What is the ruling on children's dolls made of cloth stuffed with cotton, and is it permissible to draw eyes and mouths on their heads? Please issue a ruling on this, and may Allah reward you.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : A questioner asks: What is the ruling on children's dolls made of cloth stuffed with cotton, and is it permissible to draw eyes and mouths on their heads? Please issue a ruling on this, and may Allah reward you with good?
The Shaykh : What I see, and Allah knows best, is that making these statues or dolls for young children is a permissible matter in the Sunnah. However, I do not see the deepening of their depiction and perfecting them as mentioned in the question. I observe something, and this is one of the subtle points of knowledge that students of knowledge should observe:
Regarding these children's toys and their presence in the house, even though they are statues, there are two opinions among scholars. One is that they are not permissible, applying the general texts that prohibit image-making and keeping images in homes. Some say that these images are exempted from the general texts in terms of making and keeping them. This is what we adopt and consider correct, if Allah wills. However, we do not doubt that when the Wise Lawgiver exempts a ruling from a general text, it is for a wisdom that may be apparent to some people and hidden from others. We observe that one of the wisdoms in permitting these toys for young children is to train them in matters related to household affairs, what is called today home management, such as sewing and the like. As for the deepening of depicting the ears, eyes, nose, and mouth with lines, this is related to what they call art. The Wise Lawgiver permitted this for an apparent benefit for young girls, such as A'ishah and the like. It is not in the interest of a girl to concern herself with this precision in depiction. Therefore, they say that what is contrary to analogy is not to be used as a basis for analogy. We cannot expand here beyond what the text indicates regarding the toys of the Lady A'ishah. It was not reported that she played with toys of this precision in depiction. It is sufficient to make these statues from rags only. As for the claim that this is abrogated by the generality of those hadiths, this is, in my opinion, an oversight of some conditions mentioned by scholars of usul al-fiqh in their books. It is required in knowing the abrogating and the abrogated to first know the earlier and the later, and secondly, and this is more important, that reconciliation between the two texts is not possible in principle. If reconciliation is difficult, then one proceeds to abrogation. However, the claim that this specific ruling is abrogated by the general text is something that scholars of fiqh, or usul al-fiqh, never say. In reality, some of the noble scholars fall into this, abrogating some specific texts because they contradict some general texts. The correct view is that the general text is specified by the specific text. Even if the Salaf call the specifying text the abrogator and the general text the abrogated, they mean that a part of its parts is the abrogated. If the difference between the terminology of the Salaf and the terminology of the Khalaf regarding the abrogating and the abrogated is observed, many difficulties will disappear for the student of knowledge when he finds, for example, al-Suyuti in his book *Al-Itqan fi 'Ulum al-Qur'an* mentioning that there are approximately three hundred abrogated verses. He means this in the general terminology of the Salaf, which is specification in the specific terminology of the Khalaf, as we said. Then the difficulty of three hundred abrogated verses disappears. There are no such abrogated verses in the Qur'an at all, but they mean specified. On this basis, the hadiths about children's toys that A'ishah made for herself, and that some of the Ansar made for their children to keep them busy from breaking their fast from food... in Ramadan, these are to be primitive and very superficial toys only to achieve the benefit we mentioned earlier. And Allah knows best.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : And you as well.
The Shaykh : What I see, and Allah knows best, is that making these statues or dolls for young children is a permissible matter in the Sunnah. However, I do not see the deepening of their depiction and perfecting them as mentioned in the question. I observe something, and this is one of the subtle points of knowledge that students of knowledge should observe:
Regarding these children's toys and their presence in the house, even though they are statues, there are two opinions among scholars. One is that they are not permissible, applying the general texts that prohibit image-making and keeping images in homes. Some say that these images are exempted from the general texts in terms of making and keeping them. This is what we adopt and consider correct, if Allah wills. However, we do not doubt that when the Wise Lawgiver exempts a ruling from a general text, it is for a wisdom that may be apparent to some people and hidden from others. We observe that one of the wisdoms in permitting these toys for young children is to train them in matters related to household affairs, what is called today home management, such as sewing and the like. As for the deepening of depicting the ears, eyes, nose, and mouth with lines, this is related to what they call art. The Wise Lawgiver permitted this for an apparent benefit for young girls, such as A'ishah and the like. It is not in the interest of a girl to concern herself with this precision in depiction. Therefore, they say that what is contrary to analogy is not to be used as a basis for analogy. We cannot expand here beyond what the text indicates regarding the toys of the Lady A'ishah. It was not reported that she played with toys of this precision in depiction. It is sufficient to make these statues from rags only. As for the claim that this is abrogated by the generality of those hadiths, this is, in my opinion, an oversight of some conditions mentioned by scholars of usul al-fiqh in their books. It is required in knowing the abrogating and the abrogated to first know the earlier and the later, and secondly, and this is more important, that reconciliation between the two texts is not possible in principle. If reconciliation is difficult, then one proceeds to abrogation. However, the claim that this specific ruling is abrogated by the general text is something that scholars of fiqh, or usul al-fiqh, never say. In reality, some of the noble scholars fall into this, abrogating some specific texts because they contradict some general texts. The correct view is that the general text is specified by the specific text. Even if the Salaf call the specifying text the abrogator and the general text the abrogated, they mean that a part of its parts is the abrogated. If the difference between the terminology of the Salaf and the terminology of the Khalaf regarding the abrogating and the abrogated is observed, many difficulties will disappear for the student of knowledge when he finds, for example, al-Suyuti in his book *Al-Itqan fi 'Ulum al-Qur'an* mentioning that there are approximately three hundred abrogated verses. He means this in the general terminology of the Salaf, which is specification in the specific terminology of the Khalaf, as we said. Then the difficulty of three hundred abrogated verses disappears. There are no such abrogated verses in the Qur'an at all, but they mean specified. On this basis, the hadiths about children's toys that A'ishah made for herself, and that some of the Ansar made for their children to keep them busy from breaking their fast from food... in Ramadan, these are to be primitive and very superficial toys only to achieve the benefit we mentioned earlier. And Allah knows best.
The questioner : May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : And you as well.