Why Dog is haram?
This is my first posting, please welcome me
All of us know that pig is haram, because of the quran itself speaks about it, and scientifically also does prove several filthy things like the tape worms etc.
I dont have a pet dog, but i am not really sure why dog is haram too? You cant touch it, less eating it of course. Can anyone enligten me with naqli(quran/hadith) and aqli(logical) reasonings?
Welcome to the forum. There is nothing in Quran and hadith that prohibits us to touch a dog.
salam..Dog can b touched but it cannot b kept at our homes...thats all i know
salam..Dog can b touched but it cannot b kept at our homes...thats all i know
dogs are not haram , but it is recomended that u dont keep them in house... why.......? interesting .. ummmm lemme think.......... processing..... windows is searching its databse............ hah found that
well. u now come up why pig is haram. similarty , in dog skin it genaretes some kind of alergy which is harmful to human, i 'm sorry i forgot that alergy name....
also Dog's spit is really dangoerouse for human injury, it is medically proven...i'm really sorry that i'm unable to give u source that i 've come up that approach
but u can find easily over the internet
i hope that might help u some
interesting.. i'd be happy to review the medical facts of the situation.
as far as i am aware, dogs have more to fear that people, if the touch. Dogs can catch TB (tuberculosis) from humans whilst the most that humans generally have to worry about is strep throat.
THanks to all who replied my posting.
Sorry I got myself confused by saying the dog is at the 'same haram level' with pig. What i am trying to do is to make me understand the logical reasonings behind of whatever He has commanded upon us. Of course there are few things which should not be questioned eg if you fart which void your ablution, then why dont you just clean up the spot where the fart is coming from (you know where is it, dont you?).
Well, back to the dog issue, I was getting some replies which the dog skin will produce allergic reaction to human. Although I appreciate the response, I HONESTLY still cant comprehend why dog cannot be touched (at least according to Mazhab Shafie, wet dog cannot be touched - it is a mughallazah). Because as you can see, dog to some of human is the best human friend.. and there should be something SIGNIFICANT that Allah has foreseen, which is deemed not good for His creation - human.
It is not I dont want to abide, I do abide Islamic teachings as much possible as I can but here, I am just seeking for explanation here. Thanks.
I am getting myself more refined here..I did some google search here and there, hence ignore the previous postings..
The question is:
Why the dog's saliva is considered mughallazah whereas cat's is not?
And according to at least Imam Shafie, wet dog cant also be touched (please correct me if i am wrong). So what is the reason?
Thanks for any answers
yo man salam
i just search google here n THERE so i found that http://www.nutrinus.com/102602.htm regarding allergic issue....
u internet chammp :P lols, kidding
neverthelss we can touch dogs(but we have clean/wash them regurlay as prescribed by animal's doctor)
we can keep dogs for the security purpose , obviouse that is the SIGNIFICANCE of DOG
as far as Imamam Shafiye opinion is concerned, i dont knw such a thing related to wet dogs
now the saliva thing is ur task to search over the internet , i'm sure it is mediacly proven
God knows best
30th June 2004, 03:08
In order to understand this issue, it's my humble opinion, that we need to take into consideration the Arab cultural mindset. Knowing that dogs don't have a favorable standing, in general, with Arabs it may affect understandings and opinions.
Just a thought.
30th June 2004, 06:04
well... let's talk about that for a second.
are you familiar with a dog breed called Besenji?
here's a snippet from a decent site regarding their history:
The Basenjis are amongst the oldest dogs of the World. The name Basenji means "small wild thing from the bush", which sounds in the language of the Pygmies like "Basenji". This indicates already the origin in Central Africa, that stretched from the heart of the Congo Basin to South Sudan. The Basenjis lived there for thousands of years in a close relationship with the natives e.g. the Pygmy tribes. Normally the dogs lived as an independent pack near to the villages and supported themselves as a rule (dependant on the tribe culture).Also reproduction took place for thousands of years without any special control from humans.
The breed has therefore remained very original. Basenjis are regarded as belonging to the group known as "Schensi-Dogs". This describes dogs that have not been domesticated, that remain wild. Other well known members of the Schensi family are the well known Australian dingo or the Canaan dog from Israel. The origin of the Basenji becomes clear through one thing, that it, like the wolf, comes on heat only once a year and then for a period of 30 days. Also Basenjis cannot bark-caused by their flat larynx. The bark is for humans an appropriate dog characteristic. Also the wolf, as forerunner of the dogs, as well as the original dog breeds does not have this ability. Although the Basenji lives completely independent from the affiliated native tribe, it is inestimably useful.
