DRAWING IN ISLAMIC LAW

Before we begin the discussion of the law of animate images, then we must first know why Prohibition animate images in Islamic Law. So we say:There were two cases the cause of Prohibition animate images:1. Because she worshiped besides Allah.It is based on the hadith Aisha radhiallahu anha she said: The Messenger sallallaahu alaihi wasallam said about the pictures in the church Habasyah:إن أولئك إذا كان فيهم الرجل الصالح فمات بنوا على قبره مسجدا وصوروا فيه تلك الصور فأولئك شرار الخلق عند الله يوم القيامة"They (the scribes), if there is a godly amongst them died, they build a mosque on his grave and they drew pictures of her. They are the worst creatures in the sight of Allah on the Day of Resurrection. "(Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 427 and
Muslim no. 528)Also, based on the hadith Abdullah bin Mas'ud radhiallahu anhu from the Prophet sallallaahu alaihi wasallam that he said:إن أشد الناس عذابا عند الله يوم القيامة المصورون'The people are the most violent torment of Allah on the Day of Resurrection is the drawing. "(Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 5950 and Muslim no. 2109)And has become the consensus of the scholars that the greatest sin is shirk torment.Al-Khaththabi said, "It is not a punishment for (television) images (animate) it was very great but because he was to be worshiped but Allah, and also because of the view it could cause a scandal, and make the most of life tends to him." Al-Fath (10/471)2. She is honored and glorified either by mounted or hung, as a means to magnify images shirk.Ash-Shaykh Ibn Al-'Uthaymeen said in al-qaul Al-Mufid (3/213), "The reason he mentions the grave along with the images is that they can be a means to shirk. Since the origin of shirk on the Noah was when they drew a picture of the pious, and after a period of time passed they also worship him. "In the fatwa of Al-Standing Committee (1/455) stated, "Because they can be a means to shirk, as shown princes and pious people. Or it could also be a means of opening the doors of fitnah, such as the pictures of beautiful women, movie players men and women, and the women who dressed but naked. "Supplement:Some scholars add illat (cause) another prohibition is because the images animate creatures resemble God. They postulate the hadith Aisha:إن من أشد الناس عذابا يوم القيامة الذين يشبهون بخلق الله"Verily the most serious human torment on the Day of Judgment are those who equate God's creatures." (Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 5954 and Muslim no. 5525 and is lafazhnya)It's just that most other scholars reject this illat for several reasons:1. The creatures of God very much, because if the ban is because it resembles the drawing of God's creation, then the necessity is also forbidden to draw the sun, the sky, the mountains, and so on, because they all are God's creatures. And the scholars have agreed on the bolehnya drawing pictures above.2. Arguments have set the exclusion of children's toy ban animate images, and there is no doubt that children's toys also have a resemblance to God's creatures. But along with the Prophet sallallaahu alaihi wasallam allowed Aisha to play dolls.3. Arguments also excludes bolehnya used pictures animate when she is not installed or hung or in other words he is humbled and humiliated. It is based on the hadith Aisha to come, in which the Prophet sallallaahu alaihi wasallam allowed Aisha to make a pillow out of cloth with a picture, but the picture resembles God's creation.4. The three reasons above leads us to the fourth reason that we are unlikely to understand the hadith Aisha above with the understanding that the reason Prohibition picture just because he resembles the creation of Allah. However, we must understand the meaning of 'resemblance' that much more special, that equate God with his creatures picture. It can be seen from the sentence: يشبهون بخلق الله That's because the Arabs never include the letter 'ba' in maf'ulun bihi (object). However, they only use context as if the sentence contained both BiH maf'ulun mentioned as in the sentence: كسرت بالزجاجة رأسه (I break the head with a glass) or if he is removed as in the above hadith Aisha: يشبهون بخلق الله, where full sentence (taqdirnya)-wallahu knows best-is: الذين يشبهون الله بخلق الله (those who equate Allah with the creatures of Allah) which he also handed over to worship the image to worship him as God, or in other words he did shirk to Allah with the pictures.The meaning of this is indicated in the hadeeth of Ibn Mas'ood no such hadith which is the first illat above, where