Is it permissible to spread the call and convey it on television? With an explanation of the Shaykh’s ruling on image-making?

The questioner : Praise be to Allah. This is a good opportunity for us to benefit from the virtue ofThe Shaykh : Regarding the call in the midst of television, O Shaykh, we also have the opportunity to establish or present programs through television.

The Shaykh : Hashim: Al-Sudani.

The questioner : The Sudanese television. In the past, there was difficulty. There was an opportunity given to Shaykh Abu Zayd Muhammad Hamza, who is one of our scholars. There was a Sufi speaking on television spreading superstition, so he sawThe Shaykh : and requested from the administration to comment on these superstitions. They gave him an opportunity, and then the matter moved to a response from him and a response fromThe Shaykh : until it became a debate that lasted nearly a year. It was all about creed, and the creed of the awliya (close friends of Allah) and the worship of the awliya, and so on. The tapes are recorded, so perhaps the brothers will benefit from them, if Allah wills. Then, in this recent period... the debate was by order of al-Numeiri in his time, instigated by Uthman al-Mirghani... Now, an opportunity has been given to us on television. The poor and weak one, I mean, has programs now. Praise be to Allah, it started with one of the brothers, Brother Yusuf al-Kudda, in a program called "Generalities," general things regarding dhikr (the remembrance of Allah), virtues, and so on. After that, an opportunity for a Friday seminar was opened, where the scholars come, and each time there is a talk until we stand. Now, there is a program I present, which naturally has some weakness, but in the name of creed and faith, we speak about creed, praise be to Allah, until we reached speaking about the unseen, about the Dajjal (the false messiah), about pessimism, and other things.

The Shaykh : What Allah willed!

The questioner : So we want, I mean, from your virtue guidance in this matter; because some of the brothers see that it is not permissible to enter television, or to present programs through television, and they rebuke us for some things. We have sought a ruling and asked some scholars about this matter, and we want your comment, may Allah bless you?

The Shaykh : I add my voice as a summary to those brothers. I do not see it permissible for the Muslim caller to expose himself to appear on television. But detailing this general statement requires an introduction, and then understanding the details according to what we hear from the answer. In my belief, whoever believes that there is no difference in the forbidden images by the explicit texts of the authentic Sunnah between manual images, photographic images, and video images, as they say today, whoever does not see a difference in the prohibition between all these images, and that they are all included in the generality of the hadiths forbidding image-making, such as what you know of his saying, (peace and blessings be upon him): , , then whoever sees with us the prohibition of all these images in their different means, at that time, he should be with us in not being an agent with television. And here we know, and recently we asked a Muslim American this same question, because there now television is in every house, and thus the call of Islam can be delivered to every house by means of television, especially since the American policy there has something of what they call democracy, where they allow every person of opinion and every person of belief to publish it on television.
The point is: I see that spreading the call is not limited to the way of television. For example, you can speak by means of the radio, where there is no display of the image, and the people’s attention is not directed to this imaged person, and thus you fulfill the obligation of the call and conveying it to the largest number of people possible, whether they are inside Sudan or outside it. As for taking television, which is first images, and second a fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) perhaps for the caller himself, I do not see that we are in need of such a means to convey the call. And I think you believe with us well that that word which says "the end justifies the means" is not an Islamic rule. And since the matter is so, we should not be influenced by the means of the Westerners who take every means to increase the number of their listeners, and perhaps their exploiters. Why?
Because, as you know, and we are in these places, he said, (peace and blessings be upon him): , so our means are completely different from the means of the mushrikin (one who associates partners with Allah). Look at what has befallen the Muslims from being influenced by this false rule, and if many of their intellectuals or scholars may explicitly deny it verbally, but they may approve it in action. The Christians and their priests and monks do not deny at all the mixing of women with men on Sunday in the church, nor do they deny that women attend the church in their most beautiful adornment and garments, because this is a means to increase the number of worshippers, they claim! And this, in my belief, this or this lewdness was not in the churches in the past, but the decree of Allah, (Mighty and Majestic), in His creation is that the matter is as the poet said:
"And the greatest of the fire is from the small sparks"
So evil begins drop by drop, step by step, then it increases and spreads throughout the land.
Perhaps you all remember the hadith of Aisha in the "Sahihayn" (the two authentic collections) that Umm Salama and Umm Habiba, (may Allah be pleased with them all), when they returned from Abyssinia, mentioned a church in it, and mentioned of its beauty and images in it, so he said, (peace and blessings be upon him): . The point is they built those images in it, so what have the Muslims done today and before today from a long time ago? They have decorated their mosques, and Abu Dawud narrated in his "Sunan" from the hadith of Ibn Abbas that he said: The Messenger of Allah, (peace and blessings be upon him), said: - meaning: by raising its building - then Ibn Abbas said, either by independent legal reasoning or by being stopped by the Prophet for him: , and the reality today does not need explanation.

