عربي
Home


Articles
الموقع الرئيسي

Articles

Commentary by Iftaa' Dept. on Putting down Rabid Dogs
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 03-01-2018

In the Name of Allah, The Entirely  Merciful, The Especially Merciful

 

Commentary by the General Iftaa` Department on the Fatwa Concerning Putting Down Rabid Dogs.

Islam calls for treating all creatures with mercy and kindness, and this  general directive covers all creatures: humans, animals, birds and plants. Allah, the Exalted, said, " but do good; for God loveth those who do good."{Al-Baqarah, 195}. Moreover, the Prophet Mohammad(PBUH) said, "Verily Allah has prescribed Ihsan (kindness) for everything"{Muslim}.

Not only that, but Islam has also encouraged helping animals survive, and set a reward for whoever does that, as reflected in the following Hadith where the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "While a man was walking on his way he became extremely thirsty. He found a well, he went down into it to drink water. Upon leaving it, he saw a dog which was panting out of thirst. His tongue was lolling out and he was eating moist earth from extreme thirst. The man thought to himself: 'This dog is extremely thirsty as I was.' So he descended into the well, filled up his leather sock with water, and holding it in his teeth, climbed up and quenched the thirst of the dog. Allah appreciated his action and forgave his sins". The Companions asked: "Shall we be rewarded for showing kindness to the animals also?" He (PBUH) said, "A reward is given in connection with every living creature".[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

In addition, Allah has made preserving the life of an animal amongst the acts that bring a person closer to Him. The Messenger of Allah(PBUH)said, "There was a dog moving around a well whom thirst would have killed. Suddenly a prostitute from the prostitutes of Bani Isra'il happened to see it and she drew water in her shoe and made it drink, and she was pardoned because of this."{Muslim}.

The Messenger of Allah(PBUH) has also forbidden harming animals because they have lives, and they perform a function in this universe. Ibn Mas'ud (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:

We were with the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) in a journey when he drew apart (to relieve nature). In his absence, we saw a red bird which had two young ones with it. We caught them and the red mother bird came, beating the earth with its wings. In the meantime the Prophet (PBUH) returned and said, "Who has put this bird to distress on account of its young? Return them to her." He (PBUH) also noticed a mound of ants which we had burnt up. He asked, "Who has set fire to this?" We replied: "We have done so." He (PBUH) said, "None can chastise with fire except the Rubb of the fire." {Abu Dawud}.

Torturing an animal and killing it unrightfully is among the sins for which a person receives punishment on the Day of Resurrection since the Prophet Mohammad(PBUH) said, "A woman was punished because she had kept a cat tied until it died, and (as a punishment of this offence) she was thrown into the Hell. She had not provided it with food, or drink, and had not freed her so that she could eat the insects of the earth."{Bukhari & Muslim}.

In conclusion, this shows that Islam is the religion of kindness and mercy to all creatures. Therefore, it is impossible that the Iftaa` Department or the Grand Mufti would violate that, and whatever news was circulated by media concerning the Fatwa of putting down rabid dogs or waging a holy war against dogs in general is inaccurate and was based on a misinterpretation. This is because that particular Fatwa was about killing the rabid dog which bit the two-year-old girl, Malak al-Qaraan, causing her death. If the harm of such a dog couldn`t be warded off save by killing it then that is permissible. In addition, no Fatwa was issued permitting the killing of every stray dog.

*See attached copy of the Fatwa in question. And Allah knows best.

General Iftaa` Department.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islam on swearing by Allah without intending to take an actual oath?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone swears by Allah without intending to take an actual oath, and without the firm resolve to bind themselves to it, then there is no sin or expiation (Kaffarah) required of them. Allah the Exalted says {what means}: 'God will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts; and He is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.' [Al-Baqarah/225]. However, a Muslim should avoid swearing oaths excessively so that their tongue does not become accustomed to it. Allah the Exalted says {what means}: 'And make not God’s (name) an excuse in your oaths against doing good, or acting rightly, or making peace between persons; for God is One Who heareth and knoweth all things.
' [Al-Baqarah/224]. And Allah the Exalted knows best."

What is the ruling on the prayer of one who said "Subḥāna Rabbiya al-ʿAẓīm" in prostration (*sujūd*) and forgot to correct it?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Saying “Subḥāna Rabbiya al-ʿAẓīm” in bowing (rukūʿ) and “Subḥāna Rabbiya al-Aʿlā” in prostration (sujūd) is one of the hayʾāt (non-essential sunnahs) of the prayer. Whoever omits it, whether deliberately or by forgetfulness, or replaces it with another remembrance (dhikr), his prayer is valid and he does not perform sujūd al-sahw. Shaykh al-Islām Imam al-Nawawī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Our school holds that one does not prostrate for omitting the audible or silent recitation, the tasbīḥ, and the rest of the hayʾāt.” [al-Majmūʿ, Vol.4/p.127]
If he performs sujūd al-sahw for something that does not call for it, his prayer is invalidated, because he introduced a prostration of forgetfulness without a cause, and he must repeat the prayer. The exception is one who did so out of forgetfulness or ignorance, whether because he recently entered Islam or because he lives far from scholars; he is excused and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Mughni al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/p.417): “It is stated in al-Anwār: If he does something that does not call for sujūd al-sahw, thinking that it does, and then prostrates, his prayer is not invalidated if he is ignorant because he recently entered Islam or because he is far from scholars.”
Since this issue is hidden from the laity, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laity are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of the issue is not invalidated. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated.
Whoever realizes while still in the prayer that his prostration was out of place, it is sunnah for him to perform sujūd al-sahw. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More