What Is a Picture of Muhammad, Anyway?

TCS Daily ^ | February 9, 2006 | Robert McHenry

[StopGlobalWhining]

...But Muhammad lived long before the invention of photography, and there are no likenesses of him by contemporaries. In other words, no one knows what he looked like.

If you were to assemble a set of mugshots of dark, bearded men and ask any number of ordinary Muslims, imams, or even ayatollahs, which one most resembles Muhammad, they would be (over and above being scandalized by the very idea) quite unable to do so, though some might pretend...

So, these cartoons created by some illustrators in Denmark -- what makes them "pictures of Muhammad"? Clearly, they are accepted as such only because the artists said that they meant them to be. The intention defines, not the thing itself, but only our conditional acceptance of it. This is not unlike our response to a small child's drawing that looks like mere scribbling: "Oh, yes, dear, that's a lovely picture of Aunt Louise." If only one of the artists had meant to depict Muhammad, neither we nor our panel of Muslims would have been able to pick out his work from the field. What is objected to, then, is not an actual thing or an observable act -- but an intention, a state of mind, a point of view.

[StopGlobalWhining]

This entire episode of rage of the Islamic fundamentalists demonstrates the futility of attempting to carry out any rational logical discussions with them. They are mentally stuck back in the seventh century.

[pipecorp]

"What Is a Picture of Muhammad, Anyway?"

anything depicting fecal matter is probably an accurate portrait.

[edcoil]

This has always been my question - since they cannot do a picture of him and there are none, how are the cartoons a picture of him.

[rickmichaels]

If you were to assemble a set of mugshots of dark, bearded men and ask any number of ordinary Muslims, imams, or even ayatollahs, which one most resembles Muhammad, they would be (over and above being scandalized by the very idea) quite unable to do so...

Is what comes out of a camel's bunghole that hard for them to recognize?

[farmer18th]

What Is a Picture of Muhammad, Anyway?" anything depicting fecal matter is probably an accurate portrait.

Doesn't fecal matter have, at least, some value as fertilizer? Your comparison is an insult to fecal matters all over the world.

[pipecorp]

my humblest apologies,sir.

[monkeywrench]

I wonder if Soupy Sales or Jerry Lewis portraying muhammed would have enraged them the same? Maybe we can reach a compromise, here. </sarc

[pookie18]

[ansel12]

Wow Soupy Sales, his original, short lived tv show was one of the funniest things ever shown on tv.

[Enterprise]

I found a figure of Moohammed!

[Richard Kimball]

As with much of Islam, the prohibition on images of Allah (and Muhammad, by extension) has a parallel in Judeo-Christian theology. The Old Testament has a ban on "craven images." The purpose of this ban was because many people believe that the object itself, rather than God, had power. As a quick example, if you use rosary beads as a method of counting prayers, there is nothing wrong with it. If, on the other hand, you believe that the beads themselves have power, rather than God, they have become a craven image, taking you from belief in God to a form of pagan object worship. As with many other commandments, we never seem to get it right, and thus the bans of depictions of God, rather than an understanding that man-made objects have no spiritual power or thought process at all. Of course, I always go for the simple explanation. The Muslims like to kill people, and this is just another excuse.

[Ma3lst0rm]

I was thinking about the Danish cartoon, said to be Mohammad with a bomb on his head, and thought to myself that the Muslims who are so outraged have it all wrong. It was really a bong not a bomb, just one that could worn on one's head. Muslims should feel honered that the Danish are making sure they are being included in the legal drug culture of the Netherlands.

[non-anonymous]

...................................................

Mohummad in a snowstorm.

[monkeywrench]

Right. Too good for mohammed.

[VOA]

The Old Testament has a ban on "craven images."

I may have mis-heard this during church...
but I think the prohibition is on "graven images" (as in engraved).

But as for this thread, "craven" does seem appropriate!

[Richard Kimball]

I'm sure I screwed up the term. Nice catch.

[wideminded]

In other words, no one knows what he looked like.

This is incorrect. There are Muslim writings that offer a description of him. For instance it is known what style of beard he had.

[TC Rider]

I'm surprised the mussies never went after South Park.

[Bommer]

BWAAAA! Classic. Here's an original Freeper version to cheese off the prophet

The Mohammad Factor

[RouxStir]

"What Is a Picture of Muhammad, Anyway?"

A third world, turbaned turd.