Dogs have lived side by side with humanity. God hasn’t made any creature without a reason. However, Muslims differ in their opinions on keeping a dog in the house. Some even go so far as to state that Islam enjoins Muslims to kill a jet-black dog when they come across one. Lately, the governments in some Muslim Arab countries have had stray dogs killed.
Are dogs really so unclean according to the Shariah that some of them (the jet-black ones: apparently, the more reprehensible of the lot) have to be put to death on sight? Or, is it just one of the many interpretations of the religious texts? Do all the sects of Islam hold such a low opinion of such an incredibly faithful companion of the humankind? Let a Moulvi and a Sufi work this out in an instructive dialogue. Here is the dialogue:
The Moderator: Are dogs dirty as per Shariah?
Moulvi: There are different rulings about it; but not a single scholar from any school of thought is of the opinion that one should perform ablutions after coming into contact with a dog. The Quran is silent on whether dogs are dirty or pure. However, the study of ahadith (the traditions of the prophet of Islam) indicates that dogs aren’t permissible in the house. Some ahadith, narrated by various authentic narrators, state that Angels do not visit the house where there is a dog. There is a hadith that states that jet-black dogs should be killed, and also, that they nullify our namaz if they pass by. I must add here that asking for reasons where religious dogmas are concerned is not a productive endeavour.
Sufi: I will be answering this question with a question. Why would God create something with certain properties, and later on, make them reprehensible because of those properties? I agree with Moulvi Saeb that the Quran is silent about dogs, and only ahadith prohibit us from keeping them inside our homes. However, I have a different opinion. The Quran mentions dogs three times and none of the times in a negative manner. So, there is space for debate.
Moreover, Moulvi Saeb interprets ahadith literally. We believe in a metaphorical interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah. For us, by dogs, particularly the jet-black ones, the Prophet (SAW) meant nafs, and by homes, he meant hearts. So, we should keep nafs in check and never let it take over our hearts.
The Moderator: Would Moulvi Saeb like to comment on that?
Moulvi Saeb: Indeed. I mentioned the ahadith bearing on the subject earlier. However, different scholars have interpreted the ahadith differently. The Jurisprudences of the Maliki and Zahiri schools of thought do not consider dogs as impure (najasat); they only consider the saliva of the animal as such. A family who have a dog in their house are likely to get infected by the saliva of the animal, and stand the risk of catching some disease. As you know, Islam puts human life first. It is, therefore, understood that it is for the benefit of the humans to keep their distance from dogs.
However, Sufi Saeb here differs fundamentally with me in the interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah. We do not interpret everything literally. The jurisprudence law states: “First go by the literal meaning of the text, and if the aql doesn’t allow it, only then look for the metaphorical meaning.” Sufis do not encourage the use of aql when it comes to deen, though.
The Moderator: Thank you very much for your answer. Before Sufi Saeb answers, I would like to point it out to both of you that it is still unclear whether we are allowed to keep dogs as pets at home or not?
Sufi: I agree that we are stretching it out a bit. But isn’t this how you get the answers, by getting to the bottom of the issue at hand? [To which the Moderator replied in the affirmative.]
Moulvi Saeb, if we didn’t use aql in the matters of deen, this debate wouldn’t have taken place at all. I will leave the discussion on aql for some other time. To come back to the matter at hand, Zahiris, Malikis and some Hanbli scholars, like IbnTaymiyyah and Ibn Rushd are of the opinion that only the saliva of a dog is impure; and this, in my opinion, holds for all the animals, and not just for dogs. I think they have interpreted the relevant ahadith in an objective way.
Moreover, the Prophet (SAW), through his ahadith, has allowed us to keep dogs for hunting, protecting our crop fields and orchards, and herding our sheep and cattle. There is a tradition that a prostitute gave water to a thirsty dog, and that act of kindness towards the animal earned her a place in heaven. The Quran [5:4] allows us to eat the hunt that our dogs fetch for us. Also, the Prophet (SAW) has prohibited the killing of any living creature without reason [Sahih Muslim].
So, we are in agreement that only the saliva of a dog is impure, and, obviously, we can’t ingest it. But touching dogs and keeping them in our vicinity, let us say near our homes, isn’t against Islam. [Moulvi Saeb agreed to this.]
Now we come to the injunction in some ahadith that we kill the jet-black dogs when we see them. Maybe those particular dogs in Medina carried a contagious disease, and the Prophet (SAW) commanded the Muslims to kill them. Otherwise, why would the Prophet (SAW) single out the jet-black ones only? He even called them shaitan or devil. Isn’t nafs the same as shaitan?
Moulvi Saeb: I am glad that Sufi Saeb used logic. But the problem with logic is that you can’t be sure of your deductions until they are backed by empirical evidence. Your deductions would hold water if we had any empirical evidence from that period in support of them.
As per the Maliki school of thought, the ahadith related to the killing of dogs were later abrogated; and thus, keeping a dog as a pet is permissible. However, others differ. [Sufi Saeb agreed to this.]
Let us first review what we agree on.
First, dogs shouldn’t be killed except for self-defence, that is, if they carry a contagious disease like rabies and they become untreatable. Second, touching dogs is not najs. Third, you have to be kind towards all animals, including stray dogs: You can’t just kick or throw stones at them while passing by; you can’t tie strings of firecrackers to their tails and set them off for fun; you can’t just hit them with your cars if they can’t get out of the way quickly enough. When they attack us, most of the times, it is entirely our fault. Our grandparents used to keep some batteh for the local dogs before it was served to the family. Fourth, you can keep dogs for hunting, herding, and for the protection of the fields and orchards. Fifth, there is no harm if a dog is living in your yard, except that you have to remove the faecal matter on a daily basis. [Moulvi Saeb chukled.]
Sufi: I agree with all the things you mentioned, Moulvi Saeb. However, in Sufi tradition, dogs have a higher position. They are lauded for their patience in the face of hunger, their faithfulness, their perseverance under harsh conditions, their alert mind, and the like. Even the great Moulana Rumi dedicated a masnavi to dogs.
I would like to add to the list of things you mentioned: We ought not to keep them hungry. They have been faithful to humanity since the very beginning. In the Quranic story of the Ashab-i-Kahf (the Companions of the Cave), the men who sought refuge in the cave had a dog as one of their companions, who sought to protect its companions by assuming a menacing pose which would remain fixed for centuries at the mouth of the cave.
Also, during the times of the Prophet (SAW), dogs used to roam around Masjid-e-Nabawi. In some history books, it is even mentioned that they would urinate in the vicinity. Much later, the Governor of Misr, Amr Ibn Al Aas, is said to have ordered steps to be built on the banks of the Nile so that dogs would be able to quench their thirst during the hot summer days.
There is only one story of the prophet that has kept us from keeping dogs inside our homes: The archangel, Jibreel (AS), wouldn’t enter the house of the Prophet (SAW) because there was a puppy sleeping under Prophet’s cot. It was only after the puppy was removed that Jibreel (AS) entered with a revelation from God.
So, you can disagree with me. But the Maliki School of thought, as you mentioned, says the ahadith enjoining us to kill dogs were abrogated; and dogs, like cats, are allowed to be kept as pets. However, to remain on the safer side, you can make a doghouse just outside your house and keep a dog there. But remember, it is a sin to harm a dog.
Send us such stories and we will publish them in the series, A Moulvi and a Sufi. By the play of the differences between the two, let knowledge flourish.
