Current Events > Why can't Muslims show Muhammad's face since he isn't Allah/God?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't understand this like he was a human no? So why in the world are all other humans since the history of man allowed to be shown but not his?

I'd understand if he was a God or something and it was for sacred reason. But he was never Allah just a servant or prophet for Allah correct?

Other religions have prophets and people are allowed to show their faces.

What if Muhammad had some artists draw his face and they discover it in some ruins in 2031? Will people quick rush to destroy it?

Like I don't really get it. What if in the future we have advanced AI that can recreate any face from history and its posted on the internet as a 100% accurate face of him. What then?

I mean what if he existed in modern times instead and people took his picture and drew art of him. Would his followers like thousands of years in the future destroy internet server rooms all over the planet to get ride of his face?

Oh and I had a Muslim friend that told me the Quran never says you can't show him and it isn't forbidden.

I don't really get this whole thing :/
---

they didn't want him to be worshipped like a God IIRC. Similarly they actually believe in Jesus as a prophet as well. he just isn't idolized as a God. At least that's what i've learned from some of my Muslim friends.
---

Breaking news: Stone-age cave-dweller wrote down arbitrary nonsense in a book and peddled it as god's direct words! More at 10!
---

HellsingOrg posted...

why in the world are all other humans since the history of man allowed to be shown but not his?

They are not. Islam is a strictly aniconic religion. You're not allowed to have art of people, animals, plants, or anything except abstract shapes.

As per usual, some cultures are more lax about enforcing this than others but strictly it's not allowed.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Breaking news: Stone-age cave-dweller wrote down arbitrary nonsense in a book and peddled it as god's direct words! More at 10!

The early 600s were the stone age?

A better question is: if insulting or otherwise diminishing the prophet is punishable in many countries (some by death), then why is it also acceptable to name your kid Muhammad? Wouldn't the kid have to be put to death for any petty crime because he gives the prophet a bad name?
---

Not all Islamic sects were/are against the depiction of Muhammad. The Mughals, for example, were very fond of depicting him.

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Not all Islamic sects were/are against the depiction of Muhammad. The Mughals, for example, were very fond of depicting him.

The problem isn't the Mughals. It's the hundreds of millions of Muslims who think depictions of Muhammad ought to be a death sentence.
---

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Not all Islamic sects were/are against the depiction of Muhammad. The Mughals, for example, were very fond of depicting him.

I assume all of those sects were purged for heresy by the ones that are still around?
---

only sunnis can't
---

s0nicfan posted...

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Not all Islamic sects were/are against the depiction of Muhammad. The Mughals, for example, were very fond of depicting him.

I assume all of those sects were purged for heresy by the ones that are still around?

Not exactly, but the Ottomans ended up favoring more conservative schools in part to emphasize their status as the Caliphate, and never you Syrians, Kurds, Mesopotamians, Egyptians, etc. mind that the Turks are running the show. And, of course, the most influential sect in modern (Sunni) Islam is Saudi Wahabbism, which makes most 7th-century religions look forward-thinking.