REFUTATION OF JAQMAL ON HIS FAULTY FIKRAH ON EATING OF DOG MEAT

By

Ibn Abdillah As-sudaisiy Al-Iloori

One of Jaqmal's proofs to back his claim that it is permissible to eat dog meat is that there is no specific punishment for it. This is a wrong way of deducting rulings of the sharī'ah.

The bottom line is that anyone who commits an act that is harām (forbidden) is liable to punishment if he dies upon the sin and he or she is not forgiven by Allāh. Eating of dog meat is harām because we  are prohibited from it. The fact that there is no specific punishment for this sin does not mean anyone who commits it will not be punished. The most important thing is to understand that anyone who eats dog meat is a sinner and Allāh can punish the perpetrator of this sin in any way He likes. Allāh is severe in His punishments. Stipulation of punishment is just one of the signs to know whether or not an act is harām. There are other signs too. In the case of dog meat, the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم used the word نهى (prohibit, proscribe, ban). This is one of the signs of determining what is harām. 

In a Hadith, Abu Hurayrah رضي الله عنه reported that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

كُلُّ ذِي نَابٍ مِنَ السِّبَاعِ فَأَكْلُهُ حَرَامٌ

On the authority of Abu Hurairah , may God bless him and grant him peace , on the authority of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, he said: Any wild animal that has fangs is forbidden to eat. [Sahih Muslim, 1333]

In another narration of Al-Imām Muslim attributed to Ibn 'Abbas رضي الله عنه، the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم used the  "نَهَى" (he forbade) and he added:

وَكُلُّ ذِي مِخْلَبٍ مِنَ الطَّيْرِ.

And every bird with claws [Sahih Muslim, 1334]

Regarding these two narrations, Sheikh Abdulazeez Ibn Bāz رحمه الله said:

ومن ذلك: ذو الناب من السباع، وذو المخالب من الطيور، فالرسول ﷺ نهى عن كلِّ ذي نابٍ من السباع، وعن كل ذي مخلبٍ من الطير، وقال: كل ذي نابٍ من السباع فأكله حرام، جاء هذا المعنى في عدّة أحاديث: حديث أبي هريرة، وجماعة من الصحابة فيه النَّهي عن كل ذي نابٍ من الحيوانات، وكل ذي مخلبٍ من الطير: كالكلب، والأسد، والنمر، والذئب، وأشباهها، هذه من ذوات الناب، كلها مُحرَّمة كما في حديث أبي هريرة، وأحاديث أخرى جاءت في المعنى تدل على تحريم ذلك، وهكذا ما كان له مخلب: كالعقاب، والباز، والصقر، وأشباهها مما له مخلب يصيد به.

Among these are: wild beasts with fangs, and birds with claws. The Messenger, peace and blessings of God be upon him, forbade every wild animal with fangs, and every bird with claws, and said: Every wild animal with fangs is forbidden to eat. This meaning came in several hadiths: The hadith of Abu Hurairah . And a group of the Companions included the prohibition of every animal with a fang, and every bird with a claw: such as a dog, a lion, a tiger, a wolf, and the like. These are among those with fangs, and they are all forbidden, as in the hadith of Abu Hurairah, and other hadiths that came in the meaning indicating the prohibition. That, and the same applies to what has a claw: such as the eagle, the falcon, the falcon, and the like, which have a claw with which it hunts. [Sharh Bulūghul Marām, Prohibition of Eating Animals with Fangs]

Then, there is strong 'aqeedah issue on this matter. Jaqmal in his lack of understanding of the relationship between the Qur'ān and Sunnah said he can only accept that eating of dog meat is harām if there is a clear cut verse of the Qur'ān saying "dog meat" is harām. He mentioned some verses to confuse his ignorant followers and cheerleaders. Some of the verses he erroneously mentioned to justify his false position were:

 ۗ مَا فَرَّطْنَا فِى الْـكِتٰبِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ ثُمَّ اِلٰى رَبِّهِمْ يُحْشَرُوْنَ

We have not neglected in the Register a thing. (QS. Al-An'aam: Verse 38);

 ۗ اَ لْيَوْمَ اَكْمَلْتُ لَـكُمْ دِيْنَكُمْ وَاَ تْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِيْ وَرَضِيْتُ لَـكُمُ الْاِ سْلَا مَ دِيْنًا ۗ 

This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. (QS. Al-Maaida: Verse 3)

It is important to note that these two verses were quoted by him out of context. In fact, if they are to be considered, they are against his assertions. By the first verse, he meant that the Qur'ān has explained everything and there is no need for Sunnah. He believes that the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم عليه on his own can't permit or prohibit anything in the Deen. He doesn't understand the relationship between the Qur'ān and Sunnah. He is only using his own fikrah (thought) to judge the meanings of the Qur'ān and this is not acceptable. That is why he has never pointed to any scholar or book that says what he is saying. He does not understand that there are many verses of the Qur'ān fully empowering the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to state the halāl and the harām and a Muslim must follow him. 

