The Qur’an: The Mountains are Extra Terrestrial

Islamic scientific blunder

It doesn’t take long for an objective reader of the Qur’an to notice that the entire book is dominated by a theme of repetitions and contradictions. Ali Ibn Abu Talib, the third Caliph, once described the Qur’an as a multi faced book because it can be interpreted in many different ways (1). Ali’s judgement is of exceptional significance because it came from a pious Muslim with undisputed fluency in Arabic. Ali is generally considered as the most ‘intellectual’ of Mohammed’s companions. Mohammed also made a similar confession, in the Qur’an itself, when it was pointed out to him that some of his later verses were contradicting other verses revealed in earlier years (2).

However, the Qur’an still describes itself as the clear book in a number of verses (3), and I must say that there are occasions when the Qur’an lives up to that description. Such unusual clarity in the book, where the general theme is ambiguity, exists in some of the so called ‘scientific verses’. When Mohammed expressed his scientific knowledge in the Qur’an, he often did using a clear and simple language that was comprehensible to all his followers. There are no records at all that the Arabs ever asked for clarification of any of the so called ‘scientific verses’ in the Qur’an. Equally true, there are no records at all that the Arabs ever expressed their disapproval to any of those verses. We can safely draw two conclusions from the above historical evidence:

The first conclusion is that the verses were clear enough that all the Arabs understood them well. There can be no excuse at all for today’s Muslim scholars to twist the language and invent more acceptable meanings.

The second conclusion is that the Arabs accepted the information contained in those verses as common knowledge with nothing new in them. That is why they didn’t ask questions or express their disapproval.

All the above is a clear indication that the Qur’an was in total agreement of the prevailing scientific knowledge in the seventh century Arabia.

The Qur’an’s cosmology
According to the Qur’an, the earth and the mountains are two separate entities, just like the earth and the skies are also two separate entities. The Qur’an asserts that the mountains did not originate from the earth, but were brought from ‘outside’ and then erected on the earth to fix it and stop it from swaying!

The creation and structure of the universe are repeatedly described in the Qur’an in simple language that is easy to understand and difficult to twist, even by the Muslim scholars who twist anything. Unlike the Greek, the seventh century Arabs were far behind in science and discoveries; their knowledge was mainly based on the myths that reached them through the hundreds of religions practiced in Arabia. The ancient mythologies of Mesopotamia, India and Persia were also echoed in Arabia. The Arabs, like many other nations at the time, believed that the world was a massive flat land that was attached to the sky until separated by a god. The Arabs believed that it was Allah, their moon god, who did the separation. The Qur’an confirms this myth in verse Q.21: 30 “Do not the unbeliever’s see that the skies and earth were stitched (retkan) together, and then we separated them ….”. The wording of the verse suggests that the Qur’an was referring to already known information. When somebody says to a group of people “don’t you see that the doors are painted red?” we understand that the group already know the doors are painted red and that the speaker only reminded them with a fact they all agree about.

Verse Q. 21:30 is crucial in Islamic science because it is seriously believed by the so called ‘miracle scientists’ to be the basis of the ‘Islamic big bang theory’ which is not exactly the same as the real Big Bang theory. As it is clear from the verse, the Islamic theory describes an already formed earth that was attached to an already formed sky until both were separated by Allah. That belief is in sharp contrast to the real Big Bang theory, which discusses the birth of the universe before the existence of the earth or the sky. I am afraid that in verse 21:30, the Qur’an only repeats the same old pagan myths that were already in circulation in Arabia; separating the sky from the earth and raising it high up!

To make sure that the ‘Islamic cosmology’ never meets with the infidels’ cosmology, the Qur’an goes into more details and describes the sky, which is only emptiness in the real world, as a solid structure that was raised high up by the almighty Allah who keeps it in place using a system of invisible pillars. “Q.13:2 Allah is He who raised the skies without any pillars that you can see”. To make sure that everybody gets the message clearly, the Qur’an reminds its readers that the sky would fall down on earth if it were not to Allah’s mercy. “(Q.22:65) ..He withholds the sky from falling on the earth except by His permission for Allah is most kind…”

Those invisible pillars, described in verse 13:2, must be resting on the earth, which implies that the earth must be flat. Just in case some people did not get the point, the Qur’an went on describing the earth as flat using all the words in the Arabic language that can possibly mean flat, and still the Muslims don’t get it!

