The status of Dogs in Islam

ÅÓãÇÚíá ÍÓäí
2014 / 10 / 19

Dogs have a great status in Islam like all other creatures of Allah, which may vary in shape, mind and capabilities but Allah equated them all in appreciation and respect, he said: "There is not a moving (living) creature on earth, nor a bird that flies with its two wings, but are communities like you, We have neglected nothing in the Book, then unto their Lord they (all) shall be gathered." (Al- Anaam 38). So Dogs are a community like us.
If Allah has distinguished Man with mind, status, succession and subjected all the objects on earth to serve him, it does not allow him to disdain´-or-contempt (despise) any of the other communities.
The Dogs Community is appreciated and privileged by the Qur an and the Sunnah more than most of the other communities, as it was mentioned by Allah and his Messenger in positions of miracles, honor, purity, forgiveness and utility.
First: the Qur’an:
Qur’an mentioned that dogs were acquired and accompanied by the true believers (the People of the Cave) and the miracle took place on the believers and their dog as well: "Some say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them-;- (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth" (Al-Kahf 22). Moreover, the angles were visiting them regularly to turn them around: “And We turned them on their right and on their left sides, and their dog stretching forth his two forelegs at the entrance”. (Al-Kahf 18). So the angles did not have malice to enter the cave at the presence of the dog.
The Qur’an also mentioned some benefits provided by dogs to humans such as companionship, hunting and guarding and stressed on the purity of Dogs’ Mouth and Saliva when permitted us to eat what they hold with their mouths during hunting without requiring any washing´-or-purifying process: "so eat of what they catch for you" (Al-Ma’idah 4).
It goes without saying that using dogs in hunting and guarding requires to acquire them, accompany them, being loving and friendly with them through feeding, cuddling and petting, as well as accepting the caresses dogs do by instinct such as smelling, cunnilingus and scribbling so they can be domesticated, tamed, trained and taught to obey commands.
Second: The Sunnah:
It would be a corrupt faith to claim that the Sunnah contradicts the Qu’ran by deciding that Dogs are impure (Najas) after Allah has judged in the Qu’ran that they are pure.
The Prophet permitted the acquisition and use of dogs and ordered animal welfare when tamed´-or-slaughtered, and told us about a man entered paradise for giving water to a dog and another went to hill for locking and starving a cat.
Dogs Did not suffer any ban´-or-ill-treatment in the Madinat at the time of the prophit, it was reported in Sahih Al Bukhari (1/174) that Ibn Umar said: "The dogs used to come and go and urinate in the mosque at the time of the Profit and they were not sprinkle a bit of it," Therfore, Shaykh al-Islam “Ibn Taymiyyah” quoted this hadeeth to confirm that earth is cleansed by the sun and the wind.
If the dogs were allowed to the mosques where prayers are held how can we believe a hadith says that angels do not enter houses that have dogs,´-or-that the angel Gabriel delayed the revelation on the prophet because there was a dog in his house!?
There is no a single hadith decides the impurity of the dog´-or-his body, hair, sweat, saliva´-or-urine, but the hadith talked only about “Licking”: "The purification of the utensil belonging to any one of you, after it is licked by a dog, lies in washing it seven times, using sand for the first time" (Sahih Muslim). This was not a judgment that the saliva of the dog is impure (Najasa) otherwise it was contrary to the Qu’ran, but it was a personal discretion of the Prophet in a medical issue forbade drinking from pots after dogs to prevent diseases at a time that did not have vaccination´-or-drugs.
That is how the hadith was understood by the companions and affiliates of the prophit as nothing more than a personal discretion (opinion) so they also had their different opinions: “Ahmed” did not sanctify the sand and passed to clean the pot with other materials such as soap, and “Ibn El Qayyem” emphasized that the water is to be shed only from the pot that dogs are regularly licking not any other pots.
As for the contrasting hadiths to kill all the dogs, and again to kill only the black ones, we cannot accept them because as the extermination of a Community violates all the teaches of the Qu’ran, those hadiths were just the Profit’s personal opinions to counter the phenomenon of street dogs, and not derived religious orders´-or-legislations.
Third: Islamic jurisprudence:
The schools of Islamic jurisprudence (Fikh) had different opinions with regard to this issue, “Malek” said that the whole dog is immaculate (pure) even the drool, Abu Hanifa said that the dog is immaculate except the saliva, El-Shafei exaggerated as usual and considered the whole dog as impure, while Ahmad remained in his favorite place in a middle range with two opinions, one supports El-Shafi i and the other in favor of Abu Hanifa, but most scholars such as Awzaa i and others agreed with Malek that all animals are immaculate based on the rule of "every living is immaculate” (Taher), even the pig is a pure animal however eating it’s meat is impure act.
Although scholars have agreed on the inadmissibility of drinking water from the utensil the dog licks, but they differed in the validity of this water for drinking and ablutions if the water was a lot.
This contradiction of opinions confirms that there is no incised text from Allah and His Messenger says that the community of dogs´-or-any other community of creatures is immaculate, and if there was no one could have argued´-or-disagreed. The absence of a text here takes the whole issue out of the scope of religion, and denies any relationship between the acquisition´-or-the touching of dogs and religion.
We can refer the differences between scholars in this matter to three main reasons:
1. The ignorance of the organic relationship between mankind and the universe including the other creatures as stipulated in the Qu’ran.
2. The desire of some scholars to distinguish themselves with special radical doctrines.
3. Denying the fact that the Profit had two Natures, the human and the prophetic and claiming that the outcomes of both the natures are inspired by Allah, which is a misunderstanding to the holy verses: “Nor does he speak of desire. It is only an Inspiration that is inspired” (Al-Najm 3&4), while the correct understanding of Islam asserts that the Prophet was infallible only in reporting revelation of the Qu’ran, but all his other actions and sayings came from his human side that can be right´-or-wrong, for this he was admonished many times by the Qu’ran and retreated many of his own hadiths when proved wrong, which is known to all and narrows the field here for detailed. For all this, making legislations and taboos from the Hadith without considering the essence of the message of Islam as stipulated in the Qu’ran is very wrong and dangerous and leads to a lot of mistakes like assuming that dogs are not pure and Muslim must avoid their idol´-or-saliva to be clean for paying.
May this study help you all to understand a part of the message of Islam, guide you to treat dogs and all other creatures with all due love and respect and to encourage your children to benefit from the positive impact of raising pets on their personality where they learn care, patience, diligence in communicating with others and sharing feelings abstract of purpose´-or-interest.




Add comment
Rate the article

Bad 12345678910 Very good
                                                            
Result : 35% Participated in the vote : 4