Muslims are Missing Out on the Benefits of Dogs

This is an example of how dogmatic religious thinking can impede progress and make life less convenient.

Instead of a guide dog, Mona Ramouni of Dearborn Michigan uses a horse as a guide. Her parents would not accept a dog into their home for religious reasons.

Muslims have had a long history of irrational hatred towards dogs and they have based it on hadiths that are either weak or have an historical context related to diseases such as rabies.

Dogs are wonderful pets, guards, and are used heavily in helping the blind, those with epilepsy and psychiatric disorders, search and rescue, etc. A dog is man's best friend and it is the only creature in the world that will love you more than you love yourself. It will risk your life for you.
Yet, the Muslim world has lost out on many of these benefits, because they choose to put more emphasis on weak hadiths than super-strong ultimate ayahs.

The Quran actually praises dogs for their benefits to man, and encourages humans to train them in order to take advantage of their abilities. Dog training is described as human knowledge inspired by God which utilizes the knowledge and skills of dogs.

"يَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا أُحِلَّ لَهُمْ قُلْ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَمَا عَلَّمْتُمْ مِنَ الْجَوَارِحِ مُكَلِّبِينَ تُعَلِّمُونَهُنَّ مِمَّا عَلَّمَكُمُ اللَّهُ فَكُلُوا مِمَّا أَمْسَكْنَ عَلَيْكُمْ وَاذْكُرُوا اسْمَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ" (المائدة: 4)

"They ask you what is lawful to them. Say: Lawful to you are all things good and wholesome: and what you have taught your trained hunting animals to catch (as dog trainers). You teach them what God has taught you: so eat what they catch for you, but pronounce the name of God over it: and fear God; for God is swift in taking account." (5:4)

The Quran also talks about the dog as a companion of the People of the Cave. The dog was so important that a special grave was dedicated to it, and was mentioned repeatedly in the story as a sign of its significance.

"وَتَحْسَبُهُمْ أَيْقَاظًا وَهُمْ رُقُودٌ وَنُقَلِّبُهُمْ ذَاتَ الْيَمِينِ وَذَاتَ الشِّمَالِ وَكَلْبُهُمْ بَاسِطٌ ذِرَاعَيْهِ بِالْوَصِيدِ لَوِ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَوَلَّيْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْهُمْ رُعْبًا" (الكهف: 18)

"You would have deemed them awake, while they were asleep, and We turned them on their right and on their left sides: their dog stretching forth his two fore-legs on the threshold: if you had come up on to them, you would have certainly turned back from them in flight, and would certainly have been filled with terror of them." (18:18)

"سَيَقُولُونَ ثَلاثَةٌ رَابِعُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ وَيَقُولُونَ خَمْسَةٌ سَادِسُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ رَجْمًا بِالْغَيْبِ وَيَقُولُونَ سَبْعَةٌ وَثَامِنُهُمْ كَلْبُهُمْ قُلْ رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِعِدَّتِهِمْ مَا يَعْلَمُهُمْ إِلا قَلِيلٌ فَلا تُمَارِ فِيهِمْ إِلا مِرَاءً ظَاهِرًا وَلا تَسْتَفْتِ فِيهِمْ مِنْهُمْ أَحَدًا" (الكهف: 22)

"(Some) say they were three, the dog being the fourth among them; (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth, doubtfully guessing at the unknown; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eighth. Say: "My Lord knows best their number; it is but few that know their (real case)." Enter not, therefore, into controversies concerning them, except on a matter that is clear, nor consult any of them about the affair of the People of the Cave." (18:22)

There is nothing in the Quran against dogs

If dogs were indeed ritually unpure, the Quran would have mentioned it, but instead, the Quran spoke only positively about dogs. Since ritual purity is an issue of creed (aqeedah) we should only be taking it from a strong source which is the Quran, and not give a hadith overriding significance, especially when the issue has practical implications on our livelihood.

A dog is much better than a horse as a guide for the blind. Mona Ramouni might be making her life more difficult and losing out on the benefits of dogs. It is unfortunate that she has built it on irrational dogma rather than reason.

There is also a tendency among Muslims to be prejudicial against those who own dogs. If you don't like dogs because you think they are unclean, that's fine. Don't own a dog, but don't denounce people who own dogs and love dogs.

As for the third instance where a dog was mentioned in the Quran, it did not speak of dogs as harmful to humans. The ayah aims to criticize certain humans that do not use their full human potential (their minds), therefore being similar to animals. There are other ayahs that make references to cattle to make that point. That doesn't mean that cows and sheep are evil.

"وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِنْ تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَثْ ذَلِكَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا فَاقْصُصِ الْقَصَصَ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ" (الأعراف: 176)

"If it had been Our Will, We should have elevated him with Our Signs; but he inclined to the earth, and followed his own vain desires. His similitude is that of a dog: if you attack him, he lolls out his tongue, or if you leave him alone, he (still) lolls out his tongue. That is the similitude of those who reject Our Signs; so relate the story; perchance they may reflect." (7:176)

I also believe that this ayah requires more examination in terms of the behavior of dogs, since there are several explanations, none of which made sense to me.

I think the first ayah (وَمَا عَلَّمْتُمْ مِنَ الْجَوَارِحِ مُكَلِّبِينَ) also requires further examination. The grammatical structure of the ayah is confusing.

Imam Malik considers dogs pure

Dogmatic thinking is so endemic among Muslims that they often fail to consider other points of view by imams they recognize.

Imam Malik bin Anas considers dogs pure and does not subscribe to the claims of impurity. Yet, for some reason, his opinion is not taken into account even when it is a matter of necessity.