Evidence for dogs being impure?

[AustralianRevert]

walaykum salaam

I use to think that dogs were impure but Islaam isn't based upon a democratic decision nor on desires of scholars

The dog as a whole is not impure, this is a innovation by the Shafi'is and Hanbalis. There's no evidence to say the dog is impure, MAYBE the saliva but not the dog itself. There's nothing that even mentions the reason behind throwing out the stuff and washing it 7 times and 1 with dirt. In Muwatta it only mentions the 7 washings but nothing about 1 with dirt. Only basis they have is an assumption based upon this hadeeth but nothing solid.

Hanafis probably have the most logical belief, the saliva is impure and not the dog itself but even that needs evidence

That's right, Dogs, and other carnivorous/omnivorous(including humans) can develop Gingivitis, which can cause infections and other things like that... Dogs also(like humans) can catch fleas, which can be bad also.

Dogs i don't believe are cursed or dangerous or "impure", or any other superstitious thing like that.

I do however, personally, dislike small dogs, and prefer bigger dogs, but only if they have somewhere to run and work, they do not belong in small backyards, this is cruelty.

[Ayman bin Khaled]

The dog as a whole is not impure, this is a innovation by the Shafi'is and Hanbalis.

It reported in the Hadeeth that is documented in the Musnad with good chain that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: "He is not from my Ummah who disrespect old ones and who is not merciful on youngies"

It is reported in the authentic hadeeth that is documnetd in the the Sunan the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said:" there is nothing heavier in the scale of the beleiver in the day of judgemnet than good manner and Allah indeed despise the one with bad manners"

It is reported in the authentic hadeeth that is documnetd in the Sahih that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: "Who believes in Allah and the Last Day should talk what is good or keep quiet." (i.e. abstain from dirty and evil talk, and should think before uttering).

It is reported in the authentic Hadeeth that is documented in the Sahih that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: " A slave of Allah would utter a word that he do not recognize its evilness that would through him hell-fire"

There's no evidence to say the dog is impure, MAYBE the saliva but not the dog itself.

and what we do with Muqtada Al-Nass wa Al-Mafhoum wal Mantouq wa Altanbeehu bil Adna A'la A'laaa and Qiyaas and etc.... Anyhow, I am not here to debate but to advise you that May Allah betsows His mercy upon a person who knew his status. Since when the Asaaghir criticize the Akaabir!!

May Allah bestows his Mercy upon Imam Malik!! who I wish people learn from his manners and his journey in seeking knowledge.

There's nothing that even mentions the reason behind throwing out the stuff and washing it 7 times and 1 with dirt. In Muwatta it only mentions the 7 washings but nothing about 1 with dirt. Only basis they have is an assumption based upon this hadeeth but nothing solid.

Nothing solid? La Hawala wa la quwa illah billah.

Akhi are you a student of knowledge? If not then you are surely Muqalid and that means that you have no right to deny what you do not know and that is the view of majority!!.

Hanafis probably have the most logical belief, the saliva is impure and not the dog itself but even that needs evidence

Abu hanfia is with the view that all of it is impure and the Madhab is its opposite although that view is still considered correct while the adopted one as the most correct one. In addition, what you said is the view of Sh. Al-islam as well. رحمهم الله

Wallahu A'lam

[Mufakkir]

I am aware of the hadith about washing the utensil. There is also another hadith which mentions three or five. This hadith is reject though due to Abdul Wahab from Ismail. There is a hadith in Sahih ul-Muslim saying eight washes too.

I thought there were other evidences. Some that I was not aware of. This seems like the only evidence being used.

I however do not agree with a dog being impure. Not its saliva nor the skin. The argument of it being impure is not an intelligent opinion. One can argue the washing was due to a berserk dog. And the infection that one could catch. This opinion is much better. As it is still an opinion and no one is obliged to follow. We do not know the reason behind the washing. No ones opinion is better then the other for this. Since the reason is not indicated in text. Nor does it indicate the washing is for purity sake.

Allah Alim

[Mufakkir]

Dogs i don't believe are cursed or dangerous or "impure", or any other superstitious thing like that.

I do however, personally, dislike small dogs, and prefer bigger dogs, but only if they have somewhere to run and work, they do not belong in small backyards, this is cruelty.

esalam elaikum

Allah [sub] nor Rasulullah [saw] said dogs are cursed. This was a belief before Islam. Most likely it is a cultural bias.

There are restrictions upon keeping a dog. If you like. I can tell you if you are not aware of them.

[Isma'eel]

Brother Ayman.. Miqdaad does not believe in Taqleed and thinks that everyone is free to make his own ijtihad. He does not care about the sayings of the scholars so it is waste of time to debate with him. May Allah reward you for your good intention.

