Living in the past

The people of Arabia back in the old days did not use planes, TV sets, mobile phones, automobiles, guns, bombs, and probably a million other things as well. They also did not play golf, football, etc., or listen to the radio, use the Internet, and whatnot. So, since the Prophet and his comrades did not do all this, are we allowed to do it?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Muslims only allowed to keep dogs for security and hunting, says scholar

(The Star) - Scholar Dr Fathul Bari said that Islam allows people to keep dogs but only for security and hunting purposes, not for pleasure or as pets.

Dr Fathul, who is CEO of Pertubuhan Ilmuan Malaysia said this was because dogs could not be eaten and Muslims had to perform the samak ritual (cleaning with mud and water) every time they came into contact with a dog’s saliva. 

“This shows that dogs cannot be kept as pets. According to the Al-Quran and Hadith, we can keep dogs for only security and hunting. A dog can be used in the area of detecting drugs for example,” he said.

He added that if the history of the Prophet and his comrades was studied, none of them kept dogs as pets. He said there were those who kept cats as pets though.

Dr Fathul however said the religion did not allow anyone to kill or abuse dogs as they were God’s creatures. He gave the example of the story of an old prostitute who was given a place in heaven after giving water to a dog.

“This is proof that everyone including Muslims should be kind to dogs,” he told the Star Online.  

Dr Fathul however took issue with a controversial video of Maznah Mohd Yusof celebrating Hari Raya with her dogs that has been at the centre of a social media storm, culminating in her being remanded in Segamat earlier today.

“The video contains elements that provoke Muslims. What is her motive of creating the video?,” said Dr Fathul referring to the ablutions and the Takbir Raya playing in the background.

He added that Maznah would have to explain her reasons for keeping the dogs.

However, Chairman of the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) Dr Farouk Ahmad Musa said that Muslims could keep dogs as pets as there was no specific evidence or valid reason in the Quran or Hadith that prevented them from doing so.

“Anybody who treats God’s creatures with kindness should be given credit, rather than hauled up for questioning. There is nothing insulting about being kind to God’s creatures including dogs,” he said.

The Department of Islamic Development Malaysia (JAKIM) have yet to comment directly on dog ownership saying they would release a press statement on the issue soon.

However JAKIM has stated today that it finds that the YouTube clip of Maznah and her three dogs is insulting to Muslims.

************************************************

I am NOT a religious scholar. Hence most Malays would be of the opinion that I am NOT qualified to comment on Islam, especially in response to or in disagreement with what a qualified scholar has to say.

The favourite argument is that if you are not a heart surgeon then you should not be commenting on how to perform heart surgery and should instead leave it to the experts to do the talking.

True! But that does not mean I cannot comment about how exercising can strengthen your heart and prolong your life and what type of exercise is good for you so as not to strain the heart or result in hamstring, knee, heel, hip, tendon, etc. injuries. After all, I did use to run 80-100 kilometres a week plus participate in marathons in my younger days so I should know what I am talking about even though I do not know how to cut open your chest.

So, let me venture into an area where angels fear to tread and comment on what Islamic Scholar Dr Fathul Bari has to say about dogs in the Islamic perspective.

Dr Fathul said Muslims must not keep dogs as pets because dogs could not be eaten and Muslims had to perform the samak ritual (cleaning with earth or sand) every time they came into contact with a dog’s saliva. 

First of all, he also said Muslims can keep cats as pets. But I have never heard of a Muslim who eats cats. So, if cats, which Muslims also do not eat, can be kept as pets why can’t dogs be kept as pets on grounds that Muslims do not eat dogs?

Anyway, would you want to eat your pet, even if it is a rabbit? If your rabbit dies you would want to give it a decent burial rather than cook it for dinner. And you would for sure not cook your dead cat for supper. Hence I do not buy that argument.

Now, with regards to performing the samak ritual (cleaning with earth or sand) in the event a dog licks you, that may have been true in the past. You see, dogs suffer from rabies and in those days there were no vets or doctors. Hence you cleansed yourself with earth to make sure you do not get contaminated.

Why earth? You clean yourself with earth because earth is a cleansing agent and can even purify water. For example, well water is clean because it is purified by the earth even if the river beside the well is filthy like hell -- plus you can use sand as a filter to clean sewage water (meaning toilet water) and turn it into potable water (meaning you can drink it).

Hence earth and sand (as what you found in the desert in Prophet Muhammad’s days) was used in lieu of detergent (which did not exist in the desert in Prophet Muhammad’s days).

Today, you do not need to use earth and sand. You can use antiseptic cleansers or powder soap, which is even better than earth and sand. But in the old days, say, 1,500 years ago, earth and sand were the only alternatives you had to clean germs from your person -- such as saliva of dogs that may or may not have rabies germs.

Dr Fathul added that if the history of the Prophet and his comrades was studied, none of them kept dogs as pets. He said there were those who kept cats as pets though.

Okay, so the Prophet and his comrades were not known to have kept dogs as pets. Hence, since the Prophet and his comrades did not do so, then we should not also do so and instead do what they did.

If the yardstick to use were “only do what the Prophet and his comrades did and do not do what the Prophet and his comrades did not do” then the argument would be a long argument extending beyond just dogs.

The people of Arabia back in the old days did not use planes, TV sets, mobile phones, automobiles, guns, bombs, and probably a million other things as well. They also did not play golf, football, etc., or listen to the radio, use the Internet, and whatnot. So, since the Prophet and his comrades did not do all this, are we allowed to do it?

The Prophet and his comrades waged war on the unbelievers who resisted them and cut off the heads of the rebels and confiscated all their property and captured their family and sold them or kept them as slaves. They were also allowed to have sex with their slaves since slaves are your property.

Therefore, since they did this 1,500 years ago and Islam until today still allows this and has never outlawed it, can we do that?

To argue that since they did not do all this 1,500 years ago so we can’t do it today -- or since they did all this 1,500 years ago so we can do it today -- does not make the argument very strong. We need to see what was kosher then that might not be kosher today (such as taking your enemy’s wife as your slave and having sex with her) and vice versa.

In those days, people had to use birds to send messages to each other. Today, I use my Blackberry, Samsung and iPad to send and receive messages.

Anyway, sending birds to each other may result in you transmitting bird flu or a hawk might zap your bird and the message you have been waiting for to make that crucial decision might never get through and your whole army may get wiped out because a hungry hawk ate you messenger bird.

So, modern communication methods are far better. However, since the Prophet and his comrades never did this, can we do it?