The questioner: Correct.

The Shaykh : This decoration, old and new, is taken as a means to attract customers and increase them, but this is not how the Shari'ah (Islamic sacred law) is, as that poet said:
"Sa'd led them, and Sa'd was wrapped *** This is not, O Sa'd, how you lead the camels"
So now we want to call the Muslims who have strayed from Islam, and the disbelievers who are ignorant of Islam, we want to call them, so it is not permissible for us to make lawful in the path of this call what is lawful and what is forbidden, but rather to fear Allah, (Mighty and Majestic), and as we were commanded to eat what is lawful and leave what is forbidden, so from the means we take from them what is permissible and what is good, and we leave from them what is other than that. If we are agreed that images in general are forbidden, I think the matter is very clear, and it is that the Muslim is not permitted to take the means of his appearance on television and conveying his voice to the people, and this conveying is obligatory, but displaying his image to the people is not obligatory, so we must distinguish between this means which is necessary, which is making the people hear the word of truth, and the means today, what Allah wills, are facilitated and smoothed, as for conveying to the people and his tongue’s state saying: here I am so-and-so, this is what I fear most, in addition to what has preceded of our contradiction in using the forbidden images; what I fear most is that it will be true of the one who exposes himself that it will be true of him his saying, (peace and blessings be upon him): , so this is authentic, it makes them hear the voice and displays their image, but this is a fitnah (trial, discord or temptation), and therefore the Muslim caller should suffice in conveying the voice by every means, and with that he hopes that Allah, (Mighty and Majestic), will make him firm, and not lead him astray, because, also, as came in some hadiths: , or as he said, (peace and blessings be upon him).

The questioner : .

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : .

The Shaykh, and without doubt that television is one of the most severe means that lead people astray, and divert the hearts and eyes of people to this which appears on television, whether it is a Shaykh or a priest or a teacher, or a joker, or something similar to that. This is my opinion, but it is based on the prohibition of all images, so I think you are with us in this and that you

The Shaykh : Hashim: We have no objection to the prohibition.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The Shaykh : Hashim: We are in agreement on the prohibition of images, and praise be to Allah.
He said:The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah. So, if the matter is as such, then we turn away from using any image except for what is absolutely necessary by way of analogy, consideration, and derivation from the hadith of the toys of 'A'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her). We do not say, as some of the scholars say, that this was before the prohibition of images, because this was in Madinah and during the Medinan period. Rather, this is an exception to the original ruling that forbids every image. Undoubtedly, spreading knowledge in a way where we have no path but this one is a permissible matter, if Allah wills, and necessity is estimated according to its extent.

The Shaykh : Hashim: One minute. The reality is that regarding television, we do not have the authority to enter into it, but we are commanded to enter into it. For example, there was a discussion between one of our Salafi brothers and a tyrant from among the great tyrants. This tyrant was saying: "The wali (close friend of Allah) knows the unseen."

The Shaykh: Allah is the Greatest!

The Shaykh : Hashim: The wali is in Khartoum and sees what is happening in America!

The Shaykh: Allah is the Greatest!

The Shaykh : Hashim: Yes, indeed, and many things of this sort were mentioned. When our brother challenged him, he said to the secretary who was presenting him—the secretary who presents him says to him: "O Shaykh so-and-so, the words you are saying are dangerous." He said to him: "No, if I want to, I can teach you the unseen." Yes, so our brother said to them: "Let the many words go. I have money in my pocket right now. If you know how much it is, I will give it to you. It is not far or near, it is right here in my pocket. Do you know how much it is? I will give it to you." This dialogue, O honorable...The Shaykh : ...opened up a very large field for people to pay attention to the evil and the good, and they began to distinguish between the evil and the good, and they began to rescue those whom they used to worship. We were invited to this television, and the invitation came from the authority. We fear that the authority will turn us over to our institutions and schools and such. So, if they invite us, we respond. If we do not respond, we are considered fugitives. They consider us fugitives and keepers of the times in order to convey our message. So, from this perspective, our personal view is that we consider ourselves mujahideen (strugglers) within the limits of our capacity. As for photography, we are in agreement on its prohibition, on its being forbidden.

