 |
| Daily Mail |
 |
| Reuters |
Daily Mail December 15
Cited
''Islamic doll' for children launched in Britain with no FACE in line with strict Sharia rules on depiction of prophet and his contemporaries
Featureless doll with no eyes, nose or lips produced for Muslim children
It complies with Muslim teachings that living things should not be created
Doll took 4 years to design and is aimed at children in strict Muslim homes
Has been designed by Ridhwana B, a former Lancashire school teacher 'Deeni doll' is being sold for £25 and is marketed as 'Shariah compliant'
But academic said it was 'foolish' as Muslims are not 'frozen' in history
By CLAIRE CARTER FOR MAILONLINE'
Cited
'A doll with no facial features has been launched for Muslim children in line with Islamic rules about avoiding the depiction of faces. The featureless toy comes dressed in a hijab and red dress but has no eyes, nose or mouth. It has been designed to comply with strict Muslim teachings which rule against the representation of humans and animals in other forms, and specifically Muslim gods and their companions. However critics have dismissed the doll as 'foolish' and say it represents antiquated views of Islam teachings and fails to acknowledge that Muslim's are part of modern culture.'
Cited
''There is an Islamic ruling which forbids the depiction of facial features of any kind and that includes pictures, sculptures and, in this case, dolls,' the designer, who is known as Ridhwana B, told the Lancashire Telegraph. 'I spoke to a religious scholar in Leicester who guided me through what was and what was not permissible when producing the product. 'The Deeni Doll has no face on it whatsoever and is Shariah compliant.'
End citations
Interestingly, according to this article from the Daily Mail, to be Shariah compliant, Islamic teaching is against human and animal representation in other forms.
However, photography and imagery can be seen in the Islamic world and Islamic society for political and religious leaders when it is politically beneficial.
Theologically and philosophically would there not be a risk of persons and followers making an idol of political and religious leaders?
Or perhaps this is not a concern for Islamic leadership that wishes to maintain power and understands the obvious benefits of 'positive' images in the context of political power?
This also demonstrates the problem of being theologically and philosophically consistent within radical fundamentalism; it is philosophically difficult to always prohibit images on a practical basis and for it to always be beneficial for those making the rules.
Definitions of Idolatry
Browning writes that it is 'the cult surrounding a statue of a god or goddess'. Browning (1997: 181).
'Paul warns the Corinthian Christians about a kind of idolatry (I Cor. 10: 14) which might have been a form of civic ceremony'. Browning (1997: 181).
'Idolatry is also used metaphorically for evil desires (Col. 3:5)'. Browning (1997: 181).
P.C. Craigie defines idolatry as 'The worship of an idol or of a deity represented by an idol, usually as an image. Craigie (1997: 542).
He as did Browning acknowledges that the New Testament deals with idolatry in a more metaphorical context than the Hebrew Bible. Craigie (1996: 542).
As in one should not covet for example (Ephesians 5: 5 and Colossians 3: 5).
With these definitions, a doll made for a child, even with a face, is not by definition, by nature, an idol or idolatrous. It is not made to be worshipped as a god or God, even with the acknowledgment that all created things could theoretically become idols or idolatrous for persons.
BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CRAIGIE, P.C. (1996) 'Idolatry', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
 |
| Reuters, Tehran, November 2009-Notice the image! |
Google+-No snow here presently, which is helpful with long work and church commutes.
