I urge the muslim brothers and sisters, or even the non muslims if they wish to forward this fatwa to others who are unaware of the Muslim response to the event which we've seen on the news lately.
Question: Ever since this issue about the teddy bear named Muhammad has surfaced, I have grown concerned. I never thought about the issue like that before. I want to know what the ruling is. I have videos of "Adam's World" with a very fanciful looking puppet named Adam who teaches children about Islam. Is it right or wrong to name plush toys and puppets with the names of prophets? If not, should I dispose of these videos? Also, my daughter has named her plush toys with different names. She has a toy horse named Ahmed, a toy cat named Aisha, and a toy rabbit named Muhammad – these are the names of her uncles and her aunt. Is this alright? Am I sinning by letting her keep these names for her toys?
Answered by Sheikh Muhammad Muhammad Sâlim `Abd al-Wadûd
There are two issues that need to be addressed. The first is the question of whether or not the person incurs sin. The second is the appropriateness of the action itself.
With respect to the sinfulness of the act, the first thing to consider is who the person is who named the animal character with the name of one of the prophets (peace be upon them all). If the person who did so was a small child, then there is certainly no sin involved, since a small child is not legally accountable.
If the person is an adult, then the question of sinfulness rests with the person's intention. If the person intended by giving the character or toy a certain name as a means to insult or belittle one of the prophets, then the person has committed a sin. Deliberately insulting any of the prophets is a serious sin. It does not matter which of the prophets it is, since we as Muslims do not differentiate between the prophets in their right to be accorded our respect.
If the person did not intend any insult by doing so, then the person incurs no sin.
Now, we shall turn our attention to the appropriateness of naming cartoon characters or toy characters by the names of the prophets.
It is certainly wrong to make any inappropriate representation of any of the prophets. If a person presents a cartoon character, a puppet, or an animal character as representing one of the prophets, then the person is doing something wrong. The person might have a good intention behind doing so, but the act itself is incorrect. If the person does so in ignorance and without any bad intention, the person will not be sinning. However the person should be informed of the mistake and should cease doing so as soon as his or her attention is drawn to the matter.
As for naming cartoon characters and toy animals by these names as simple names for the characters, there is nothing inherently wrong with this. For instance, in the show "Adam's World", the name is not being used to suggest that the character is the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him). The name is used to suggest that the character is a Muslim.
The same would be said for an Arabic television cartoon where cartoon people or cartoon animals are given Arabic names – including those names that are names of prophets – since these names are common names of people in the world, and these names are not understood to indicate prophets except when they are used expressly in reference to the prophets.
Cartoon animal characters and toy animal characters – since they are characters in a story or are used for imaginative play – are naturally given names and personalities that are customarily associated with people. Therefore, names that people customarily have can be given to fanciful characters in the same context.
Therefore, we see nothing wrong with these shows as long as their content is wholesome, and we see no objection to your allowing your daughter to give her toys the names of her aunts and uncles.
However, we still need to pay heed to both general sensibilities and cultural norms.
For instance, it would certainly be wrong to give a cartoon or toy animal that is seen as unclean in Islam – like a pig – the name of a prophet, regardless of the context in which it is presented, since this is inherently injurious to Muslim sensibilities. Also, with respect to any toy or cartoon character, the various sensibilities of the local communities – which differ from country to country – should be respected. A Muslim should never knowingly and unnecessarily insult or offend other people.
Re: Fatwa Response to the teddy bear incident: Naming toys with the names of Prophets
like the fatwa says if no one intended no insult, then their is no sin
i dont think the lady intended insult to be honest, and i dunno if its true or not but in the paper it said one boy asked "can i name the teddy the same as my name" and she said "yes"
personally i think the sudanese govt are just punishin her to get some attention
and allahu alim
Jaa-Ro-Nee-Mo!!!