The Shaykh : This is correct within the limits of what you mentioned, but that is one thing, and for the da'iyah (caller to Islam) to expose himself to present himself with a lecture or a speech he delivers on television is another thing.

The Shaykh : Hashim: It strikes him with arrogance and self-admiration.

The Shaykh : First, it may strike him with arrogance, or it may not. But secondly, he has departed from the rule. The circumstances you mentioned are one thing, and the general rule we are discussing is another thing.

The Shaykh : Hashim: Correct. If this is the rule that deviated, we found a correction for it. For example, we permitted photography for the ID card and for the university.

The Shaykh : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh : Hashim: And its name is the license. We permitted it for all these things. So, is there no objection to this particular case? We permit it to correct an error that has spread throughout the world, and it must be corrected.

The Shaykh : This, may Allah bless you, is not a point of disagreement. But what we fear most is that images will become a permissible matter for the general Muslims, even among the Salafis, especially for those who distinguish between manual photography and photographic photography, saying that photographic photography did not do anything; rather, it pressed a button and released the image.

The Shaykh : Hashim: By Allah, you have done a great good, O Shaykh. We, thirty-five years ago, a great Salafi scholar issued a fatwa that there is nothing wrong with a camera image.

The Shaykh : And many still do.

The Shaykh : Hashim: And we did not take his opinion. He permitted us other things. I was an employee in the state, and I could not save from my salary what I needed to build a house. The state gives me a loan to build the house and deducts it from me over ten years, but four percent interest is placed on it.

The Shaykh: Allah is the Greatest!

The Shaykh : Hashim: Every year, so it became compound interest. I sought a fatwa, and he also said it was permissible. He is a Salafi scholar, correct, as you mentioned, many Salafi scholars. But we were in agreement that photography is undoubtedly forbidden, but necessity has its weight.

The Shaykh : It has its rulings, yes.

The Shaykh : Hashim: And we ask Allah to guide us to what is good.

The Shaykh : May Allah grant that, O Lord of the worlds.


The questioner : We asked you years ago about the topic of television, and your answer was that we cannot forbid television as a medium, but if it is used like the radio, for example, we switch between stations for useful things. We present a program on how the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed, we present a program on the acts of Hajj. So, we understand from this that teaching the ummah (the Muslim community) some of the matters of their religion means television is permitted, and the method of photography in television is permitted. This is one point.
The second point is that, in my opinion, we must distinguish between images. Not between the photographic image and the drawing. No, because drawing, sculpture, and fixed things can remain a fixed thing. But a television tape, if we hold it, we do not see an image. So, it remains a transient thing that is shown to people once and then put in the drawers. That is, there is no issue of veneration; this is erased.
The third thing is the issue of arrogance that you relied on, which enters in. This arrogance can strike any scholar, even in a council of knowledge in a mosque or such. So, his account is with Allah. If he wants to be arrogant, let him be arrogant. It has nothing to do with us.
The fourth thing is the truth of whether, as you said, we are not required to make television the only means of spreading the da'wah (calling to Islam). And who says that? Television is undoubtedly one of the means, and we do not have to deny it.
Thirdly, something I do not know, fifth or sixth.

The Shaykh : What Allah willed!

The questioner : You see that it is not necessary for us to see the image of the scholar who is speaking. Undoubtedly, those who show the expressions of the scholar's face, his movements, and his emotions, especially if the topic is a debate, not just a lecture like this, meaning he interacts more. For example, you put a Sufi Shaykh and a Salafi Shaykh and they discuss, and their impressions are seen, and it is seen how they know, meaning how they evade, and so on. This attracts people. So, with these points and these considerations, do you have any response?

The Shaykh : Does the meaning of the speech and its essence imply that television is permissible in general, or in a specific context?

The questioner : No, in a specific context.

The Shaykh : And we said this.

The questioner : A specific context, no, we...

The Shaykh : Be patient, one by one; because you—what Allah wills!—are preparing the idea in your mind first, second, third, fourth, then you scattered, wondering if it is fifth or sixth. Each of these needs to be addressed on its own. You said, for example, these emotions between this Sunni and this innovator, and so on, have an effect. We do not deny this, but is it by a lawful means or an unlawful means? This is the research.

The questioner : ... The topic is long, I have commented.

The Shaykh : Be patient, be patient. I am now bringing from the four or five examples, to the extent that I could comprehend from first to second to third to the end. These phenomena that you emphasize as having an effect, we are not in disagreement with you on them, especially since we are sons of one country, and our country all says: "The eye is a ladle for speech." Is that not so?

The questioner: Correct.

