When photography emerged in the 19th century as a technological marvel, it was met with wonder, skepticism, and resistance across the world. Among Muslim communities, its arrival sparked a complex debate—not only about art and innovation but about religious identity, power, and modernity.It was Muslims who strongly opposed it, declaring it haram (prohibited) and impermissible to use. Years were spent debating whether it was halal (permissible) or haram, while on the other hand, non-Muslims readily embraced the technology and used it as a means of income and influence. Today, they dominate the visual world and use it as a powerful tool to shape narratives as they wish.
Photography has become a major instrument for spreading propaganda and fostering hatred within societies. Meanwhile, Muslims often find themselves in a defensive position, as their perspective is frequently ignored or dismissed by others.
In this article, we will analyze the issue to gain a clearer understanding of why we have fallen behind.
The Arrival of the Camera
The first public photography process—the daguerreotype—was introduced in 1839 in France. As cameras made their way to the Ottoman Empire, Persia, Egypt, and British India, Muslims encountered the strange new medium within a broader context of colonialism, scientific advancement, and cultural upheaval. The early reaction wasn’t monolithic. It ranged from embrace and adaptation to suspicion and outright rejection.
The Religious Question: Is Photography Permissible?
One of the central Islamic concerns revolved around aniconism—the prohibition or discouragement of images of living beings. Traditional interpretations of Hadith warned against creating images that imitate God’s act of creation. Some scholars equated photography with drawing or sculpture, placing it under the same restrictions.
However, photography also differed from traditional art forms. It was mechanical, seen by some as a mere reflection of reality rather than an act of imitation. This nuance allowed space for differing interpretations.
In the late 19th century, many ulama (Islamic scholars) in conservative circles condemned photography as impermissible. They argued it could lead to idolatry or was unnecessary vanity. But others, particularly those close to royal courts or reformist circles, took a more permissive stance, especially when photography served practical purposes—documentation, science, or even governance.
The Ottoman Empire: Embracing Modernity
The Ottomans provide the clearest example of early Muslim engagement with photography. Sultan Abdülmecid I posed for a daguerreotype in the 1850s. His successor, Sultan Abdülhamid II, went further: he used photography to project a modern, centralized state. He ordered thousands of images to be taken of Ottoman schools, hospitals, railways, and military drills—later sending them to foreign dignitaries to showcase the empire’s modernization.
Here, photography was co-opted as a tool of statecraft, not condemned. The camera was seen as a way to counter European narratives and assert Muslim agency on the global stage.
Persia: From Superstition to Strategy
In Qajar Iran, photography arrived with court patronage. Nasir al-Din Shah, a keen admirer of Western technology, became one of the first Muslim rulers to personally take photographs. His private albums include images of women from his harem, military parades, and self-portraits.
Yet among the broader public, resistance lingered. Some rural and religious communities believed photography could steal the soul or bring spiritual harm. Still, photography gained ground as elites used it to assert social status and modern identity.
South Asia: A Battleground of Faith and Colonialism
Under British rule, photography in India was both a colonial instrument and a site of cultural negotiation. British authorities used it to classify and catalog Indians—often through racist, pseudoscientific methods. Muslims, already navigating their diminished status after the fall of the Mughal Empire, were caught between resistance to colonial gaze and a desire to modernize.
Some Indian Muslim reformers, like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, supported photography as part of broader educational reform. Muslim photographers emerged, particularly in urban centers like Delhi and Lucknow, opening studios and photographing weddings, portraits, and religious ceremonies.
But opposition remained. In rural areas, and among conservative religious figures, photography was still seen as a moral and theological threat—an example of how technology could unsettle long-held norms.
Photography in Mosques and Sacred Spaces
One of the most sensitive issues was photographing religious sites or rituals. In some Muslim societies, it was considered sacrilegious. In others, photographs of Mecca and Medina, once introduced by Ottoman and later Egyptian and Indian publishers, became prized images—proof that modern technology could also serve faith.
By the 20th century, images of pilgrimage, mosques, and Islamic leaders became more widespread. Photography was increasingly integrated into Muslim life—though never without scrutiny.
Conclusion: From Suspicion to Integration
The Muslim response to photography was neither reactionary nor blindly progressive. It was a careful, contested process of negotiation—between religion and modernity, tradition and change, fear and fascination.
What Muslims “did” when photography arrived wasn’t a simple yes or no. Some banned it. Some embraced it. Most navigated a grey zone, as they have with every new tool from printing presses to satellite TV to social media.
What’s clear is this: photography, once suspect, is now deeply woven into Muslim societies. From ID cards to Instagram, it captures everything from prayer to protest. The journey from daguerreotype to digital has been long—but the debate it sparked remains alive, reflecting enduring tensions over image, representation, and power.
The writer is a Faculty member of Mathematics, Department of General Education SUC, Sharjah, UAE. Email: [email protected]
