Study Bay Coursework Assignment Writing Help<\/p>\n
The purpose of this short essay is to examine Iconoclasm and Iconophilia within the Islamic context. First, the two terms will be defined, elucidating their meaning by also drawing upon other linking terminologies. Second, references from traditional sources, Quran and Sunnah (Hadith) will be discussed to highlight the debates on figural representation from a theological perspective. In relation to this, the next part will briefly discuss the umbrella terms \u2018Muslim Iconoclasm or Islamic Iconoclasm\u2019 and focus on the problematic aspects of such labelling. Subsequently, the last part will contextualise all the preceding arguments to understand and debate the Taliban destruction of the Buddhas of Bamyan in 21st Century. In the end pertinent conclusions will be drawn.<\/p>\n
The point of departure for this essay will be to define the two terms Iconoclasm and Iconophilia and elucidate the duality of these concepts. Moreover, some of the terms associated and derived from these two concepts will also be highlighted.<\/p>\n
According to wordiq\u00a0[1<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0, an icon derived from Greek word, \u201c\u00ce\u00b5\u00ce\u00b9\u00ce\u00ba\u00cf\u2030\u00ce\u00bd, eikon\u201d which means an image. It is defined as \u201can artistic visual representation or symbol of anything considered holy and divine, such as God, saints or deities\u201d. A painting, sculpture as well as a mosaic classifies as an icon. The same source\u00a0[2<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0defines the word iconoclasm, as literally destructing religious icons sacred monuments and images, for religious or political motives. This is primarily an action done by a person who attacks, breaks and destroys sacred monuments and religious images. Such people are called iconoclasts. This term also refers to a person who has a hatred for established religious institutions and dogmas and images for religious veneration.<\/p>\n gods-bull-breaking.gif An Image of an Iconoclastic man with a hammer, breaking a bull icon into pieces.<\/p>\n Courtesy of: Word Info image \u00a9 Copyright, 2006.<\/p>\n As per contra, those individuals who venerate or revere any religious images are called iconodules. In addition, this is linked to the second term in discussion, Iconophilia. An iconophile, is understood as a connotation of images, pictures, engravings, illustrations on books or manuscripts. A person who has a fondness of such images and objects and one who loves these \u2018icons, illustrations and pictures\u2019 is defined as an iconophilist or an iconophil.<\/p>\n Moreover, someone who produces such images and pictorial icons is referred to as an Iconoplast\u00a0[3<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0.<\/p>\n With an understanding of the key terms in question, the next part of this essay will discuss the act of destroying cultural and religious icons for obtaining abstraction and conversely by contra the act of making figural representation in light of Islamic tradition. The following part of the essay will first shed light on references from traditional sources that have been used for supporting prohibition of figural representation in Islam.<\/p>\n In Quran:<\/p>\n In the Quran, although there is no specific mention of figural representation\/ painting, there are verses which indicate prohibition of idolatry, such as in the following verse, chapter 5, verse 90: \u201cO ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination, of Satan\u2019s handwork: eschew such abomination), that ye may prosper.\u201d\u00a0[4<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0<\/p>\n Another Surah from the Quran, chapter 21, verses 53-55 states:<\/p>\n \u201cWhen he said to his father and to his people, \u2018What are these images to which ye pay devotion?\u2019 Said they,\u2019We found our fathers serving them.\u2019 Said he, \u2018Both you and your fathers have been in obvious error\u2019.\u201d This verse can be interpreted in various ways. One possible interpretation is that it forbids false idols, or another interpretation could be that it indicates that any form of imagery of God or his divine nature is condemned and prohibited. Therefore, this verse has had many interpretations done by theologians, who have used it to ban the act of drawing, painting as well as sculpting figures\u00a0[5<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0. One may argue that this verse prohibits idolatry as supposed to figural representation.<\/p>\n It is commonly argued that the Qur\u2019an, as compared to the Hadith traditions, is not specific on the subject of figural depiction, however it nonetheless condemns \u201cidolatry and uses the Arabic term musawwir (\u201cmaker of forms,\u201d or artist) as an epithet for God\u201d (Figural Representatiom of Islamic Art, 2000), due to this sentiment, paintings with figures are made abstract and stylized, moreover, partially as a result of this religious sentiment, many incidents of destruction of figurative art took place (Ibid., 2000). Therefore, in the hadith (the recorded sayings) of the Prophet Muhammad, there are much clearer references to the prohibition of figural representation and painting. It is these hadith which are utilized by the theologians to support and elaborate on the meaning and intent of the above Quranic verse, and, it is from them that many Muslims derive legitimacy for their arguments against figural representation.