The Shaykh : That is it, but this image should be permissible and not—what?—forbidden, falling under the general rule. So I said at the beginning, andThe Shaykh : He emphasized this at the end, and we agreed and gave examples of identity cards and passports, and so on. Now, you have cited some examples and attributed them to me, may Allah reward you with good, such as "Rites of Hajj" and "The Description of the Prophet's Prayer." I say that there is no television broadcasting a scholar who demonstrates the rites of Hajj for people on television, because most of them come not knowing how to perform Hajj, and most of them do not perform the prayer properly... and so on. I brought this example to clarify that television, or images in general, are not such that every part falling under the prohibition is forbidden, but there are exceptions. When we want to make an exception here, the matter requires knowledge and mindfulness of Allah. And when you said, for example, in part of what you said, that it may be affected by delusion, and the teacher is affected by delusion, your example was like the one who transports dates to Hajar. Why? Because I mentioned this, I mentioned the hadith that it diverts the hearts of people, and I helped the man mention this specific phrase... and therefore I said that he, the one who delivers the lessons, is exposed to fitnah (trial, discord or temptation). There is no doubt about this. But which of the two is more apparent for fitnah, more prominent for it, and stronger for it? I am now giving you a very simple example. The preacher, when he ascends the pulpit, is he not in a position of fitnah?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: All right, but now let us see the difference. The preacher who preaches on the pulpit like the Prophet's pulpit, which has three steps, and the one whose head almost touches the sky, which has ten steps, are they equal? No. So it is obligatory that we consider these causes, which are appearances, that may or may not have an effect. But just as they say in our country, "Far from evil, and sing to it," and this is taken from his saying (peace be upon him): This is it. So may Allah bless you. The examples and parts you mentioned first, second, and third, if they give permission for television in general, and I do not think you say that, then we have agreed. And if they lead to it being permissible in certain forms, like the form mentioned by the honorable...The Shaykh : And like the two images you quoted from me, this is not a point of disagreement. The point of disagreement is to use television in general.

The questioner: Because of the importance of this issue, because our brother who mentioned the programs he presents, I think there is benefit in them and there is this exception, as long as it is a debate. And then I mentioned an important point, which is the most important thing, that we must distinguish between photography. This photography is not established...

The Shaykh: This is what needs a response. This is what needs a response from the things you mentioned, Doctor, first, second, and third. What is the name of this image that was photographed and stored?

The questioner: Its name is an image, unless it comes out on video. As for a tape, it has no benefit like this tape. It is recorded on a cassette and limited, it has no benefit unless I use it. And if you put it on the television, it is a passing thing. The reverence is gone, and the thing that is fixed, which one sees in a fixed, stable image, is gone.

The Shaykh: I do not think you answered me. Doctor, stay with me... The image became hidden, and when you wish you reveal it. This does not justify saying that this image is permissible and this one is permissible to photograph. And now... allow me to complete the discussion with the Doctor here... I do not want to throw, meaning immediately after the sun sets...

The questioner: There is room, yes.

The Shaykh: Yes, for what? To get out of the crowd that... I want to say, may Allah bless you, a person must not stop at formalities, because the Shari'ah has educated us and refined us and forbidden us to stop at formalities. Now we take the first characteristic. This one who photographed his son's image, did he hit the mark or did he err?

The questioner: I mean his son's fixed image, meaning a fixed photographic image.

The Shaykh: Not yet, not yet his son's image, step by step. This one who photographed his son's image, in that he photographed his son's image, not to be recorded in the identity card or something similar, but just for the sake of remembrance or something similar, did he hit the mark or did he err?

The questioner: He erred, because there is no benefit.

The Shaykh: I am not asking you about the benefit. "The best speech is what is little and effective." He erred, he hid it in the box. Did he hit the mark or did he err?

The questioner: He erred from the start.