The first drawings of the type were found in the tombs of the Great Pyramid of Khufu (Cheops), built approx. 2700 BC in the IV Dynasty. They show small dogs sitting near the feet of their owners or under the chairs. Amongst other tomb furnishings of rich Egyptians and Pharaohs were statues and illustrations of these dogs, which because of its extremely cat like nature ( it moves silently, is free from dog smells and washes itself like a cat) was highly prized by this civilised nation. Presumably the first Basenjis reached Egypt as gifts from the Pygmies to the Pharaohs. With the decline of the Egyptian culture, the knowledge about the Basenji also disappeared. (from the same site)
the history of canines interacting with humans is long and well established. from hunting together to mutual protection and security, man has no better friend in the animal kingdom than the canine.
now, of course, there is no more fundamentally Arab dog than the Saluki.
from a good site on Saluki's:
For many centuries, the nomadic Bedouin depended on the swift Saluki to bring down game for the tribe's cooking pots. Although dogs were pronounced unclean when the Islamic religion swept the Arab world (600 - 1918), a special exemption was made for the Saluki. It was believed that the Saluki was a gift from Allah and, like the Egyptians, they called the hound "El Hor," or the Noble One. Even today it is reportedly rare to find a Saluki wandering free in the Middle East. Many Arabs will not even admit to knowing that such a dog exists, largely because Salukis are venerated as holy dogs, for if they were not holy, Arabs could not eat of the game captured by them. Any ordinary dog or "Kelb" in the Middle East is considered a scavenger. Only those men holding high rank were permitted to own a Saluki and rarely was the Saluki ever purchased in it's Country of Origin, even now. Instead, they were given as gifts to those honoured by the owner.
30th June 2004, 13:24
I appreciate the info. However, I have several problems with it. I went to link you provided and it stated that the Saluki was an exception and that other dogs weren't viewed with the same regard. This may hint to what I was talking about. If you know Arabs and their culture you will realize that one of their slurs is to call someone a "kalb" (dog). This has nothing to do with Islam.
As for the link, I suggest that it was taken from an Annie Hayes who interviewed an Hamad Al Ghanem who is "a memeber of the U.S.A. World Kennel Club and also a Board Member of the Society for the Perpetuation of Desert Bred Salukis based in Arizona USA." I read what she has written and could not find where some of the information came from that was in the link you provided.
Although dogs were pronounced unclean when the Islamic religion swept the Arab world (600 - 1918)...
They had been viewed so long before Islam. Besides the Prophet (P) owned a dog for hunting. We can also eat what a dog carries back in its mouth to us from a hunt so long as it doesn't eat the prey.
It was believed that the Saluki was a gift from Allah...
I checked several Islamic sources and could not find anything remotely close to this assertion. Even Mr. Hamad Ghanem did not mention such a statement. So I'm curious to know where the source for this is. Please provide it if you have it.
Many Arabs will not even admit to knowing that such a dog exists, largely because Salukis are venerated as holy dogs, for if they were not holy, Arabs could not eat of the game captured by them.
Here again is a very strange statement. Arabs know the Saluki dog but to call them "holy" is a stretch. Again I'd like a source to this comment also. Even the Qur'an allows us to eat from what a hunting dog brings back but it doesn't mention anything about a Saluki:
They ask thee (O Muhammad) what is made lawful for them. Say: (all) good things are made lawful for you. And those beasts and birds of prey which ye have trained as hounds are trained, ye teach them that which Allah taught you; so eat of that which they catch for you and mention Allah's name upon it, and observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is swift to take account. Al Ma'idah 5:4
I think the article is flawed and unless some supporting evidence is provided it cannot be taken at face value. Anyway, I appreciate you looking into it but I would hope for a more accurate source, it seems this one is a bit misleading. I intend no offense and hope none was taken
30th June 2004, 16:47
I noticed that you kept emphasizing on the position of dogs in the Arab culture. So, I'm curious to know what do you deduce from the Prophet's statement about the prohibition of keeping dogs in the houses and about cleaning utensils "7 times" if a it is licked by a dog. Are you trying to establish a link between the culture of the Arabs and these statements of the Prophet or am I just reading too much into your writing?
Thanks for your clarification
30th June 2004, 22:35
Thanks for asking. My intention was actually geared more towards how someone (i.e. scholars, people in general) would gather their opinion regarding this subject because of their cultural norms. As for the ahadith relating to dogs I believe there need be more of a study into the subject. In one of the answers on the main page it is offered that we may consider that there may have been an outbreak of rabies which is why it was required to wash the utensils 7 times. However, I want you to keep in mind that many of the ahadith came from the very cultural disposition (or similar) that I was referring to. Hence, one needs to consider how a person transmitting a hadith may have understood, because of his own biases, what the Prophet may have been trying to say. Thus a hadith such as any of these may have been colored by the person's mind as he was transmitting it.
I only offer this to suggest that a deeper study of this subject needs to be made.
thank you for the post.
er... as you know, the cites were cut and pasted from the web location, ergo, that is the source of my quotation. from whence they derived their information, i cannot say.
are you asking that i check their sources for them?
to be honest with you... i was unaware of the Saluki sitution until a recent National Geographic special that focused on the Siani. every tribe that they visited had packs of the dogs and, to a man, they were NOT going to sell them. seems that they valued them higher than any other animal that they had.
no offense taken... heck, you shouldn't accept anything that i, or anyone for that matter, say without investigating it for yourself.