What is a drawing of Muhammad?

[Leonardo17]

People earnestly attempting to follow their irrational religions will routinely fail to manifest the intended or alleged outcomes.  You can hardly blame them, even when they reach rock bottom and have the slightest glimpse of reality and self realization....because helpful idiots the world over will keep telling them that there's some good in that horrid shit, that they're just doing it wrong.  

Back to the grind they go, trying to do irrational shit right...again and again and again.

   This can be one way of seeing it.

---

 
   When I was younger I used to read the philosophers of enlightenment. J.J. Rousseau for instance is saying that men (and women) are created good by nature and any vice that we see in people has been taught to them by society. And that’s the basis of all our 20th century humanism and belief that a just social contract will produce healthy and responsible individuals.
 
   But the philosophy of enlightenment doesn’t seem to be totally aware that people have a freedom of choice and that they can knowingly and willingly choose evil (for themselves and for others). Sadhguru for instance says that you can be a strong and fiery person (while working to do something new / something useful for mankind) but that ignorant people will come in masses (like the zombie herds in TWD) and destroy everything you have worked so hard for.
 
   I’ve heard that in the early days of Turkish theater, you would have people responsible for teaching people how to sit correctly and seeing to it that people were respectful toward the actors performing the play. That’s because the people in those days (some 50, 60 years ago), perceived theater as something that is alien to their culture and therefore potentially harmful to their beliefs and culture.
 
   Humanity is nor through that yet. This year has been the hottest year on record. The US signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, The US withdrew in 2020, Biden rejoined in 2021, now Trump is going to withdraw again.
 
   So there is always this 2 steps forward 1 step backward stuff everywhere, on every subject. So Rousseau has a very good point there, but if it were that simple we would be on a much better situation right now (I mean mankind as a whole).
 
    So in this this world everyone needs some sort of philosophy of some sort. Just to keep your head straight while facing difficult stuff. And I believe that if you have adopted a philosophy of life that is partly based on spirituality you will find it easier going through stuff. I mean people in particular. That’s because spirituality explains stuff. Especially people, so you learn to be kind to yourself and kind to others even when they (or you) are total J…s.
 
    Your Anti-religious position is also a very respectable type of approach. But you seem to be saying that all of it is nothing but an empty shell of some sort. I don’t agree with that. Depending on the type of spirituality you are into (It doesn’t matter which one, only that it is one of the genuine types of spirituality of this world) you start learning stuff, especially on issues related to people and you develop these attitudinal muscles and other stuff like that.

---

 
   That’s how it is supposed to work at least. I’m not saying that all religious people are like that because that isn’t true either  

[The Grand Nudger]

You never listen, lol. I'm not antireligious. I'm an antitheist. I don't think your spirituality™ is empty Leo..I think it's stupid and evil.

[TheWhiteMarten]

What qualifies something to be a drawing of Muhammad?

We sometimes see Muslims protesting on streets and throwing bombs on people who draw Muhammad or make contests in drawing him, but how can they tell something is a drawing of Muhammad?

If I drew a stick figure or something equally simplistic would that actually be a picture of Muhammad?

How can Muslims tell? Only because I say so? Is it offensive?

Whatever offends them.

Be careful not to take a photo of toast, that might not be Mary but MoMo.

[The Grand Nudger]

Can't get it out of my head. Spirit Muscle is a good name for a bad funk band.

[Leonardo17]

I don’t know if I ever shared this one with you.
 
It says “If Muhammad came back”.
 
Mohammad says: “I’m the Prophet you fool”

The ISIL guy says “Shut up you Infidel”


 
And here is another one:


 
On the issue in general: I don’t know if making fun of somebody else’s faith is completely moral even if their faith is completely idiotic and irrational. Still: there is something that’s called “The right of Blasphemy”. A cartoonist of other artist (writer, movie maker, song composer etc.) is not obliged to know about and be respectful toward all types of religious or even non-religious belief systems in this world. It’s as simple as that.
 
Fanaticism on the other hand is a totally ego-induced condition. It’s the Ego’s feeling of greatness. This man or woman is in a state in which he sort of figured out everything. One good comparison could be the Nazis or other right extremists.
 
In the entrance of one of our famous universities here it says “I fear the man of a single book” (Lat. Timeo hominem unius libri)

[Sheldon]

I don’t know if I ever shared this one with you.
 
It says “If Muhammad came back”.
 
Mohammad says: “I’m the Prophet you fool”

The ISIL guy says “Shut up you Infidel”


 
And here is another one:


 
On the issue in general: I don’t know if making fun of somebody else’s faith is completely moral even if their faith is completely idiotic and irrational. Still: there is something that’s called “The right of Blasphemy”. A cartoonist of other artist (writer, movie maker, song composer etc.) is not obliged to know about and be respectful toward all types of religious or even non-religious belief systems in this world. It’s as simple as that.
 
Fanaticism on the other hand is a totally ego-induced condition. It’s the Ego’s feeling of greatness. This man or woman is in a state in which he sort of figured out everything. One good comparison could be the Nazis or other right extremists.
 
In the entrance of one of our famous universities here it says “I fear the man of a single book” (Lat. Timeo hominem unius libri)

Labelling ideas as blasphemous, is just an attempt to ringfence beliefs from critical scrutiny. If the beliefs are are so weak they can't stand up to critical scrutiny, then sulking when people do so, is pretty lame.

[zebo-the-fat]

Blasphemy, insulting a god... poor weak god, unable to handle an insult? ... wimp!

[HappySkeptic]

Blasphemy, insulting a god...  poor weak god, unable to handle an insult? ... wimp!

The gods of antiquity were depicted as powerful "people", with all the human attributes that would come with someone used to unchecked power.  

Of course a narcissistic god would extract retribution for an insult.  The question is - why do they need followers to do it for them?

[Leonardo17]

Blasphemy, insulting a god...  poor weak god, unable to handle an insult? ... wimp!

   That’s a very important point in true spiritual teachings. “God will not be mocked” simply means that he isn’t. And the meaning is deeper than that. It means that we as humans are able to make mistakes or “sins” (sin in original English is an archery terms and it means that you missed the mark) and yet “Truth” is still always present at all time and we as humans can either choose to remain in the Matrix of or illusions or go back to that unchanging reality which is our true identity.
 
   That’s how we read this.

Happy Sceptic:



 
   This is the king Akhenaten from 1350 BC. The first known individual who wanted to replace polytheism with monotheism. Behind him and his wife you see the one and only God “Aten” and the other “Gods” are just attributes or sun beams emanating from the one and only God Aten.
 
   The ways I understand it, it’s the same thing in Hinduism too. There is the only God or Shiva which is unique and formless and the other Gods of the pantheon represent the other forces of Nature. Kali for death, Brahma for wisdom, Lakshmi for prosperity etc. etc.

[The Grand Nudger]

Akhenaten was, more accurately, a henotheist. His desire to replace the egyptian pantheon at the state level with his favored deity from that pantheon being at odds with their acceptance of other cultures deities even if akhenatens reforms held - which they didn't. That atenism (or abrahamism for that matter) is seen as "monotheistic" today boils down to a present cultural need to assert as much, but not the reality of the historic circumstances. Ultimately, it's the theistic gods themselves, and not any particular number of them, which cause the issue. All of them share in those two fundamental attributes of theistic gods and so all instantiate the issues of conceiving of divinity in that particular way. You could pick any one of them..and we have...and you will see all of the same problems, which we have. All we do when we posit a single deity is add totalitarianism to the list of defects.