The Shaykh: So does this error extend?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: All right, and the ruling is the same for television, may Allah bless you. So your reliance on the fact that this image became thrown on the tape or something similar does not make the initial photography permissible. No, the original ruling is that it falls under the prohibition, and what is built upon what is forbidden is forbidden. This is first. The image of the son was hidden, but he is ready every hour to take it and look at it and remember, especially if what? Allah has taken his trust, and he also has memories in it that he savors, then he throws it in the box. These are means to divert Muslims from obeying the Prophet (peace be upon him) in his prohibition of photography in general. So if the image was public at first and became hidden at the end, it does not mean that the first part became permissible. No, it was forbidden and remains forbidden. This is said for every image as long as it has not been erased. And this video image, if the expression is correct, is worse than photographic images because the imitation in it is much more than the imitation in static photographic images, because you see a person moving, eating, and drinking... and so on. Then you took one point in your previous research, which is that there is no reverence in it. When the scholars forbid photography, they establish that the cause of photography has two causes. The first is mentioned in the hadith, which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): And the other cause is that it was a cause, at one time, for worshipping idols besides Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He). That a person photographs an image and you exclude that there is reverence in it, this does not align with the ruling of the Shari'ah forbidding images from the perspective of sadd al-dhara'i' (blocking the means to harm). So if photography is forbidden in general, and we find an image that does not come to mind as being revered besides Allah, this does not mean that this is permissible, because the Lawgiver forbids a thing not for its own sake, but because it may lead to other forbidden things. So may Allah bless you, Doctor, it is necessary that we look at the issue from all its sides. We do not look at this image itself, whether it has reverence or not. The image that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) hung, which was embroidered in her curtain or in her sleeve and her pillow, do you think that Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was revering this image? Of course not. But he (peace be upon him) said . These generalities must not be negated or invalidated because we found there exceptions that the Shari'ah helped us to except, so we stopped there and preserved the original ruling, which is that all photography is forbidden, no difference between a hand-drawn image, a photographic solar image, or video images as they say today in this time. Please.

The questioner: His EminenceThe Shaykh : I mean, regarding those who say that photographic images or video images did not exist in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?

The Shaykh: Yes, this is the people's doubt.

The questioner: So it is measured by what existed in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?

The Shaykh: It is not measured, and complete your statement.

The questioner: This is what they say, may Allah bless you. And in the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), there were two types of images: the image of the mirror or water and the like, and the images by drawing and carving. And of these images, some people measured them by the image of the mirror, considering it to be the same creation that Allah created, which is imprinted on the mirror or on this polished surface, and it does not have this imitation. So it is closer to being measured by the image of the mirror, because it does not show the creativity of man or the effort of man. And the hadith, as you mentioned, which is , so this image is more like, they said, the image of the mirror, the image of the mirror, because there is no effort of man in it that shows the skill of man, which is imitating Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). Those who measured it as an image more like the image of carving and drawing, and so on. Yes...?

The Shaykh: That is enough. First, may Allah bless you, the issue does not involve qiyas (analogical reasoning), neither negative nor positive. And the evidence for that is this one who photographs with the device, which is the photographic machine. What is its name in the language? And the effect of this device, what is its name in the language?

The questioner : A picture.

The Shaykh : If he is the one who created that image, well, now if we take his statement, peace and blessings be upon him, as a known custom, do we understand the Messenger’s words, peace and blessings be upon him, to include this image-maker about whom we are currently disagreeing, or not?

The questioner : By the general wording, it is possible.

The Shaykh : .

The questioner : In this detail, we say that the image in the mirror is called an image.

The Shaykh : No, is he called an image-maker?

The questioner : The one who made it is not the one holding it now...

The Shaykh : You answer me and spare yourself the trouble: is the one who stood in front of the mirror called an image-maker?

The questioner : Is this an image-maker, like the person who stood in front of the camera?

The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you, may Allah forgive you. The best speech is what is brief and to the point. Is the one who stood in front of the mirror called an image-maker?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : The matter is finished. I beg you, I beg you, because rushing matters leads us to being deprived of the benefit of the research.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : So if you believe with me, as I think, that the one who stood in front of the mirror is not called an image-maker, neither linguistically nor by custom, but I fear...

The questioner : I am sorry for the interruption; I have taken up too much of your time.

The Shaykh : You are rushing me. If anyone had the right to rush the other, it would be the Shaykh. I am a Shaykh like you, but let us say, for the sake of argument, if it were permissible for one to rush the other, it would be permissible for the Shaykh to rush, a fortiori. But I am not rushing you, and you are not rushing me; rather, we are trying to understand each other. I said earlier that if you believe with us that the one who stands in front of the mirror and sees his image is not an image-maker, the case is closed from a certain perspective. But what I fear most is that you do not believe with me in this. Do you believe with me in this? Do you believe with me in this so that we can proceed?

The questioner : May Allah bless you! I say...

The Shaykh : I ask Allah to guide you, I ask you.

The questioner : No, shall I elaborate?

The Shaykh : Elaborate as you wish.

The questioner : This is what I want. I am sorry for the interruption; I do not want to interrupt you. May Allah bless you...

The Shaykh : No, it is not an interruption. Rather, if I ask you, I hope your answer will be clear, because at first you said, "No, this is not an image-maker," and now what do you say?

