To: Hawkmoon who wrote (12301 ) 2/6/2006 5:27:01 PM From: lorne Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32591 Depictions of prophet nothing new February 06, 2006theaustralian.news.com.au LONDON: Despite the outcry, the Danish cartoons of Mohammed are just the latest in a long line of depictions of the Muslim prophet, both in the West and in Islamic countries. From Ottoman religious icons to market stalls in Iran, from the US Supreme Court building to the South Park cartoon, Mohammed has been frequently portrayed in flattering and unflattering lights. Many painters, including William Blake, Gustave Dore, Auguste Rodin and Salvador Dali, have depicted Mohammed in illustrations of Dante's Inferno, where the Muslim prophet ends up in hell with his entrails hanging out. Depictions of Mohammed were common during the Ottoman Empire, when the taboo on portraying him was less strong, although often his face was left blank. The Boston Museum of Fine Arts has a 16th-century picture of Mohammed in a mosque, wearing long sleeves to hide his arms and hands. A 14th-century Persian miniature shows the angel Gabriel speaking to Mohammed, whose face is shown. Medieval Islamic pictures often echoed Christian iconography. The University of California has a 14th-century Turkish painting of the newborn Mohammed in his mother's arms, like pictures of the Christ child. The taboo is stronger in Sunni Islam than Shia -- and even today in Iran, which is mainly Shia, pictures of Mohammed can be bought illegally in markets. Even in the holiest Muslim city of Mecca, Mohammed has been depicted. Edinburgh University has a 14th-century miniature of him rededicating the black stone at the Kaaba mosque in Mecca, to illustrate A Monumental History of the World by Rachid Ed-Dine. In Islam, as in other religions, different communities will place different interpretations on the Hadith, the sayings of the prophet, which deal with depictions of him. Mohammed is recorded as having said: "And who is more unjust than those who try to create the likeness of my creation?" He also said: "Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture." Taken with the Koranic injunctions on respect for the prophet, these sayings mean that in strict Islamic interpretations, any representation of any living thing is forbidden. Essential illustrations in academic textbooks might, for example, show a cow but with the head missing. Technically, the rulings also forbid photographs of family members in the home, video cameras and mobile picture phones. They remain the subject of intense debate in Islamic scholarly circles. Just as many young British Muslims today photograph their friends and family on their mobile telephones, the prophet has appeared in art throughout the centuries, along with his court. Where this has happened, concession is usually made to Muslim sensitivities by ensuring the features of his face at least are veiled or blanked out. Such pictures arose most often in cultures where it was a mark of respect to hang pictures of a reigning monarch or other leader in homes and galleries. Imam Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "This would happen where the Hadith prohibiting it might be overlooked, or merely interpreted differently. For example, some scholars might argue that the intention of the Hadith was to prevent worship of the image and that it was permissible to have an image where the aim was not to worship but to show respect." He said the debate continued in Muslim families today. "Some are very strict about it and will not have photographs taken except for official documents such as a driving licence or a passport. Others will say it is OK to have photographs taken because they do not intend to worship the pictures. In this country, most people take a relaxed view about photographs." The US Supreme Court in Washington has a statue of Mohammed as an example of an ancient law-maker. Mohammed was put to less serious use by a German food company in 1928, which used him for advertising bouillon. In the past 20 years, many books on Islam in France have shown pictures of Mohammed, even on their cover, in a more sympathetic light. In 2001, the satirical cartoon South Park included an episode called Super Best Friends in which Mohammed and the founders of the other world religions acted as superheroes. Although not deliberately blasphemous, there can be few portrayals of Mohammed in an all-singing, all-dancing version. The Times