Is the ban on British epic The Lady Of Heaven Justified?
A long-awaited British-made film has been banned by leading UK cinema chain Cineworld following protests from Muslim groups slamming it as “blasphemous”.
The Lady Of Heaven, a historical epic, written by a Kuwaiti-born, UK-based Shi’a cleric, Yasser Al-Habib and directed by Eli King, features the story of Lady Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad, described as ‘the first victim of terrorism’.
Cineworld cancelled all showings of the film, stating that the decision was made “to ensure the safety of our staff and customers” after it sparked protests outside some cinemas. More than 126,000 people have signed a petition for the new film to be pulled from UK cinemas.
So why has The Lady of Heaven prompted such protests, and is the ban justified?
The controversy over events
Criticism of The Lady Of Heaven is largely focused on the plot. Protesters, mainly Sunnis, state that the film does not accurately portray historical events, insisting that it is only ‘spreading false information on Islam’. This leads us to ask: is the new movie based on false information?
“False information” is defined in Law Insider dictionary as “any written or verbal statement or representation of fact that is not true and that was made intentionally, knowingly or without having taken reasonable steps to ascertain whether or not the information was true.”
‘Spreading false information on Islam’ seems to be too strong as the movie does not appear to produce imaginary events or portray fictional characters’ actions. The film deals with a historical event believed to have happened by millions of Muslims, from a different perspective, based on Shi’a Islam. The scriptwriter behind The Lady of Heaven movie, Yasser Al-Habib insisted that the film was 100% historically accurate and in accordance with the Muslim faith.
It is worth noting that Fatima Az Zahra is an important figure in Islamic history for both Sunnis and Shi’as. Producer Abdul-Malik Shlibak said in an interview: “The Lady of Heaven is a very important character to us. She’s impacted my life personally. My life revolves around the Lady. We have this passion to share the story of the Lady with the world.”
Sunni and Shi’a Muslims have always had theological differences and differing views on historical events including the life and death of Fatima. While Sunni scholars maintain that she died from grief for the loss of her father, Shi’a Muslims hold a different belief. According to Shi’a historians, Fatima died after her house was attacked to force her husband Ali ibn Abu Talib to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr who was the first caliph to lead the Muslim world after the Prophet’s death.
Some Sunni narrations also support Shi’a views. Ibn Abd Rabbih Al-Undulosi, the author of the book (Al-Iqdul Farid) has said: “As for Ali, Al-Abbas and Zubayr, they remained in the house of Fatima until Abu Bakr sent Umar to force them out. Abu Bakr instructed Umar, ‘If they refuse, then fight them!’ Therefore, Umar approached them with a burning flame to burn the house on them. So Fatima addressed him and said, ‘O ibn Al-Khattab, have you come to burn our house?!’ He said, ‘Yes, unless you do what the people have done and pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr.” (Al-Iqdul Farid 4:93)
This view is also held by the contemporary historian, Abdul Fattah Abdul Maqsood, who stated in his book (Imam Ali): “Umar ibn Al-Khattab said, ‘I swear by the One whom Umar’s soul is in His power, they must come out of the house or else I will burn it on whoever is inside it.’”
It is interesting to note that despite Sunni and Shi’a conflicting views about the death of Fatima, they both accept that there was some kind of disagreement between Fatima and Abu Bakr and that she died unhappy with him.
Depictions of holy figures
The portrayals of the Prophet Muhammad and several characters, including the Prophet Muhammad’s companions, Abu Bakr As-Sadiq, Umar Ibn Al-Khattab and Uthman Ibn Affan, was one of the main reasons leading to the protests.
Malik Shlibak rejected the claims made by the protesters. He said, “These radical groups have effectively bullied the Western world into believing that there’s a blanket fatwa in Islam saying you cannot depict the Prophet. But it’s a huge lie, because the Muslim world is very varied, there are different views and there are many groups that allow the depiction of the Prophet, so long as it’s done a certain way. From our side specifically, it’s perfectly fine. And the biggest Shi’a cleric in the world permits it, as long as you maintain their honor and their dignity.”
While the Quran does not outright forbid images of Allah or the Prophet Muhammad, some teachings believe visual depictions of Muslims to be blasphemous, and Surah Ash-Shura Ayat 11 does say: “He is Creator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you from yourselves, mates, and among the cattle, mates; He multiplies you thereby. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.”
