to, that the forbidden images are the three-dimensional ones. Then he progressed in the topic and wanted to show Islam in the appearance that is acceptable to those who deviate from Islam, who accuse Islam of rigidity and regression and its fighting of fine arts. He wanted to show that Islam is not regressive and not fighting of fine arts. After he limited the prohibition of images to three-dimensional statues and idols, he fell into a problem, a problem he himself fell into, and he knows that those who complain about Islam have many complaints, and among what they complain about is its prohibition of statues. So whoever inspired this writer to reach a way of these stratagems to make statues permissible by the slightest stratagem said: After he touched on the topic that altering the image and making it in a position where, if it were truly alive, it could not live, if the image is like that, even if three-dimensional, it is lawful. He said: So we take from here a very wide dispensation. He knows, he said: "We taught them the oath, we preceded them at the doors". He knows the devils, so it did not occur to him that this is making permissible what Allah has forbidden. He says to the sculptor or artist, in their terminology: Do not worry, make whatever statues you wish, and then, a complete three-dimensional statue, then dig small holes from the top of the head to the brain. Does this body live if it were alive? Of course, it does not live, but this is a defect from the artistic side. Do not worry, put a wig on the drilled head, and there it appears in its most complete form. This is a Muslim and a scholar from the scholars of al-Azhar. Thus he makes permissible what Allah has forbidden by the slightest stratagems, in accordance with the hadith of Jarir ibn Batta.
- Do not drink with your left hand, O master, for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited that.
Ibn Batta narrates a hadith whose chain is graded good by Imam Ibn Kathir, and I have a concern regarding it. But the truth is that the Muslims do a lot of what the Jews did, among which is making images permissible by formal shapes or drilling from above and then covering it with hair. This is in reality something that can be said: we have preceded the Jews in stratagems to make permissible what Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has forbidden.
So the truth, as the author said: The alteration by which the prohibition of images is removed is a radical alteration until it becomes like a tree, meaning the hands are shaved with some lines so they become... like branches, like leaves, and thus it becomes another reality. And this is a principle of the principles of the Shari'ah: if there is something forbidden and this forbidden thing develops until it becomes something else entirely, such that you do not feel that it is that thing, neither in appearance nor in description, then without doubt the ruling here changes; it is originally forbidden and becomes lawful with this alteration. The greatest example of that is: wine that ferments by itself. Is it considered forbidden? No, because its reality has become another reality.
For example, the forbidden carrion, forbidden due to the natural putrefaction that occurs in it due to winds, rains, heat, and sun, becomes salt, for example, with time. Is this salt called forbidden because its origin was carrion? No, its reality has changed completely. And thus there are many examples.
So if a line is placed on the image or it is drilled in a place... but the image is still an image, and even if it is forbidden, one must not be deceived by such formal alterations.
It is reported in the hadith
That Jibril (peace be upon him) refused to enter the house of the Messenger because of the presence of a statue at the door of his house, and he did not enter the next day until he said to him: Order the head of the statue to be cut off, until it becomes like a tree.
أن جبريل عليه السلام امتنع عن دخول بيت الرسول، لوجود تمثال على باب بيته، ولم يدخل في اليوم التالي حتى قال له: مُر برأس التمثال فليقطع، حتى يصير كهيئة الشجرةA group of scholars have used this hadith as evidence that the forbidden images are those that are complete." Pay attention to this research, for it is good.
"A group of scholars have used this hadith as evidence that the forbidden images are those that are complete, while those that lack a limb without which life is not possible are permissible." The author adds, saying: "However, the correct and sincere view regarding what Jibril requested, namely cutting off the head of the statue until it becomes like a tree, indicates to us that the criterion is not the effect of the missing limb on the life or death of the image, but rather the criterion is its distortion, such that its appearance no longer suggests its veneration after this part of it is removed."