<\/p>\n According to one of the related hadiths to this matter, A\u2019isha, the wife of the Prophet reported that on seeing a curtain embellished with pictures of animals, the Prophet was enraged and tore the cloth to pieces, declaring, \u201cThe makers of these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them, \u2018Give life to what you have created.\u2019 \u201cThe Prophet added, \u201cThe Angels of (Mercy) do not enter a house in which there are pictures (of animals).\u201d Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62:110.\u00a0[6<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0Another source presents additional response by Prophet on the same incident saying \u201cSuch people as paint these pictures will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection.\u201d\u00a0[7<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0On another occasion Muhammad is supposed to have said, \u201cVerily the most grievously tormented people on the Day of Resurrection would be the painters of pictures.\u201d\u00a0[8<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0<\/p>\n As for Iconoclastic activities in early Islamic tradition, there are early accounts of the prophet Muhammad\u2019s iconoclastic activities, for instance in the ninth-century Book of Idols which narrates that \u201cWhen on the day he conquered Mecca, the Apostle of God appeared before the Kabah, he found the idols arrayed around it. There upon he started to pierce their eyes with the point of his arrow, saying, \u201cTruth is come and false-hood is vanished. Verily, falsehood is a thing that vanish-eth (Quran 17:81 as narrated in Faris, 1952, p. 27).\u201d It was after having said this, that he ordered for the idols to be knocked down and burnt (Ibid.).<\/p>\n According to another source, the same incident is narrated: \u201cAs told by Ibn Abbas:<\/p>\n \u2018When the Prophet saw pictures in the Ka\u2019ba, he did not enter it till he ordered them to be erased. When he saw (the pictures of) Ibrahim and Ismail carrying the arrows of divination, he said, \u201cMay God curse them (i.e. the Quraysh)! By God, neither Ibrahim nor Ismail practiced divination by arrows.\u201d (Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55:571, as quoted in Kheilen on Iconoclasm).\u00a0[9<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0These hadith are however subject to various interpretations. It can be argued that this tradition prohibits figural representations in scared spaces, not just Kaaba but also in mosques as well, or it may be suggested that Prophet prohibited the specific \u2018cult\u2019 or set of beliefs that these idols presented, that is divination; a pre Islamic custom on Mecca.(Ibid.\u00a0[10<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0)<\/p>\n http:\/\/lexicorient.com\/e.o\/x\/t.gif<\/p>\n According to one Hadith, the Prophet is also reported to declare that \u201cAngels do not enter the house in which there are portrayals or pictures.\u201d\u00a0[11<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0. Per contra, one of the oldest chronicles, that of Al-Azraqi, narrates that when the Prophet returned to Mecca victoriously, he found the Kaaba covered with \u2018fresco paintings\u2019 and he ordered that \u2018they be effaced but made an exception for one the them, executed on a pillar, which represented Mary and Jesus. (Besancon, 2000, P. 78-79). The ambivalence to figuration in textual tradition is argued by many scholars. This is also reiterated in Rubin (1986, p. 97) and Van Reenen, (1990, p. 40) who reiterate the above tradition by arguing that after the conquest of Mecca the prophet ordered the destruction of the paintings of prophets, angels, as well as trees that had decorated the interior of the Kaaba, whilst sparing an image of Jesus and Mary.<\/p>\n Rubin (1986) further argues that although there is a general consensus in Hadith of forbidding representations, some interpretations by traditional schools of thought also \u2018go so far as to liken artists to polytheists\u2019 but these proscriptions may have been a used to promote aniconism (the eschewal of figural imagery) along with iconoclasm (the destruction or mutilation of existing figural imagery). However, he states that despite their efforts Islamic art varies to a great extent across different time and places (Ibid., p. 129-131).<\/p>\n Albeit contested and varying in form and interpretation, generally the removal of Meccan Idols in Kaaba upon conquest is deemed very symbolic by Muslims and this event holds great historical importance. It is due to this that generally Muslim societies refrain from figural representations in sacred spaces such as Mosques and Prayer halls. However, this opposition to depiction of living things and figural representation is not based on Quranic references but rather on various traditions present within the Hadith (Flood, 2002, p. 643-44).