To what extent is it permissible to draw incomplete images of animate beings, such as only the upper or lower half, based on the hadiths that permit drawing on cloth and smooth surfaces, as opposed to three-dimensional images? And what is the proof for the prohibition of drawing the face of animate beings, even though it is an incomplete drawing?

The two mentioned hadiths are authentic, and scholars have differed regarding the meaning of "except for a pattern on a garment." Some view it as an exception for images of inanimate objects, while others believe it was before the prohibition. As for the second hadith, many scholars have used it as evidence for the permissibility of using images that are treated with disrespect.

In summary, the ruling on images varies depending on their type: 1. Three-dimensional images (statues): Forbidden by consensus, with the exception of dolls for girls. 2. Complete images of animate beings: There are three opinions on this: Not forbidden. Not forbidden unless it has a shadow, complete limbs, and is made from durable material. Absolutely forbidden (which is the preferred ruling). 3. Incomplete images of animate beings: Permissible if a visible limb is missing without which the animal cannot survive (such as drawing only the face). 4. Images of inanimate objects (like trees and buildings): Permissible according to the majority of scholars. 5. Imaginary images of animate beings: Their ruling is the same as that of forbidden animate beings, except for what is explicitly exempted, such as children's toys.