Product Code Database
Aniconism is the cultural absence of artistic representations ( ) of the natural and supernatural worlds, or it is the absence of representations of certain figures in . The prohibition of material representations may only extend to a specific supreme deity, or it can encompass an entire pantheon, it can also include depictions of a prophet, saints, or sages, or even depictions of living beings and anything in existence generally. (2025). 9780857454690, Berghahn Books. ISBN 9780857454690 It is generally codified by religious traditions and as such, it becomes a taboo. When it is enforced by the physical destruction of images, aniconism becomes iconoclasm.
Aniconism has historical phases in both Buddhism and Christianity, though these movements have been largely rejected as Buddha in art, life of Buddha in art, Buddhas and bodhisattvas in art, God the Father in Western art, Holy Spirit in Christian art, the depiction of Jesus, The Trinity in art, and Manus Dei are common. By contrast Islam has predominantly been aniconistic throughout their histories, including representations of major figures such as Muhammad. (2025). 9781789903461, Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN 9781789903461 The view of aniconism in Judaism has been challenged, with a number of medieval Ashkenazi illuminated manuscripts collected by David Kaufmann. The earliest phases of ancient Greek religion were rich in aniconic representation, even though Greek mythology is heavily anthropomorphism.
The word "aniconism" is derived from Ancient Greek εικων 'image' with the negative prefix an- (Greek privative alpha) and the suffix -ism (Greek -ισμος). Iconoclasm is the active destruction of images for religious or cultural reasons.
Some modern scholars who have studied various cultures have gathered material which shows that in many cases, the idea of aniconism is an intellectual construction rather than a fact of tangible reality, it suits specific intents and historical contexts.
In relation to the image of the Buddha, this aniconistic tradition could have been based on an ancient Buddhist rule which prohibited images of the Buddha in which he appeared in human form, a rule which is written in the Sarvastivada vinaya (the rules of the early Buddhist school of the Sarvastivada): "Since it is not permitted to make an image of the Buddha's body, I pray that the Buddha will grant that I can make an image of the attendant Bodhisattva. Is that acceptable?" The Buddha answered: "You may make an image of the Bodhisattava".
Although they are still a subject of debate, the first anthropomorphic representations of the Buddha are frequently considered a result of the Greco-Buddhist interaction, a cultural exchange which was particularly widespread in Gandhara, a theory which was first fully expounded upon by Alfred A. Foucher, but from the start, it was criticized by Ananda Coomaraswamy. Foucher also accounted for the origins of the aniconistic symbols by collecting small souvenirs which he removed from the main pilgrimage sites and carried away, souvenirs which were later recognized and popularized as symbols of the events which occurred at the site. Other explanations stated that it was inappropriate to represent a person who had attained nirvana.Krishan, 9
However, in 1990, the notion of aniconism in Buddhism was challenged by Susan Huntington, initiating a vigorous debate among specialists that still continues to occur.See note 7 here for an update on the controversy as of 2007, and here for another from 2001. She sees many early scenes claimed to be aniconic as in fact not depicting scenes from the life of the Buddha, but worship of cetiya (relics) or re-enactments by devotees at the places where these scenes occurred. Thus the image of the empty throne shows an actual relic-throne at Bodh Gaya or elsewhere. She points out that there is only one indirect reference for a specific aniconic doctrine in Buddhism to be found, and that pertaining to only one sect.(Huntington 1990) [3] and here
As for the archeological evidence, it shows that some anthropomorphic sculptures of the Buddha actually existed during the supposedly aniconistic period, which ended during the 1st century CE. Huntington also rejects the association of "aniconistic" and "iconic" art with the division that emerged between Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Huntington's views have been challenged by Vidya Dehejia and others. Although some earlier examples of them have been found in recent years, it is widely-believed that the large free-standing iconic images of the Buddha which are so prevalent in later works of Buddhist art are not prevalent in works of Buddhist art which were produced during the earliest period of the history of Buddhism; discussion is focused on smaller figures in relief panels, conventionally considered to represent scenes from the life of the Buddha, and now re-interpreted by Huntington and her supporters.
Some Amish prefer not to have their photo taken. This has been attributed to the Biblical commandment "Thou shalt not make unto thyself a graven image," and the belief that photographs can "steal your soul," among other reasons. Modern Amish differ in their attitudes towards photography, with some accepting it as a part of the modern world around them.