However, no actor has played the role of Prophet Muhammad, Lady Fatima, or any of the other holy figures. Dazzling sunburst computer-generated images are used instead. British newspaper The Guardian pointed out that “No single actor is credited with playing him, or any of the other holy figures in his entourage. And, as a nervous initial disclaimer points out, their faces, often shown in dazzling sunbursts, are computer-generated.”
Moreover, the depiction of human figures is not new. Medieval depictions of prophet Muhammad date back to the Mongol and Ottoman empires. There is no evidence to suggest that those drawings were not made in good faith. They rather appear to be inspired by admiration and devotion. Prof Mona Siddiqui from Edinburgh University told the BBC: “The majority of people drew these pictures out of love and veneration, not intending idolatry.”
Today, despite all the protests and indignation, images continue to be used here and there in parts of the Muslim world. Hassan Yousefi Eshkavari, a former Iranian cleric, now based in Germany told the BBC that today, images of Muhammad continue to hang in many Iranian homes: “From a religious point of view there is no prohibition on these pictures. These images exist in shops as well as houses. They aren’t seen as insulting, either from a religious or cultural viewpoint.”
The threat of sectarianism
Protesters have labelled The Lady Of Heaven “divisive”, stating that it was intended to cause sectarian hatred and foment division between Muslims.
The Muslim Council of Britain released a statement on 5th June 2022 that read, “A new film entitled ‘The Lady of Heaven‘ has been condemned as divisive and sectarian by scholars across the rich traditions of Islam. The MCB, which proudly represents affiliates from across the different schools of thought in our faith, supports those scholars and leaders who are advocating for greater unity and for the common good.”
The Iranian government was among the first governments in the Islamic world to ban the movie from being released, stating that it was aimed at dividing Muslims. Teheran Times said “Iranian clerics Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi, Ayatollah Hossein Nuri Hamedani and Ayatollah Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani have banned watching the film, believing that it will cause discord among Muslims, particularly between Shia and Sunni Muslims.”
These statements suggest that Sunnis and Shi’as have not had any divide throughout their long history together, and that the new film poses a concrete threat to the two main sects within Islam and to their unity. The sad truth is that the split between the two main denominations within Islam already exists. It is a reality that goes back some 1,400 years, to the period known as ‘the Dawn of Islam’, soon after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, in the year 632. Tensions between the two communities have always been brewing beneath the surface since then. They steadily increased over the past decades, when they became more political than religious, leading to sectarian clashes and fighting in Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon and other countries in the Middle East and the Muslim world.
Cancel culture and freedom of speech
Criticism of The Lady Of Heaven is largely centered on depictions and the biography of Fatima.
While Sunnis believe that these depictions should be prohibited, Shi’a Islam appears to be less strict on the ban, accepting such depictions when they are done with respect. There is evidence of reproductions of images of the Prophet, dating back to the 7th Century in Persia, and such images continue to be used in Shi’a houses and shops today. Moreover, there is no specific or explicit ban on depictions in the Quran, be they carved, painted or drawn.
With regard to the historical events, the movie follows the life of Fatima from Shi’a perspective, and reflects the mainstream Shi’a view, supported by a number of Shi’a historians, that the Prophet’s daughter did not die from grief but of injuries she sustained when her house was attacked to force her husband Ali ibn Abu Talib to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr.
Today, there is no consensus on such historic events. There are instead radically different versions presented by different Sunni and Shi’a narrators, which leads us to ask whether the actions taken by Sunni protesters were necessary. These actions, which are sometimes accompanied by threats and even violence, are seen in the UK as a violation of human rights and ‘cancel culture’. Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Sajid Javid attacked ‘cancel culture’ stating: “I am very concerned about the growing cancel culture in this country. There’s people out there who think they have a right not to be offended and of course, no one has that right.”
While Sunnis and Shi’as dispute historical events, ideological heritage and issues of leadership, the truth may lie somewhere in between them as American academic Hassan Abbas, author of (The Prophet’s Heir, The Life of Ali ibn Abi Talib), put it: “the truth could be somewhere in between.”
In conclusion, the question remains: how can unity, harmony and peace be established between Sunnis, Shi’as and all other sects within Islam? Is it through intimidation, imposing one’s values and beliefs on others and ‘cancel culture’, or rather through the recognition and acceptance of differences between different denominations and the acknowledgement of the right of everyone to freedom of thought and belief without interference, pressure or fear?
