between manual imaging and photographic imaging, thus the first is prohibited while the second is not, is a modern literalism and an uncommendable rigidity, as I have detailed in "The Etiquettes of Marriage in the Purified Sunnah" (pp. 112-114). Third: the prohibition also includes the image that is trampled upon if it is left as it is and not altered by cutting, which is the view inclined to by the ḥāfiẓ in "al-Fatḥ". Fourth: his statement "until it becomes like the form of a tree" is evidence that the alteration which permits the use of the image is that which affects the features of the image, changing it until it becomes in another permissible form like a tree. Accordingly, it is not permissible to use the image even if it is such that it would not live if it were alive, as some jurists say, because in this case it remains an image in name and reality, like half-images and the like. Know this, for it is important for the Muslim to understand in this era where images have become widespread and prevalent. And if you desire further clarification on this, refer to the aforementioned source (pp. 111/112). Fifth: there is an indication that if the image is of inanimate objects, it is permissible and does not prevent the entry of angels, due to his statement "like the form of a tree", for if depicting trees were prohibited like depicting animate beings, Gabriel (peace be upon him) would not have commanded changing it to the image of a tree. This is clear, and it is supported by the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) "And if you must do so, make a tree or something that has no soul." Narrated by Muslim and Aḥmad (1/308). Sixth: the prohibition of keeping a dog because it is also a reason that prevents the entry of angels. Whether it prevents if it is a shepherd or hunting dog, apparently not, because it is permissible to keep it. It is supported by the fact that if the image is permissible, it also does not prevent the entry of angels, as evidenced by the fact that