Among Jehovah's Witnesses, followers are prohibited from wearing religious themed jewelry displaying icons such as the cross, as idol worship is prohibited. Having images or sculptures of Jesus, Jehovah (God), and angels is also considered a taboo according to their interpretation of Exodus 20:4,5 and 1 Corinthians 10:14. Followers are also admonished to avoid any objects portraying depictions of the supernatural.
Aniconism in Islam not only deals with the material image, but touches upon mental representations as well. It is a thorny question, discussed by early theologians, as to how to describe God, Muhammad and other prophets, and, indeed, if it is permissible at all to do so. Allah is usually represented by immaterial attributes, such as "holy" or "merciful", commonly known from His "Ninety-nine beautiful names". Muhammad's physical appearance, however, is amply described, particularly in the traditions on his life and deeds, Sira al-Nabi. Of no less interest is the validity of sightings of holy personages made during dreams.
Depending on which segment of Islamic societies are referred to, the application of aniconism is characterized with noteworthy differences. Factors are the epoch considered, the country, the religious orientation, the political intent, the popular beliefs, the private benefit or the dichotomy between reality and discourse. Today, the concept of an aniconic Islam coexists with a daily life for Muslims awash with images. TV stations and newspapers (which do present still and moving representations of living beings) have an exceptional impact on public opinion, sometimes, as in the case of Al Jazeera, with a global reach, beyond the Arabic-speaking and Muslim audience. Portraits of secular and religious leaders are omnipresent on banknotes and coins, in streets and offices. Anthropomorphic statues in public places are to be found in most Muslim countries (Saddam's are infamous), as well as arts schools training sculptors and painters. In the Egyptian countryside, it is fashionable to celebrate and advertise the returning of pilgrims from Mecca on the walls of their houses. Sometimes those who profess aniconism will practice figurative representation (cf. portraits of Taliban fighters from the Kandahar photographic studios during their imposed ban on photographyJ. L. Anderson, Thomas Dworzak, Taliban, London (UK), Trolley, 2003, .). For Shia communities, portraits of the major figures of Shi'ite history are important elements of religious devotion. Portraits of 'Ali – with veiled and unveiled face alike – can be bought in Iran around shrines and in the streets, to be hung in homes or carried with oneself, while in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh they notoriously ornate trucks, buses and rickshas. Contrary to the Sunni tradition, a photographic picture of the deceased can be placed on the Shia tombs. A curiosity in Iran is an Orientalism photograph supposed to represent Muhammad as a young boy. The Grand Ayatollah Sistani of Najaf in Iraq gave a fatwa declaring the depiction of Muhammad, Islamic prophets and other characters considered holy, permissible if it is made with the utmost respect.
Neither is the representation of living beings in Islamic countries a modern phenomenon or due to current technology, westernization or the cult of the personality. Statues of humans and animals adorned palaces of the Ummayad era, while frescoes were common under the Umayyads, and later in many Muslim countries, notably under the and various Central Asian dynasties. Figurative miniatures from Medieval Arabic countries, India, Persia and Turkey are among the pinnacles of Islamic art and account for a good deal of its attraction. Potent rulers like Shah Tahmasp in Persia and Akbar in India, patrons of some of the most beautiful figurative miniatures in arts from Islamic countries, migrated during their life between an extravagant 'figurative' and an extremist 'aniconic' period. During the 15th and 17th century representations of Muhammad (veiled, unveiled) and other prophets or Biblical characters, like Adam, Abraham or Jesus; and Solomon and Alexander the Great, became common in painted manuscripts from Persia, India and Turkey. Extreme rarities are an illustrated Qur'an depicting Muhammad and, in a Spanish-Muslim manuscript datable from the 16th century, five Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs. Iblis too is present in various illustrated manuscripts. However, there are no known figurative depictions of God.
Medieval Muslim artists found various ways not to infringe any prohibition of the image, while still representing living beings. It can be argued that since God is absolute, the act of depiction is his own and not that of a human; and miniatures are obviously very crude representations of the reality, so the two can't be mistaken. At the material level, prophets in manuscripts can have their face covered by a veil or all humans have a stroke drawn over their neck, a symbolic cut preventing them from being alive. Calligraphy, the most Islamic of arts in the Muslim world, has also its figurative side due to anthropo- and zoomorphic calligrams.