In essence, we cannot practice Islām without the Sunnah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم because it is through the Sunnah that we are able to understand the Qur'ān. Jaqmal is only following the way of the Quraniyyoon who claim to believe in the Qur'ān alone. They reject hadiths and explanations of companions and the classical scholars of Islām. It is not possible to believe in the Qur'ān and reject hadiths because the Qur'ān has instructed us to follow the Sunnah. Anyone who rejects any authentic Hadith has indirectly rejected the Qur'ān and this is a form of kufr (disbelief). In Suratul Ahzāb, Allāh says:

وَمَا كَا نَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَّلَا مُؤْمِنَةٍ اِذَا قَضَى اللّٰهُ وَرَسُوْلُهٗۤ اَمْرًا اَنْ يَّكُوْنَ لَهُمُ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ اَمْرِهِمْ ۗ وَمَنْ يَّعْصِ اللّٰهَ وَرَسُوْلَهٗ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلٰلًا مُّبِيْنًا

It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error. [QS. Al-Ahzaab: Verse 36]

There are many other verses of the Qur'ān establishing the place of Sunnah in the practice of Islam. They all point to the fact that the Qur'ān cannot stand alone without the Sunnah. That is how Allāh has made this Deen. Allāh has empowered the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم to make laws in many ways. 

There are many acts of ibādah that we engage in that requires the input of the Sunnah before they can be valid. For instance, our 5 daily prayers, fast, charity, hajj etc can never be understood or practised without the Sunnah. The Qur'ān in most cases only give orders. How those orders are to be carried out is the work of the prophetic Sunnah. Even Jaqmal that is saying people saying eating of dog meat is permissible cannot perform salat and other acts of ibādah without the Sunnah. The double standard is very clear. He uses hadiths to perform salat and reject hadiths that prohibits eating of dog meat. 

Meanwhile, it must be noted that Jaqmal is not the first to say what he is saying in our contemporary society. Principal had also presented the same view in the past where he said we don't need hadiths. He once claimed that some hadiths contradict the Qur'ān. But this is not true. An authentic Hadith will never contradict the Qur'ān. They both believe that they can only pick anything that suits their thoughts and preconceived notions in the Sunnah and reject any aspect they like. They think they can understand and preach Islām without recourse to our Salaf (pious predecessors). They make their own thoughts a yardstick to measure which Hadith is authentic and which is not without proper knowledge of science of hadith. This is very dangerous for them and anyone who toe their path. Anyone who falls for this dangerous fikrah will be toying with his or her Islām. That is why it is important to learn the foundation of Islam properly before listening to anyone who ascribe to knowledge.

I once heard Principal saying that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم can't make law. This statement is erroneous. He said the Hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that prohibits keeping of dogs as pets contradicts the Qur'ān because there is no verse of the Qur'ān that says we can't keep dogs. 

To set the record straight, Abu Talha رضي الله عنه reported that the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

لا تَدْخُلُ المَلائِكَةُ بَيْتًا فِيهِ كَلْبٌ وَلا صُورَةٌ

Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or an image. [Agreed Upon]

In another narration, Ibn 'Umar رضي الله عنه reported:

وَعَدَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ﷺ جِبْرِيلُ أَنْ يأتِيَهُ، فَرَاثَ عَليْهِ حتَّى اشْتَدَّ عَلى رَسُول اللَّه ﷺ، فَخَرَجَ فَلَقِيهُ جبْرِيلُ، فَشَكَا إلَيْهِ، فقَالَ: إنَّا لا نَدْخُلُ بيْتًا فيهِ كَلْبٌ وَلا صُورَةٌ

Jibril (Gabriel) promised to visit the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) but delayed and this grieved him very much. When he came out of his house, Jibril met him. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) asked him about the reason of delay, and he replied: "We do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a portrait.[Al-Bukhari].

These are clear and authentic hadiths and they do not contradict any part of the Qur'ān. It is a must for a Muslim to believe them and act upon them. Believing them is believing the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and opposing them with ra'y is disbelieving the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم. If the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم cannot make law for us, Allāh will make a judge in our affairs. He will never speak from his own whims. Allāh says:

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُوْنَ حَتّٰى يُحَكِّمُوْكَ فِيْمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوْا فِيْۤ اَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوْا تَسْلِيْمًا

But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission. [QS. An-Nisaa: Verse 65]

In conclusion, it is one evil to fall into the sin of eating dog meat. It is a greater evil to rule that eating dog meat is permissible in the sharī'ah despite the clear instructions of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the ijmā' (consensus of scholars) against it. The former is a mere sin, the latter falls under opposing the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم in a way that can take those who those engage in it out of Islām. Opposing Allāh or His Messenger in their laws is a form of kufr (disbelief). It is better to keep quiet if someone doesn't know the position of the sharī'ah on a matter than to display ignorance in this manner.  Allāh says:

 ۚ فَلْيَحْذَرِ الَّذِيْنَ يُخَا لِفُوْنَ عَنْ اَمْرِهٖۤ اَنْ تُصِيْبَهُمْ فِتْنَةٌ اَوْ يُصِيْبَهُمْ عَذَا بٌ اَ لِيْمٌ

So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet's order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment." [QS. An-Noor: Verse 63]

According to scholars, the word "fitnah" in this verse is that the perpetrators of this evil of opposing the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم would fall into kufr (disbelief) and leave the fold of Islam. 

May Allāh guide us against the evils of ignoramuses parading themselves as scscholars.