"they ask you when will the help of Allah (swt) come! Certainly Allah (Swt) help is always near"
Re: Fatwa Response to the teddy bear incident: Naming toys with the names of Prophets
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
like the fatwa says if no one intended no insult, then their is no sin
i dont think the lady intended insult to be honest, and i dunno if its true or not but in the paper it said one boy asked "can i name the teddy the same as my name" and she said "yes"
personally i think the sudanese govt are just punishin her to get some attention
and allahu alim
I don't think the government is the problem.
Sudan's top clerics had called for the full measure of the law to be used against Mrs Gibbons and labelled her actions part of a Western plot against Islam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation.
So let me get this right. Calling a teddy bear Muhammad is blasphemy because it implies that the teddy bear is Muhammad???
Otherwise I don't understand how Gillian Gibbons statement can be interpreted as a blasphemy, even technically.
I don't want to speculate further until someone can explain why. Please, if anyone answers, keep it simple and to the point.
PS I wrote to the Sudanese government online but got no confirmation that they received it.
Re: Fatwa Response to the teddy bear incident: Naming toys with the names of Prophets
I am just glad English muslim groups and muslims all over the world spoke up on this issue in her defense. I am sure that played some part in her "light" sentence..although I think she should have been givien no jail time at all..I guess the goverment felt they had to give her a little time to keep the clerics and radicals happy..but did not want to be too extreme because she really didnt mean any harm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
In law, defamation is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may harm the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government or nation.
So let me get this right. Calling a teddy bear Muhammad is blasphemy because it implies that the teddy bear is Muhammad???
Otherwise I don't understand how Gillian Gibbons statement can be interpreted as a blasphemy, even technically.
I don't want to speculate further until someone can explain why. Please, if anyone answers, keep it simple and to the point.
PS I wrote to the Sudanese government online but got no confirmation that they received it.
I know nobody agrees with this decision, but can anybody explain the basis for it? Did the Sudanese government just make up the rules or is it based on something? Tried writing online to the Sudanese government website but it doesn't seem to be working. Since they stirred up this "storm in a teacup", you'd think they'd have the decency to respond to enquiries.
I know nobody agrees with this decision, but can anybody explain the basis for it? Did the Sudanese government just make up the rules or is it based on something? Tried writing online to the Sudanese government website but it doesn't seem to be working. Since they stirred up this "storm in a teacup", you'd think they'd have the decency to respond to enquiries.
Can anybody explain the basis for it? Sure.
It's the clerics version of "God's Law".
Well, that just highlights the limitation of written law - no matter what source it comes from it can be interpreted in any way.
The fact is, it used to be that our cultures could exist in harmony separate from each other. But these days, with the ease of travel and the world “getting smaller”, we have to accept that the good old days of living in our respective cocoons is steadily coming to an end. If we are to live in harmony again, then we need to find some common ground that everyone can live by that doesn’t encroach upon our culture or religion.
A human code. One based on our similarities – not our differences.
The alternative is for us to argue about who is right until one day someone decides to do something extreme about it. We look at Bush and the Sudanese governments and say - they are wrong. But we all condone their actions by accepting this culture of difference in the world.
Well, that just highlights the limitation of written law - no matter what source it comes from it can be interpreted in any way.
The fact is, it used to be that our cultures could exist in harmony separate from each other. But these days, with the ease of travel and the world “getting smaller”, we have to accept that the good old days of living in our respective cocoons is steadily coming to an end. If we are to live in harmony again, then we need to find some common ground that everyone can live by that doesn’t encroach upon our culture or religion.
A human code. One based on our similarities – not our differences.
The alternative is for us to argue about who is right until one day someone decides to do something extreme about it. We look at Bush and the Sudanese governments and say - they are wrong. But we all condone their actions by accepting this culture of difference in the world.
Harmony has never existed anywhere for a long time.
That's what some have been doing since there were two tribes.
Failure is no reason to stop trying.
Try a random act of kindness and see what happens.
It's been a long time since someone reminded me to be kind. That's the kind of reminder I like to hear
For the record then, although you feel there has never been harmony for long in the world, do you still agree that it is incumbent upon us all to strive for it?
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Jaa-Ro-Nee-Mo!!!
Subhanallah 
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks