Depicting the Prophet

[qatarperegrine]

Over 200,000 people have recently signed an online petition asking for pictures of the Prophet Mohammad to be removed from Wikipedia.

The petition says:

"In Islam picture of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and other Humans are not allowed. But Wikipedia editors are showing illustrations with face illustrated and face is veiled or white washed. But still they are offensive to Muslims. I request all brothers and sisters to sign this petitions so we can tell Wikipedia to respect the religion and remove the illustrations."

Leaving aside the ridiculousness of petitioning a wiki to remove content, and of asking non-Muslims to abide by the Sunnah, let's focus on the ridiculousness of the petitioners' choice of targets. The picture specifically mentioned in the petition, reprinted above, is from an 11th century book by al-Biruni, an 11th century Muslim scientist. Apparently the petitioners are unaware that Shi'a Islam has a long and vibrant history of depicting the Prophet. (And al-Biruni wasn't himself even Shia.)

Of even more interest are the bogeymen implicated by the outraged Muslims. In his blog, the originator of the petition blames this portrayal of the Prophet on "west European and Atheist" Wikipedia admins. In the associated Facebook group someone commented, "THIS IS DEFINATELY THE ACT OF JEWS FUCK U MOTHER FUCKER ASSHOLES."

Apparently Jews and/or atheists are traveling back in time to eleventh century Persia to produce Muslim devotional artwork. Funny old world, isn't it?

Comments

[douglasperkins.livejournal.com]

Do Doonesbury-style depictions count as depictions?

[qatar.livejournal.com]

You mean like a feather or a waffle? I don't really know. Maybe it depends on what the object chosen is. :-)

[kit-ping.livejournal.com]

Apparently Jews and/or atheists are traveling back in time to eleventh century Persia to produce Muslim devotional artwork.

Shhhh! Keep it down or they'll all want to do it!

[archdukechocula.livejournal.com]

I think the best thing to do in cases like this is just to ignore them, like we do with most other extremist ideolouges. Obviously it's silly, and is a pretty narrow interpretation, so I imagine ideas like this would fade into the dustbin of history if people just ignored it all together instead of turning it into a big fiasco. I think what people like that most want is to get a reaction of any kind, because it draws attention and stirs emotions. Since the arguments being made aren't particularly logical, they are dependent upon the stirring of emotions to have any impact at all. If the debate was dropped all together, demonizing "the west" would become a lot more of a hard sell.

[earthdog.livejournal.com]

So that is what my atheist friend was doing with my time machine. Looks like I need to go back and stop him.

Silliness incarnate

[shmuelisms.livejournal.com]

May the prophet save us from the silliness/absurdity of his followers.

Are those halos in the picture? Never seen that in Islamic art before. Neat! Until now, I had no idea the concept was nearly as widespread as Wikipedia claims. Halos do NOT exist at all in Jewish art (most likely because of their pagan origins), so I had always presumed them to be just a Christian concept.

omg

[rockinhejabi.livejournal.com]

Oh my Goodness, Marjorie! Things like this make me want to crawl under a rock, so very very embarrassing!

Sometimes I wonder if we're even really practicing the same "religion".

Yikes.