In any case, although his statement is good, he still ties it to three-dimensional statues and what was worshipped besides Allah (Mighty and Majestic). As for us, based on our established principle of generalization, and adding to it, we say: The criterion in altering the image is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) explicitly stated, namely that it becomes like a tree, meaning its features appear and it becomes another reality, like a tree. This alteration is what takes the image out of being forbidden. As for the ingenuity of some later scholars in saying that the image is altered by the simplest thing, this is in reality a deviation that has affected some of the later scholars, which falls under the category of legal stratagems. We have mentioned to you many examples of such stratagems, which they unjustly call legal stratagems, and they are undoubtedly innovations. Among these is the issue of altering the forbidden image until it becomes... The author pointed to a type of alteration, meaning whether the image is a half-statue. Does a person live like that? Of course, a person does not live without intestines or a stomach. So this image is permissible. And thus some of them were ingenious and expanded, saying: If there is an image and a line is drawn on the neck, like glue, or rather tar, then the image has been altered, so it... was forbidden before this line... is multiplied because of this line. And thus, as time recedes, the trials and stratagems in following what Allah has forbidden, including images, increase. Until I read with my own eyes a very strange research by one of the scholars of al-Azhar, in the magazine *Nur al-Islam*, which became a magazine that is not light, no, *Nur al-Islam*, *Nur al-Islam* in the past, but it was published by the Sheikhdom of al-Azhar, and then it became titled *Al-Azhar Magazine*. *Nur al-Islam* published an article by one of the scholars on exactly this research. First, he went to what the author went to, that the forbidden images are the three-dimensional ones. Then he progressed in the topic and wanted to show Islam in the appearance that is acceptable to those who deviate from Islam, who accuse Islam of rigidity and regression and its fighting of fine arts. He wanted to show that Islam is not regressive and not fighting of fine arts. After he limited the prohibition of images to three-dimensional statues and idols, he fell into a problem, a problem he himself fell into, and he knows that those who complain about Islam have many complaints, and among what they complain about is its prohibition of statues. So whoever inspired this writer to reach a way of these stratagems to make statues permissible by the slightest stratagem said: After he touched on the topic that altering the image and making it in a position where, if it were truly alive, it could not live, if the image is like that, even if three-dimensional, it is lawful. He said: So we take from here a very wide dispensation. He knows, he said: "We taught them the oath, we preceded them at the doors". He knows the devils, so it did not occur to him that this is making permissible what Allah has forbidden. He says to the sculptor or artist, in their terminology: Do not worry, make whatever statues you wish, and then, a complete three-dimensional statue, then dig small holes from the top of the head to the brain. Does this body live if it were alive? Of course, it does not live, but this is a defect from the artistic side. Do not worry, put a wig on the drilled head, and there it appears in its most complete form. This is a Muslim and a scholar from the scholars of al-Azhar. Thus he makes permissible what Allah has forbidden by the slightest stratagems, in accordance with the hadith of Jarir ibn Batta.
- Do not drink with your left hand, O master, for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited that.
Ibn Batta narrates a hadith whose chain is graded good by Imam Ibn Kathir, and I have a concern regarding it
Do not make permissible the forbidden things by the slightest stratagems, as the Jews did.
لا تستحل المحرمات بأدنى الحيل كما فعلت اليهودSo the truth, as the author said: The alteration by which the prohibition of images is removed is a radical alteration until it becomes like a tree, meaning the hands are shaved with some lines so they become... like branches, like leaves, and thus it becomes another reality. And this is a principle of the principles of the Shari'ah: if there is something forbidden and this forbidden thing develops until it becomes something else entirely, such that you do not feel that it is that thing, neither in appearance nor in description, then without doubt the ruling here changes; it is originally forbidden and becomes lawful with this alteration. The greatest example of that is: wine that ferments by itself. Is it considered forbidden? No, because its reality has become another reality.
For example, the forbidden carrion, forbidden due to the natural putrefaction that occurs in it due to winds, rains, heat, and sun, becomes salt, for example, with time. Is this salt called forbidden because its origin was carrion? No, its reality has changed completely. And thus there are many examples.
So if a line is placed on the image or it is drilled in a place... but the image is still an image, and even if it is forbidden, one must not be deceived by such formal alterations.