<\/p>\n In light of these traditional sources and their interpretation, the next part of the essay will briefly elucidate the concept of Islamic Iconoclasm or Muslim Iconoclasm in light of Muslim history. Among Muslims, it is clear and lucid to refrain from producing figures and life-like images of God, his Prophet, figures who are eminent in Islam as well as all living things. Several Classical traditions and religious sources are interpreted in light of prohibition of figural representation and from time immemorial; these sources are interpreted and used for various religious, as well as political Islamic doctrines. The disdain for figural representation, religious icons and images is often linked to idolatry. In popular literature this is referred to as \u2018Islamic Iconoclam and or Muslim Iconoclasm\u2019. Note that these terms will be used interchangeably throughout the essay.<\/p>\n As noted above, one of the earliest Muslim Iconoclasm was in 630 upon the conquest of Mecca when the deities in Kaaba were destroyed; this holds true despite the presence of what may be an apologetic tradition, that Mohammad spared the statues of Mary and Jesus. This incident is also widely linked to the end of the Jahalliyah period in Mecca, and consequent end to idolatry in Arabia.<\/p>\n As for the concept of Islamic Iconoclasm, it is contested and argued by many scholars. According to Besancon (2000), Muslim iconoclasm is a \u2018result of the absence of a Covenant that is why the Koran does not take the trouble to positively prohibit the image\u2019. He argues that for Muslims the notion of God is transcendent and beyond human comprehension, it is thus discouraging to any figural and imagery associations (P. 81).<\/p>\n Grabar (1975) describes the distinction between Byzantine and Islamic iconoclasm by suggesting that in case of Byzantine, Iconoclasm is usually spelled with a capital \u2018I\u2019 and In Islamic iconoclasm it is spelled with a small \u2018i.\u2019 He argues that such secondary typographical distinction demonstrate differences between a historical moments which are then capitalised later or they refer to an attitude or mode of behaviour, to the affect that he claims that for Islamic iconoclasm it is \u2018apparently too common to deserve capitalization'(Ibid., p. 45). Such a statement about Islamic iconoclastic acts are devoid of any historical context as it disregards the ample evidence of a tradition of figural representation throughout Muslim art history, and it is this lack of recognition that western authors tend to perceive and associate \u201ca long, culturally determined, and unchanging tradition of violent iconoclastic acts\u201d within Islamic tradition and Muslim history. (Flood, 2002, p. 641) However, this is not to overlook that in various Muslim denominations there is a continuation of iconoclastic agendas, along with much recent on-going controversy regarding the destruction of Meccan historic buildings(not images) by the Wahhabist authorities who claim that they fear that these buildings were or would become \u201cthe subject of polytheism and idolatry.\u201d (Howden, 2005)<\/p>\n According to Kjeilen, this opposition to figural representation and its influence on Muslim iconoclasm have been used many times in Islamic history in order \u201cto destroy the representation of gods, divine figures or semi-divine figures of other religions\u201d, and the destruction of statues of Buddhas by the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001 is the modern day example of this.<\/p>\n The following part of the essay will incorporate the proceeding arguments and analyze the Taliban destruction of Buddha at Bamiyan in 2001, so as to examine iconoclastic events in modern day Islamic state and develop a context to debate the preceding arguments.<\/p>\n Dupree (2002) describes the \u2018saga\u2019 of the Bamiyan Buddha destruction at Bamiyan as an aftermath of the debate at Supreme court and amongst its Council of Ministers who ordered Mullah Omar, to carry out investigation with the department of religious police (The Ministry for the Prevention of Vice and the Promotion of Virtue) regarding the \u2018appropriateness of the National Museum\u2019s holdings in Afghanistan. It was following these orders that incorporation of Shariah Law was done in order to carry out, what may be suggested here, a \u2018political exploitation\u2019. The following events then unfolded leading to the total destruction; as narrated by Dupree (2002) specific orders were given to destroy any offending objects in the museum. A couple of weeks later, on the 26th of February, Mullah Omar gave an edict that mandated the destruction of all non-Islamic objects and subsequently on March 8 and 9th, the Bamiyan Buddhas were dynamited (Dupree, 2002, p. 986)<\/p>\n taliban-2.jpg Bamiyan Buddha Statue before and after destruction by the Taliban. Image Courtesy of Fortunecity\u00a0[12<\/a>]<\/span>\u00a0<\/p>\n Biggs (2003) claims that this destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in 2001 is a reminder that \u201cmonotheism has its roots in the persecution of idolaters, and that the cultural expression of this violence was and remains acts of iconoclasm\u201d, however, his argument clearly falls into the frame of what Flood (2002) suggests as an \u2018ahistorical paradigm\u2019. Flood\u2019s response to such interpretations is that they overlook the coexistence between the Muslim population and the Buddhas for over a millennium prior to the destruction by Taliban (King, 1985, as quoted in Flood, 2002, p. 654)<\/p>\nInstruction for Image prohibition in light of Quran and Sunnah (Hadith)<\/h2>\n
Muslim Iconoclasm<\/h2>\n
The destruction of the Buddha-statues in Afghanistan in 2001<\/h2>\n