Explanation of the author's statement: "... and its use..."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : As for its use, the author said: "and its use".
This phrase contains some degree of linguistic flexibility, because if we took it at face value, the meaning would be "and the use of image-making," since the pronoun refers back to image-making. This is certainly not what is intended, because the meaning would become corrupt if we said "image-making is forbidden and the use of image-making is forbidden." However, as the commentator explained, "the use of the image" means the use of the image itself. So the pronoun refers back to a verbal noun that is intended to mean the object, that is, the use of the image is forbidden, and the use of the image-maker is forbidden. The apparent generality of the author's statement indicates that it is forbidden in any form. However, we should know the details in this matter. The use of the image is divided into three categories.
The first is that one uses it for the sake of veneration. This is forbidden, whether it is three-dimensional or colored, and whether the veneration is veneration of authority, veneration of worship, veneration of knowledge, veneration of kinship, or veneration of companionship, whatever the type of veneration may be. A person may use an image to venerate a person for his authority, or to venerate him for his knowledge, or to venerate him for his worship, if he is a worshipper, or to venerate him for his kinship, such as a father or mother, or for his companionship, or for something else.
The important point is that using an image for the sake of veneration is forbidden in all cases, whether it is three-dimensional or colored. In reality, there is no veneration in it. If a person wants to make an image of his father, if his father is alive, veneration of him is by giving him what is required of him in terms of verbal, physical, financial, and social kindness, and so on. If he is dead, will he benefit from this veneration? Absolutely not. So it is not veneration of him. And will you benefit? Absolutely not. But you will renew your sorrows every time you see it, remembering him, and you and he are having coffee together, sitting in the gathering, talking, taking comfort in remembering him when you see this image.
So there is no veneration in it, but only the earning of sin. Therefore, it is obligatory for anyone who has images of this type to tear them up or burn them, and it is not permissible for him to keep them, because this involves two dangers.
The first danger is that the angels avoid entering the house, and the second danger is that Satan may enter upon the person through this veneration, so that their veneration takes over his heart and controls him, especially in matters related to knowledge and worship. The trial of the people of Noah was from images.
Now, there is no difference in this, as we said, between what? The colored and the three-dimensional. That is, whether it is an image on paper or on a cloth, or a three-dimensional image, an image of a person, a statue.
The second is that one takes it for the sake of humiliation. One uses the image for the sake of humiliation, such as making it a bed, a cushion, or a pillow, or something similar. There is a difference of opinion among the scholars regarding this. Most of the scholars are of the opinion that it is permissible, saying that there is no harm in it, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and because this is the opposite of the cause for which the use of images was forbidden, because this is humiliation, and using images for the sake of veneration is what is forbidden. Some scholars went to the opinion of prohibition, and these people cited as evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) came to his house one day and saw a cushion with images on it. A cushion means a pillow with images on it. He stood and did not enter. Aisha said, "I recognized the dislike on his face, so I said, 'I repent to Allah and His Messenger. What have I done?'" He said: Sunan al-Bayhaqi 10:1866 They said, "So we disliked it because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked it, because the Messenger disliked it, and he said: and he said: Sunan Abi Dawud 4155Sahih (Al-Albani) And what is mentioned about him that he leaned on a pillow with an image on it is to be understood as that the head of the image had been cut off. And if the head of the image is cut off, it is permissible. And there is no doubt that this is more scrupulous and safer, not to use images even for the sake of humiliation, such as for bedding and cushions. And there is no doubt that safety is safer.
And something that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked entering his house for, you should not enter the house and feel at ease. Who can feel at ease in a place where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked entering? Yes, for this opinion of prohibition, if it is not the correct one, it is the precaution, and staying away from it is preferable without a doubt.
The third category is that it is not for veneration and not for humiliation. The majority of scholars are of the opinion of prohibition, prohibiting the use of images in this manner. Yes, and it was mentioned from some of the Salaf that they did not dislike it if it was colored, until some of them had curtains in their houses with images on them, images of animals, and they did not deny it. But there is no doubt that those who did this from the Salaf, like al-Qasim ibn Muhammad (may Allah have mercy on him), there is no doubt that an excuse is made for them, and their statement is not used as evidence, because the evidence is the statement of Allah and His Messenger. But an excuse is made for these people that they interpreted it, or the report did not reach them, or something similar to that from the excuses. So these are the categories of the use of images.