The questioner : I say no, with elaboration. May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The Shaykh : I mean, the image in the mirror is called an image, and the image on video is called an image, and the one who does the video recording is called an image-maker. This is true...

The Shaykh : This is a repetition of the previous statement.

The questioner : The one who does the video recording is called an image-maker, likewise. But as for the mirror, there is an image in the mirror that is called an image, whereas the one who stood in front of it is not called an image-maker, like the person who stood in front of the mirror is called an image-maker. Here, the image-maker is not present. This is what I wanted to say a moment ago.

The Shaykh : Be patient a little. Are you finished?

The questioner : This is what I want to say.

The Shaykh : Are you finished? May Allah forgive you. You have brought us back to where we started and then taken us to where we had not yet arrived. Our research was about the device, this solar image-making device, and you brought us back to video. Then, as I asked you and you answered first, is this person who stood in front of the mirror an image-maker? You answered me first, "No, he is not an image-maker." Then you returned and said, "I say no, but with elaboration." When you elaborated, you linked the image to video and did not link it to this solar device. What do they call this image-making device?

The questioner : A camera?

The Shaykh : A camera. So let us stay with the camera now. We agreed that this person who stands in front of the mirror is not an image-maker. I am not going far from you when I say that this image in the mirror is an image, so I will not debate you on this, and therefore we will not argue about a matter on which we agree, for we are in agreement, praise be to Allah. But we are discussing a matter in which we may differ. And now it has become clear to us, praise be to Allah, that we agree that the one who stands in front of the mirror and sees his image in it is not an image-maker, and that the one who records people with the camera is called an image-maker, and that the result of his recording is called an image. Good. Now we leave the one we agreed is not an image-maker, who is the one standing in front of the mirror. We do not speak of this in terms of Arabic style. We agreed that he is an image-maker, and we should agree that he falls under the generality of his statement, peace and blessings be upon him, , because it is a general text from which it is not permissible to depart. What is it?

The questioner : We agreed that the one standing in front of the mirror is an image-maker...

The Shaykh : No, no, we agreed that he is not an image-maker. As for the image, it is an image, so let us leave that side. Let us say now that the one who records with the camera is an image-maker, without doubt, and that he falls under the generality of his statement, peace and blessings be upon him, . Likewise, he falls under the generality of his statement, peace and blessings be upon him, . Up to here, the discussion in terms of Arabic style is going smoothly?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good. Now, what has excluded this image from these generalities? What has excluded it? Nothing. I say that two things have excluded it. First, a factual reality: people have been afflicted with this camera recording until the camera became a means of amusement. Small children hang it on their shoulders and record whatever they wish, whether lawful or forbidden. So, among the people today who claim to be scholars, the love of making things easy in matters where there is no ease in the Shari'ah has overcome them, even at the expense of the Shari'ah texts. Therefore, they try to pass off this widespread violation today through various interpretations. So I believe that what led people to exclude images and image-makers by camera from prohibition is that it is a general affliction. The second thing, which we have read from the time of Bukhiti, the Mufti of Egypt, and its influence spread to many of the noble Muslim scholars, is that they said, "This does nothing except press the button." In my opinion, this is a strange stubbornness. They do not look at the people and the efforts of people over the years that combined and cooperated until the matter reached pressing the button, and then the image appears clearly, clearer than the hand-drawn image. Then you see, does the image appear as this image-maker wants without him aiming the camera at the target he wants to record? Of course, the answer is no. Why do these people overlook this and say, "He did nothing except press the button"? My brother, he is cooperating with these disbeliever image-makers who, hundreds of years ago, first invented this device, and the image would come out unclear, needing developing, and they would say, "Come back in a day or two." And now, with the press of a button, the image appears immediately. They completely ignored this cooperation and said, "This image-maker did nothing except press the button," and those who created this device after it was non-existent are not given any credit. Finally, this man places the camera here to record this person and presses the button; his image does not appear unless he is the one recording. Therefore, it is a common custom that no one can deny that the one who records with the camera is called an image-maker, because he performed the action. The only difference between this image-maker and the old image-maker is that the old one would take a pen or a brush, place the subject in front of him, look at it carefully, strain his eyes, until the image came out as close as possible to the reality of the subject. And as they say, if I forget, I do not forget: when I was in primary school, the teacher of drawing and mathematics had a hobby of image-making.

The questioner : Was it in primary school in Syria?