In a refutation of the belief in an aniconistic form of Judaism, and more generally in an underestimation of Jewish visual arts, the historian of ideas Kalman Bland proposed that the phenomenon is a modern construction, stating that "Jewish aniconism crystallized simultaneously with the construction of modern Jewish identities". Others have also argued that the notion of a total prohibition of figural representation in the Biblical and Hellenistic-Roman periods is untenable.Joseph Gutmann: "The 'Second Commandment' and the image in Judaism." In Hebrew Union College Annual 32 (1961) 161–174. =. Northampton 1989. II. 161–174].Joseph Gutmann: "Recent literature on Jewish art: a critical appraisal." In Jewish Book Annual 25 (5728/1967-1968) 167–169. See also Gabrielle Sed-Rajna's contribution to this volume.
Some illustrations from the Middle Ages feature fantasy creatures—usually animal-headed , even when the depictions are quite clearly meant to be those of historical or mythology humans, known as zoocephalic figures. A well-known example is the Birds' Head Haggadah (Germany, circa 1300). Although it is theorized that zoocephalic art is to circumvent this prohibition, the fact that some manuscripts also include human faces casts doubt on this assumption. The reasons for this illustration style are not fully understood.
The Ambrosian Bible or Ambrosian Tanakh of 1236 by Jacob ben Samuel and Joseph ben Kalonymus is one of the earliest Ashkenazic illuminated manuscripts and biblical codices. It contains figural representation and depictions of biblical figures such as Adam and Eve, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob or Joseph, Moses, Solomon, David and others. Some of the figures appear with faces obscured or zoocephalic. It was made for a patron probably from Ulm.
Leviticus 26:1 reads:
A breakdown can be found in the Shulkhan Aruch, section Yoreh De'ah, which takes the literal meaning of פסל as "graven image" (from the root פסל , 'to engrave'.See Exodus 34:1, 4; Deuteronomy 10:1, 3.) The prohibition is therefore seen by the Orthodox community as applying specifically to certain forms of sculpture and depictions of the human face. It is thought that illustrations from the Middle Ages of zoocephalic figures, such as in Birds' Head Haggadah, do not violate this prohibition. Because such creatures as Griffin, harpy, , and the phoenix do not actually exist, no violation of the prohibition is perceived in such depictions. This is based on the fact that the commandment, as stated in Exodus, refers specifically to "anything in the heaven above, on the earth below, or in the water below the land." However, it is forbidden to make the four faces on the Divine Chariot of the Book of Ezekiel or the ministering angels, because these are believed to be real beings that actually exist "in the heaven above." ( Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 168:1)
Shoghi Effendi has also written in the Directives from the Guardian regarding the portrait of the Báb:
/ref>De Vries, Jelle: The Babi Question You Mentioned?The Origins of the Baháʼí Community of the Netherlands, pg. 243. Peeters Publishers, 2002.Two pictures of Bahá'u'lláh and a portrait of the Báb are on display at the Baháʼí World Centre in the International Archives building, where the Baháʼís view it as part of an organized Baháʼí pilgrimage.
About the Germanic peoples, the Roman historian Tacitus writes the following: "They don't consider it mighty enough for the Heavens to depict Gods on walls or to display them in some human shape." Publius Cornelius Tacitus, "9. Götterverehrung", Germania (De origine et situ Germanorum liber), Reclam, Stuttgart, 2000, . His observation was not general to all the Germanic peoples (or, similar to the Xoanon, it evolved after his time) as documentary evidence suggests (see Ardre image stones).
In the ancient Etruscan religion, the dii involuti or "veiled gods", a group of gods who were superior to the ordinary pantheon and regulated the infliction of disasters, were never named or depicted. Depictions of gods more generally were infrequent in Etruscan civilization until after the adoption of Greek influences in the "Orientalizing" period of the 7th–6th centuries BC, and sometimes carried negative associations, their faces in particular. An Etruscan divination calendar describes being "visited with visions of the faces of the gods" as a negative event.
In some Australian Aboriginal cultural groups, the "naming and depiction of recently deceased people is often prohibited under customary law and the mourning period may last for weeks, months or years". It is believed that depicting them will inhibit their passage to the Dreamtime of the Ancestors. Some broadcasters (such as the ABC) include content warnings in programs or articles that depict Aboriginal people. The prohibition does not apply to the depiction of non-Aboriginal people who are deceased.
|
|