the artist attributed as the loudest human torment. And it's understandable that people are the most violent torment the infidels and idolaters.Also hadith Aisha radhiallahu anha she said: The Messenger sallallaahu alaihi wasallam said about the pictures in the church Habasyah:إن أولئك إذا كان فيهم الرجل الصالح فمات بنوا على قبره مسجدا وصوروا فيه تلك الصور فأولئك شرار الخلق عند الله يوم القيامة"They (the scribes), if there is a godly amongst them died, they build a mosque on his grave and they drew pictures of her. They are the worst creatures in the sight of Allah on the Day of Resurrection. "(Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 427 and Muslim no. 528)And of course most people are ugly infidels and polytheists.Hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah also radhiallahu anhu he said: I heard the Prophet sallallaahu alaihi wasallam said:قال الله عز وجل ومن أظلم ممن ذهب يخلق كخلقي فليخلقوا بعوضة أو ليخلقوا ذرة"Allah Almighty says," Who is more injustice than those who are willing to create like My creation. Why do they not create a fly or why they do not create a small ant (if they can)? "(Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 5953, Muslim no. 2111, Ahmad, and this is lafazhnya)I mean like going to create my creations are: Intends to match the nature of God's creation, and this is definitely the rububiah shirk, hence he regarded as being the most injustice because shirk is the greatest kezhaliman. The mean like creature without intending to resemble the nature of creation, then it is not included in this hadith.In conclusion: illat (cause) Prohibition of the image is limited to the first two cases mentioned. As for God's creation resemble, then there is no firm arguments showing why he is drawing terlarangnya, wallahu knows best.Once we understand the causes and the banning of the draw, so here we bring you a quick draw in Islamic law, then we say:Image is divided into 2:1. Who has the spirit. It is divided into two:a. A 3-dimensional. It is divided into two:First: The image of the full body.If the materials used in durable-like wood or stone or something-, almost all scholars unanimously declared illegitimate, both intended for worship or for any other. While quoted from Abu Said Al-Ashthakhri Ash-Shafi'i that he found: Figure 3 dimensional haram only be made if intended for worship. However, it is a weak opinion.As for the raw materials are not durable, for example made of materials that can be eaten and then formed into the image creation, such as chocolate, bread, candy, and so on. The truth of the matter is if he is made to be mounted or hung then it is forbidden. However, if he is made to be eaten or used as toys then why not because it is a form humiliate it, and it will be explained that the toys children are exempt from this law.Then, there's a disagreement about toys, whether allowed or not. There are two opinions among the scholars:First: May. This is the school of Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ash-Shafi'i, and later practiced by most scholars of the school of Ahmad. And this is the more correct opinion.They postulate the hadith of Aisha radhiallahu 'anha she said:كنت ألعب بالبنات عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وكان لي صواحب يلعبن معي فكان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا دخل يتقمعن منه فيسربهن إلي فيلعبن معي"I've played with (dolls) girls near the Prophet sallallaahu 'alaihi wasallam, and I have friends who used to play with me. When the Prophet entered shallaallahu'alaihi wa sallam, they hid from him. So he called them to play with me. "(Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 5665 and Muslim no. 4470)The second opinion: Still not allowed. This is the school of Ahmad and opinions of a group of scholars and Syafi'iyah Malikiah. This opinion is also quoted from Ibn Baththal, Ad-Daudi, Al-Bayhaqi, Al-Hulaimi, and Al-Mundziri.Note:Differences of opinion on 3-dimensional toys that quoted from the scholars of the Salaf only with respect to toys made from wool yarn, fabric, and the like. The toys are made of plastic-like in this age-, then the scholars are also different opinions about it later:1. Forbidden. Known to argue with this opinion is ash-Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibrahim vol.2. Perhaps, and this is the opinion of the majority of scholars in this age, and God willing this is a more precise opinion.Second: If the picture just a part of the body. It is also divided into two:1. That there was no head. The statute is permissible because he is no longer considered animate creature picture. It is the opinion of all scholars except Al-Qurtubi Al-Maliki of the school and Al-Mutawalli of ash-Shafi'i schools, and both refuted by ijma 'ulama who had been there before them.2. That there is no other than his head, and there are also two forms:a. If that is not there it does not make a man dies, for example, drawing the whole body except the hands and feet. Because people who do not have hands and feet still be alive. Legal forms such as drawing a full body of law that is still forbidden.b. If that does not exist it makes men dead, such as half-body picture. Because humans are split up to her chest will not survive. So picture like this should be included legal due to the image being lifeless. This is the school of Imam Four.b. Its 2 dimensional. A two-dimensional subdivided into 2:First: Being made by hand, either directly or indirectly such as through a computer draw but still by hand (for example, by holding the mouse). It is also divided into two:1. The pictures do not move, then it also exists in two forms:• Drawing a full body. There are two opinions among scholars about the ruling:a. Absolutely forbidden. This is the most authentic narration from Imam Ahmad, one of the two sides of the madhhab of Abu Haneefah, and the most authentic in the schools of Ash-Shafi'i.b. Haram except humiliated and made to be humiliated or children's toys. This is the other side of the school and the ash-Syafi'iyah Hanabilah, the most authentic in the school of Abu Hanifah, and the standard of the madhhab Malik.They postulate the hadith Aisha radhiallahu anha said: The Messenger entered into my house while I just closed my house with the curtains were pictures of him. When he saw it, he changed the face (angry) then pulled the curtain pull off. Then he said:إن من أشد الناس عذابا يوم القيامة الذين يشبهون بخلق الله"Verily the most serious human torment on the Day of Judgment are those who resemble God's creation." (Narrated by Al-Bukhari no. 5954 and Muslim no. 5525 and is lafazhnya)In Muslim history:أنها نصبت سترا فيه تصاوير فدخل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فنزعه, قالت: فقطعته وسادتين"She (Ayesha) put up curtains were pictures of him, the Prophet came in and pulled it out. He said, "So I cut the curtain and then I made two pillows from him."So this hadith and other matters as long as the picture shows that they are not posted and not too hung up then he said 'Mumtahanah' (degraded / humiliated).• The two-dimensional image of the body that are not full (ie half of the body), the details and the same ruling as the discussion of 3-dimensional images, as well as opinion rajih in it.2. If drawing by hand is moving, or that we are familiar with the cartoon. That is where someone drew some images are almost identical, and these images appear quickly so as if he moved.Same ruling as images move over, because essentially he did not move but he just seemed to move in the eyes of the beholder.Second: Who made the tools, both displays are static as well as moving picture like the one on TV.This includes issues such as contemporary because there is no form in the days of the Salaf. Picture with the camera and such only comes in 1839 AD which was first introduced by an Englishman by the name of William Henry Fox.There are two opinions among scholars later this regard:The first opinion: Forbidden required except in urgent situations, such as the photo on the ID card, driving license, passport, and the like. It is the opinion masyaikh: Muhammad bin Ibrahim, Abdul Aziz bin Baaz, Abdurrazzaq Afifi, Al-Albani, Muqbil bin Hady, Ahmad An-Najmi, Rabi 'bin Hadi, Saleh Al-Fawzaan, and much more rahimahumullah.The clergy is postulated to 5 arguments but everything is not clearly indicate illicit images with this tool.The second opinion: Perhaps because it is made with a tool is not an essential figure, therefore he does not belong to the arguments which forbids image. It is the opinion masyaikh: Mohammed bin Saleh Al-Uthaymeen, Abdillah bin Abdul Aziz Alu ash-Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Al-Abbad, and much more rahimahumullah.The clergy is postulated with 3 arguments but ultimately only back to the first proposition is that the image is not a picture with the tools essential.We purposely did not bring any arguments for this opinion is the discussion brief and only to specify the problem in this case. Ala Kulli thing, opinions are more appropriate in our opinion is the opinion of a second, which argues that the image is not forbidden by means basically, unless he or she is worshiped besides Allah mounted or hung which is a form of glorification of the image and a wasilah to shirk wallahu knows best.This opinion we consider more powerful because it is essentially an image by means not 'shurah' by language. That's because 'shurah' (picture) as a language is 'at-tasykil' meaningful form a 'syakl' (form) or 'at-tashwir' which means to make something on the form or circumstances. So 'shurah' intrinsic meaning in language led to the calling of a substance that was not there before. And the meaning of this is shown in Al-Qur `an, as in His saying:وصوركم في الأرحام كيف يشاء"And He formed you in the womb according to His will."Also on his word:في أي صورة ما شاء ركبك"In whatever form He wills, He created you."While the photographic image does not contain meaning 'shurah' which we mentioned above. Because the photographic image is not keeping a substance / form that did not exist before, but just the reverse photographic images of the original object.This can be understood by understanding the working principle of the camera are as follows:The camera consists of a convex lens and the film, when he received the light (in this case a light shaped object photographed), the lens will focus light, where the result is in the form of an upside-down image can be captured by the screen. The shadow is recorded in the light sensitive film.To prove this, we can take a convex lens (magnifying glass). We faced this loop facing out the open window. Then we put a piece of white paper behind the magnifying glass, then we will surely see a shadow of the scenery outside the window at the white paper but it was upside down.Once we understand the working principles of the camera, then we will not find the meaning of 'shurah' in it. The 'shurah' essential in the above case is light (shaped objects) coming toward the camera lens, while light that hold and shape it is God Almighty, not the camera nor the photographer. The camera itself is just turning shadows come and is operated by a photographer's camera.Now will come the question: Is the process of turning light objects are considered as 'shurah' or picture?The answer: No, he's not a 'shurah'. Because 'shurah' can not exist unless there is a 'mushawwir' (draftsman) and this person must have the ability to draw. While flipping light can occur even though no mushawwir or people who do not understand the draw. For example: A person standing in front of a mirror or water so it looks its shadow. Then the shadow is simply a reversal of the original object, the stand does not do anything, did not touch anything, maybe he is a person who can not draw at all. Therefore no one is calling reflection in the mirror as 'shurah' (pictured), both the language and the urf (custom).Ash-Shaykh Ibn Al-'Uthaymeen memperumpamakan photocopy of it like a book, because of the letters that are in the photo is a copy of the writings of the owner of the book, not the writings of those who operate the copy and not the bull writings of these copies.Such explanations are concise, wallahu a'lam bishshawab.Note:When we say that the image is two-dimensional image with a tool is not essential, it does not require bolehnya hang the photos because it can be a means to an excessive exaltation of the creature it is shirk.2. Who do not have the spirit. Divided into:a. Which grows like a plant.The statute may be based on opinions of nearly all scholars.b. Inanimate objects. Which is divided into:1. Which can be made by humans.2. That can only be created by God as the sunLaw image that has spirit with all of the above forms is allowed by the arguments that we have mentioned here. Hence the scholars would agree bolehnya drawing animate beings.As a final note we say:Here we only mention the legal origin of the image with all of its forms, we are not talking about the law of pictures from the use or based on what is contained in the image. Since scholars can not agree to see same-sex or genitals or the genitals of the opposite sex who is not mahram or see other illicit affair, as they agreed bolehnya not see anything (in the form of drawings or otherwise) are busy and neglect of worship, as well as illicit hung or put something with exalted purpose, whether he is an image or not. A'la wa Ta'ala Allaah knows best.[Source reading: Mas `alah At-Tashwir by Dr. Abdul Aziz bin Ahmad Al-Bajadi, Bayan Tadhlil Fatwa al-Umrani fii fii Jawaz At-Tashwir by ash-Shaykh Yahya al-Hajuri, Tahrim At-Tashwir by Ash-Sheikh Hamud bin Abdillah At-Tuwaijiry, Hukmu At-Tashwir Al- Futughrafi by Walid bin As-Saidan Raasyid, Al-Ibraz Aqwal li al-Ulama `fii Hukmi At-Tilfazh collected by Luqman ibn Abi al-Qasim]