The Shaykh : Yes, in Syria, not in Albania, because I left Albania when I was nine years old and knew nothing. The important thing is that when we came to Syria and entered primary school, our teacher for drawing and arithmetic had a hobby in drawing. When the students went out for the break, he would sit in front of the board—called the blackboard in some countries—and take the chalk. If he saw a boy whose appearance he liked, he would call him, "Come here, boy," and place him in front of him. He would take the chalk, and in moments, there was the picture of the boy. You look at the boy and say, "By Allah, this is the boy." This is a skill that is not like the skill of another person; he does not have this hobby or this mastery. Do you think these two painters differ in manual drawing such that one is exempt from prohibition because he drew quickly and the other slowly? I do not think so. This is also a point where there is absolutely no disagreement. Here we pause briefly regarding the imitation that those who say camera photography does not involve imitation deny. Where is the imitation in this man I described to you, who took the chalk, did this, and whitened the board, and there was the boy on the board? Where is the imitation in this? In other words, is this imitation internal or external?

The questioner : External.

The Shaykh : It is apparent. We leave this image and take the sculptor who carves the idol and the statue, continuing for long nights and days until the idol comes out exactly as he wishes. And I do not know if some of those present remember that Italian sculptor who carved an idol, and when he was pleased with his carving and thought it did not need a spirit to enter it and speak, he said to it, "What?" He said to it, "Speak." It did not speak. So what did he do with it? He smashed it, he smashed it. This is an example of a statue. Is this likening to Allah (Mighty and Majestic) in this statue that he kept carving until he was pleased with its carving for days and nights? The likening is in the form. As for the brain, intestines, or heart, there is nothing inside, ever. So the likening is apparent and external, and it is known whether it is drawing, embroidery, drawing on paper, embroidery on cloth, or carving in stone or similar. All this likening is apparent and not real. Therefore, I am very sorry that there are some scholars for whom I read an article a long time ago when the al-Azhar magazine was called Nur al-Islam, and he used to write in itThe Shaykh : al-Dujwi and others like him. One of them wrote an article, unfortunately, in which he goes to the permissibility of idols, carving idols, not only the permissibility of drawing on paper. No, he mentioned two opinions and then chose the one furthest from the Sunnah. He said that scholars differed on forbidden images: are they all forbidden, or only the three-dimensional ones that have a shadow? He mentioned that the Malikis permit images on paper or on clothes and restrict the prohibition to statues and idols. So what did this jurist say, unfortunately? He said, after adopting this opinion and not referring to the hadiths about tearing the curtains of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) and the like, and the story of Jibril (peace be upon him) refusing to enter the house and ordering the image to be changed until it became like a tree, and it was not a carved idol but on the cloth. He turned away from all these hadiths. Why? Because he wants to make room for the poor artists who are living with the knot of prohibition. Most scholars say idols are forbidden unanimously, but as for this image, there is disagreement. So since there is disagreement in this matter, we left it. But what is the trick to get out of the opinion that statues are forbidden? This mufti said that the artist, he says, is permitted to make the statue exactly as he wishes, then dig a hole in the top of its head until it reaches the place of its brain, and there is nothing of that at all, it is just a dumb stone. And by that, there is no likening, because this creation does not live in this form. But without a doubt, he feels, like every person, that this statue has fallen from the eyes of the artists because it became what? It has a defect. He said, and the solution is easy: he comes and takes a tuft of hair and covers it on the head, and the defect is gone. And, by the will of Allah, the idol will be in the most beautiful state. All this is proof of the truthfulness of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in many hadiths, among them "Blessed are you, O Abu Layla. By the will of Allah, this is a new garment. 'You have put on new, lived wisely, and died a martyr.'" So the point, may Allah reward you, is that all this is a deception of the Shari'ah rulings. We are getting out of the problem: every image, whether manual, by camera, by video, by carving, or similar, is all forbidden except what is necessitated by dire necessity or pressing need. And finally, it is necessary to draw attention to the fact that this pressing of the button reminds me of another button, which is that the Europeans, as you know, created huge machines. They created furnaces in which they pour iron or copper or anything and press a button from here... and out comes an idol from there. This idol by this method did not exist in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), and this image by this method did not exist in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). But what is the difference, my brothers? The difference is as that poet said, "The causes are many, but death is one." And you know two hadiths, and with them I conclude this speech. The first hadith is his saying (may the prayer and peace of Allah be upon him): "Melt them." It is known, if Allah wills, that it means melt them. So why did the Jews consider the melted fat lawful? Because in their opinion, they did not eat the fat. Allah forbade them the fat. What fat? The fat that is curly, especially in days of severe cold, meaning it has a specific shape. But when they put it in the pots and large cauldrons and lit the fire underneath, it melted and took a new shape. Did changing this shape make the forbidden thing lawful for them? The answer is no. The fat remains fat with all its properties. Also, this image is an image, and the one who made it is an image-maker, whether on paper with a pencil or with ink or with paint, etc., or the image he embroidered or carved in stone or in iron, etc. All these things fall under the name of images. And finally, what appears to you is that these are formalities from which Islam disavows itself. The proof is this hadith and the second hadith. But I will keep this one hidden until I give you an example that occurred to me once on a journey of mine, when I was returning from Aleppo to Damascus after I had gone out for da'wah. A young man rode with me and raised with me the topic of these photographic images. And we discussed it on the road from Aleppo to Damascus for four hours. I said to him finally, "They claimed, and I mean what I say because it is a fictional story that came from my mind. I said, they claimed that a noble, distinguished Shaykh visited one of his diligent students in his house. When he sat in the front of the place, he raised his eyes and saw his own picture hanging on the wall. So he called him and said to him, 'O Abu So-and-so, you are a righteous and good student, and by the will of Allah, you have heard in my lessons that images are forbidden and that the house in which there is an image, the angels do not enter. So what do you think about placing my picture and hanging it in this place?' He said, 'O NobleThe Shaykh : ...and so on. He said, "No, this is not permissible for you at all." So the obedient, dutiful student quickly took down the picture. In the Syrian expression, days passed and days came, and the story became forgotten and neglected, and he returnedThe Shaykh : His student visited him again and sat in the same gathering, and there he saw the image—also—in its place. He said to him, Malik, O so-and-so? My understanding of you was that you responded to my call and that you removed my image, so how did you bring it back? He said, May Allah bless you, we understood from you the distinction between a hand-drawn image and a photographic image. That was a hand-drawn image, whereas this is a photographic image. What is your opinion on this apparent contradiction? Does the fitnah (trial) not occur with this as well as with that? We seek help from Allah. As for the second hadith, which is the last, his saying (peace be upon him): Even though, as some schools of jurisprudence say to this day, this is a valid marriage. Why? Because the conditions of marriage were present: the guardian, the consent of the wife, the just witnesses, and so on. But the intention behind it was to make lawful what Allah has forbidden. So, scheming to circumvent what Allah has forbidden by any means is haram (forbidden). Remember what remains with the camera: the Jews' scheme in melting fats. And please, if you have something to say.

