DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**carpartsho** · 10-25-2011, 01:55 AM

The document I linked to above discusses this; I will quote the relevant portion:

Lings’ “Ka¢ba icons” episode is a notorious element of the Catholico-perennialist persona of his book. First he writes: (VI,17, 2) “One Christian had been allowed and even encouraged to paint an icon of the Virgin Mary and the child Christ onan inside wall of the Ka¢bah, where it sharply contrasted with all the other paintings.” That the image was an “icon” in theritual Christian Orthodox sense or, if not, that its painter was even a Christian; that he was actually “encouraged to paint” it;or that it “contrasted with all the other paintings” is all sourceless speculation and pure Lingsian poetic license. Then hewrites in the chapter entitled “The Conquest of Mecca” (LXXV, 302, 4): “Apart from the icon of the Virgin Mary and thechild Jesus, and a paiting of an old man, said to be Abraham, the walls inside had been covered with pictures of pagandeities. Placing his hand protectively over the icon, the Prophet told ¢Uthm¥n to see that all the other paintings, except thatof Abraham, were effaced.” The footnote continues: “W¥qidÏ’s
Magh¥zÏ
p. 834 and AzraqÏ’s
Akhb¥r Makka
I, 107. Butother accounts say ‘all’ without mention of these two exceptions.” In reality
all
accounts say “all”:- Even these versions do not except the image of the Virgin Mary but only that of Ibr¥hÏm †. Lings adds the word “other”from his own head in the clause “to see that all the
other
paintings, except that of Abraham, were effaced.”- Al-W¥qidÏ does not mention “pictures of pagan deities” but rather “imagery of angels and others.”- The Prophet œ nowhere is said to be “placing his hand
protectively
over the icon” but rather: “Then he caught sight of the image of Maryam and immediately placed his hand over it
(thumma ra’¥ |‰rata Maryam fa-wa\a¢a yadahu ¢alayh¥)
. Thenhe said
(thumma q¥l)
: ‘Erase every single image in it except the image of Ibr¥hÏm!’” If authentic, the meaning is – and All¥hknows best – that out of his magnificent sense of modesty and
adab
the Prophet œ would not have anyone even glance atthe image of the most pure Virgin Maryam before it was washed away at once – by himself – and her chastity protected.- As for his excepting the image of Ibr¥hÏm, it only meant – and All¥h knows best – he was leaving it for last since it wasQuranically the least offensive of all in comparison to Maryam and the angels, although its offensiveness is established fromthe fact he curses its painters: “All¥h destroy them! They made him an old man casting arrows for divination!”- He does not address ¢Uthman but ¢Umar; and on the same page actually tells him to erase the image of Ibr¥hÏm at last. Sorry the formatting got a little strange, please see the linked document, page 6 (better to download the pdf there than view it in the site though).

10-25-2011, 01:55 AM	#18
carpartsho Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 501 Senior Member	The document I linked to above discusses this; I will quote the relevant portion: Lings’ “Ka¢ba icons” episode is a notorious element of the Catholico-perennialist persona of his book. First he writes: (VI,17, 2) “One Christian had been allowed and even encouraged to paint an icon of the Virgin Mary and the child Christ onan inside wall of the Ka¢bah, where it sharply contrasted with all the other paintings.” That the image was an “icon” in theritual Christian Orthodox sense or, if not, that its painter was even a Christian; that he was actually “encouraged to paint” it;or that it “contrasted with all the other paintings” is all sourceless speculation and pure Lingsian poetic license. Then hewrites in the chapter entitled “The Conquest of Mecca” (LXXV, 302, 4): “Apart from the icon of the Virgin Mary and thechild Jesus, and a paiting of an old man, said to be Abraham, the walls inside had been covered with pictures of pagandeities. Placing his hand protectively over the icon, the Prophet told ¢Uthm¥n to see that all the other paintings, except thatof Abraham, were effaced.” The footnote continues: “W¥qidÏ’s Magh¥zÏ p. 834 and AzraqÏ’s Akhb¥r Makka I, 107. Butother accounts say ‘all’ without mention of these two exceptions.” In reality all accounts say “all”:- Even these versions do not except the image of the Virgin Mary but only that of Ibr¥hÏm †. Lings adds the word “other”from his own head in the clause “to see that all the other paintings, except that of Abraham, were effaced.”- Al-W¥qidÏ does not mention “pictures of pagan deities” but rather “imagery of angels and others.”- The Prophet œ nowhere is said to be “placing his hand protectively over the icon” but rather: “Then he caught sight of the image of Maryam and immediately placed his hand over it (thumma ra’¥ \|‰rata Maryam fa-wa\a¢a yadahu ¢alayh¥) . Thenhe said (thumma q¥l) : ‘Erase every single image in it except the image of Ibr¥hÏm!’” If authentic, the meaning is – and All¥hknows best – that out of his magnificent sense of modesty and adab the Prophet œ would not have anyone even glance atthe image of the most pure Virgin Maryam before it was washed away at once – by himself – and her chastity protected.- As for his excepting the image of Ibr¥hÏm, it only meant – and All¥h knows best – he was leaving it for last since it wasQuranically the least offensive of all in comparison to Maryam and the angels, although its offensiveness is established fromthe fact he curses its painters: “All¥h destroy them! They made him an old man casting arrows for divination!”- He does not address ¢Uthman but ¢Umar; and on the same page actually tells him to erase the image of Ibr¥hÏm at last. Sorry the formatting got a little strange, please see the linked document, page 6 (better to download the pdf there than view it in the site though).
	Quote