[Ayman bin Khaled]

I am aware of the hadith about washing the utensil. There is also another hadith which mentions three or five. This hadith is reject though due to Abdul Wahab from Ismail. There is a hadith in Sahih ul-Muslim saying eight washes too.

I thought there were other evidences. Some that I was not aware of. This seems like the only evidence being used.

I however do not agree with a dog being impure. Not its saliva nor the skin. The argument of it being impure is not an intelligent opinion. One can argue the washing was due to a berserk dog. And the infection that one could catch. This opinion is much better. As it is still an opinion and no one is obliged to follow. We do not know the reason behind the washing. No ones opinion is better then the other for this. Since the reason is not indicated in text. Nor does it indicate the washing is for purity sake.

Allah Alim

Akhi al-kareem,

If you only observe the words you say, you would have not have me reply to you!

You can do taqleed with the Maliki scholars, May Allah preserve them, but that does not mean to say what you have said above. Such statment means either you are more knowledgable than the majority of scholars from four Madhabs or you disrepect them!! and neither of that is true! However, I think maybe the words failed you and came out wrongly but please everyone need to show respect to the scholars whom dedicated their lives so that most laypeople now can google answers in seconds easily!!

By the way, I can easily convince you that it is impure based only on that Hadeeth and use the argumenst of the maliki scholars to prove the view of the majority but I would not because this is not a win-lose debate.

Anyhow, whoever adopt the view of the majority then he adopted the most correct and the safest and who adopt the Maliki view then he is excused inshAllah and adopted what appeared to be correct to him based on Taqleed.

Wallahu A'lam

[Pluma]

Mufakkir : You act like someone lacking intelligence and like a moron. Saying that Al-Shaafi'i or Ibn Taymiyya were doing fataawaa that "lack intelligence" is stupidity in itself.

Miqdaad : The Hanaabila may have some bida' on some issues, but they are not mubtadi'a for sure : you are the only mubtadi' mentionned here.

[FOS]

This denying of authentic hadith with peoples limited knowledge has led me to believe either the ones who have used there intellect against hadith must own a dog themselves , or have family that do so.

The people of truth admit there wrongs, and put themselves wright according to the teachings of the prophet muhammed sallallahu alayhi wassallam, that is the best guidance and indeed the path of the most intelligent.

The knowledged should be respected.

Aslaamualaicum

[Miqdad]

It reported in the Hadeeth that is documented in the Musnad with good chain that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: "He is not from my Ummah who disrespect old ones and who is not merciful on youngies"

There's no disrespecting, whether a person is old or young, it doesn't give them the right to enforce opinions into the deen.

Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours that is not part of it will have it rejected [Bukhaari Kitab al Sulh]

and what we do with Muqtada Al-Nass wa Al-Mafhoum wal Mantouq wa Altanbeehu bil Adna A'la A'laaa and Qiyaas and etc.... Anyhow, I am not here to debate but to advise you that May Allah betsows His mercy upon a person who knew his status. Since when the Asaaghir criticize the Akaabir!!

May Allah bestows his Mercy upon Imam Malik!! who I wish people learn from his manners and his journey in seeking knowledge.

Nothing solid? La Hawala wa la quwa illah billah.

Akhi are you a student of knowledge? If not then you are surely Muqalid and that means that you have no right to deny what you do not know and that is the view of majority!!.

Abu hanfia is with the view that all of it is impure and the Madhab is its opposite although that view is still considered correct while the adopted one as the most correct one. In addition, what you said is the view of Sh. Al-islam as well. رحمهم الله

Wallahu A'lam

Manners are based upon custom, as long as there isn't anything haraam, the rest depends on where you are.

Well these are just views, none are supported by clear-cut evidence

Anyone can give reasons why the Prophet said to do something but it doesn't mean that is the real reason. If there isn't evidence supporting their view, then everyone's opinion is the same, no ones out weighs another.

At the end these are just opinions which aren't based upon knowledge but just conjecture. More like a guessing game then anything

[Miqdad]

Mufakkir : You act like someone lacking intelligence and like a moron. Saying that Al-Shaafi'i or Ibn Taymiyya were doing fataawaa that "lack intelligence" is stupidity in itself.

You went from Shafi'i to ibn Taymiyyah, skipped a whole lot of people there

They were wrong and they were right, they lacked intelligence and even committed sins, is that so bad? They weren't masoom

Plus ibn taymiyyah declared the saliva of the dog impure but not the dog itself. So this is more closer to the hadeeth itself then to assume that the entire dog is impure

Miqdaad : The Hanaabila may have some bida' on some issues, but they are not mubtadi'a for sure : you are the only mubtadi' mentionned here.

No one called them mubtadi even though the entire school does fall into it as it's based upon a persons usul and not the Prophets "hear and obey" sunnah. They cant even agree on their own aqeedah, so forget about fiqh issues

I don't care let these "schoolers" fight and cut each others throats like they use to do