The questioner : By Allah, we have benefited greatly, O honorable one.The Shaykh . . . .

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. This is from your kindness.

The questioner : But we want to leave with a benefit we have gained, which is: since photography for necessity is permitted for the ID card and the passport, the camera is likewise [permitted], and there are religious benefits from television... at least refuting a shubhah (doubt) or removing haram (forbidden) things by refuting them, returning them, or criticizing them with evidence from the Sunnah. Does this mean that photography for necessities is free of blame, while holding the belief that it is haram (forbidden)?

The Shaykh : This means repeating what we agreed upon previously, but I want to insist on another point that we must observe. Starting with passports or personal IDs, I believe that if it is possible to do without photographic images for personal IDs or official passports in the desired Islamic state, then we must do without them. But if there is no alternative to them, then we say that necessities permit the prohibited. May Allah reward you with all good.

The questioner : That is enough, praise be to Allah. May Allah reward you with all good, and we are very happy to meet you.

The Shaykh : ...May Allah make you happier.

The questioner : May Allah gather us and you in goodness.

The Shaykh : And may He bless you and your life.

The questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And peace be upon you.

The questioner : Our children here are insisting that you visit us in Sudan...

The Shaykh : By Allah, I hope that it is made possible for me, but it requires something of a private session. First, so that you can get to know my circumstances, and second, so that I can get to know the atmosphere you have, so that we can look at the environment that helps me benefit more and more from my presence among you. Perhaps we can manage this, if Allah wills, and this session will be, if Allah wills, in this season.

The questioner : But your student, Ali al-Khashan, lived with us, and we want a brief visit, my brother. He knows us and lived with us, and he knows the atmosphere of our country and its need for people like you, and the atmosphere here is good and suits you.

The Shaykh : This is true, but I know, and I fear this example will distract us from you more, and I am attached to you because he fled from you out of love for you... and he is young, so what do we say about...The Shaykh ؟

The questioner : No, he cannot say he fled from something in the religion. No, he cannot say that, because he found responsiveness and the people loved him.

The Shaykh : No, no, he fled from the atmosphere that you do not possess, and he desires the atmosphere that you possess...

The questioner : May Allah reward you with all good.

The Shaykh : In any case, we hope to meet with you.

The questioner : May Allah thank you. Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.