This phrase contains some degree of linguistic flexibility, because if we took it at face value, the meaning would be "and the use of image-making," since the pronoun refers back to image-making. This is certainly not what is intended, because the meaning would become corrupt if we said "image-making is forbidden and the use of image-making is forbidden." However, as the commentator explained, "the use of the image" means the use of the image itself. So the pronoun refers back to a verbal noun that is intended to mean the object, that is, the use of the image is forbidden, and the use of the image-maker is forbidden. The apparent generality of the author's statement indicates that it is forbidden in any form. However, we should know the details in this matter. The use of the image is divided into three categories.
The first is that one uses it for the sake of veneration. This is forbidden, whether it is three-dimensional or colored, and whether the veneration is veneration of authority, veneration of worship, veneration of knowledge, veneration of kinship, or veneration of companionship, whatever the type of veneration may be. A person may use an image to venerate a person for his authority, or to venerate him for his knowledge, or to venerate him for his worship, if he is a worshipper, or to venerate him for his kinship, such as a father or mother, or for his companionship, or for something else.
The important point is that using an image for the sake of veneration is forbidden in all cases, whether it is three-dimensional or colored. In reality, there is no veneration in it. If a person wants to make an image of his father, if his father is alive, veneration of him is by giving him what is required of him in terms of verbal, physical, financial, and social kindness, and so on. If he is dead, will he benefit from this veneration? Absolutely not. So it is not veneration of him. And will you benefit? Absolutely not. But you will renew your sorrows every time you see it, remembering him, and you and he are having coffee together, sitting in the gathering, talking, taking comfort in remembering him when you see this image.
So there is no veneration in it, but only the earning of sin. Therefore, it is obligatory for anyone who has images of this type to tear them up or burn them, and it is not permissible for him to keep them, because this involves two dangers.
The first danger is that the angels avoid entering the house, and the second danger is that Satan may enter upon the person through this veneration, so that their veneration takes over his heart and controls him, especially in matters related to knowledge and worship. The trial of the people of Noah was from images.
Now, there is no difference in this, as we said, between what? The colored and the three-dimensional. That is, whether it is an image on paper or on a cloth, or a three-dimensional image, an image of a person, a statue.
The second is that one takes it for the sake of humiliation. One uses the image for the sake of humiliation, such as making it a bed, a cushion, or a pillow, or something similar. There is a difference of opinion among the scholars regarding this. Most of the scholars are of the opinion that it is permissible, saying that there is no harm in it, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)
He made a pillow with an image on it
اتخذ وِسادة فيها صورةThe people of these images will be punished. It will be said to them: "Bring to life what you created."
إن أهل هذه الصور يُعذّبون يقال لهم أحيوا ما خلقتمThe people of these images will be punished
إن أهل هذه الصور يعذبونThe angels do not enter the house which contains a picture.
إن الملائكة لا تدخل بيتا فيه صورةAnd something that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked entering his house for, you should not enter the house and feel at ease. Who can feel at ease in a place where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked entering? Yes, for this opinion of prohibition, if it is not the correct one, it is the precaution, and staying away from it is preferable without a doubt.
The third category is that it is not for veneration and not for humiliation. The majority of scholars are of the opinion of prohibition, prohibiting the use of images in this manner. Yes, and it was mentioned from some of the Salaf that they did not dislike it if it was colored, until some of them had curtains in their houses with images on them, images of animals, and they did not deny it. But there is no doubt that those who did this from the Salaf, like al-Qasim ibn Muhammad (may Allah have mercy on him), there is no doubt that an excuse is made for them, and their statement is not used as evidence, because the evidence is the statement of Allah and His Messenger. But an excuse is made for these people that they interpreted it, or the report did not reach them, or something similar to that from the excuses. So these are the categories of the use of images.