The author of the Qur’an likened the earth to a carpet (Q.71:19) that, when used in the open, requires some stones, or pegs, to secure it against the blowing desert wind. Similarly, the flat earth, which was thought to be floating on water, also required some mechanism to stabilize it. The problem of the Earth’s instability was fixed by erecting massive pegs, called mountains, which Allah dropped on its surface and erected to function as stabilizers. Therefore, the mountains were not part of the earth!

The Qur’an’s geology:
The Qur’an doesn’t agree with our the established knowledge that the mountains are integral parts of the earth that were formed as a result of tectonic forces and have no role at all on the Earth’s stability. Instead, the Qur’an’s declares that the mountains were extraterrestrial objects that were added to the earth, after its creation, to stop its imaginary swaying movement.

In verses 88:18-20, the Qur’an calls people to think of three of Allah’s major creations; the sky, the mountains and the earth. Sura88 is clear evidence that the Qur’an considers the three creations as separate structures. Read this: “Q.88:18-20 And at the sky, how it is raised? And at the mountains, how they are erected? And at the earth, how it is spread out?” It is disgraceful that the writer of the Qur’an, who obviously knew nothing about the nature of those structures, could claim to have created them. Just like a person who knows nothing about computers and still claims to have invented them!

Verse 19:90 claims that even the skies, the earth and the mountains are full of rage because some people claim that Allah had a son. The Qur’an describes the ‘feelings’ of those three structures and doesn’t miss the opportunity to confirm its ignorance about the nature of those creations: “At it the skies are about to crack, the earth about to split, and the mountains about to fall and crumble”

More evidence that the mountains are different from the earth comes in verse Q.13:31 “If there were a Qur’an with which mountains were moved, or the earth cut into pieces…” and in verse Q.18:47: “And the day when we shall cause the mountains to pass away, and you see the earth prominent….”.

Verses 56:4-5 and verse 73:14 describe what will happen to the Earth and the mountains on the Last Day; the earth will be shaken while the mountains will crumble. The different treatment received by each creation is an indication that both were different entities in the mind whoever wrote the Qur’an:

Q.56:4. “.. the earth shall be shaken. 56:5 and the mountains shall be crumbled”
Q. 73: 14. “One day the earth and the mountains will shake, and the mountains will be as a heap of flowing sand”

It is impossible to justify the blunders in the above verses and remain in the area of sanity, but the Muslim scholars would come up with something and claim that the verses contain no errors, but miracles! They would use the same tactics of twisting the language and claiming that Allah didn’t mean what he said.

Well, it seems that Allah did mean what he said because verse Q.15: 19 tells us how the mountains came to the flat earth: Q.15:19 “And the earth we have spread out; and thrown thereon mountains…” therefore, the mountains were dropped on the earth after its creation. Verse 16: 15 goes even further and explains that Allah decided to add the mountains to the earth to stop it from shaking: “And He has thrown down mountains on the earth, lest it should shake with you…”

In case somebody did not hear well, the Qur’an repeats the same information with the same consistency in verses 31:10 and 50:7

31:10. “He created the skies without any pillars that you can see; He thrown down on the Earth Mountains, lest it should shake with you…”

50:7. “And the earth- We have spread it out, and thrown down thereon mountains…”

In verses 70: 8-9, the Qur’an speaks about the mountains in a similar way it speaks about the sky. These two verses describe what will happen to both structures on that same day, which is the Last Day. However, that scientific consistency we praised in the beginning of the article seems to have broken, but we cannot expect the Qur’an to avoid contradictions every time. The sky, according to verse 70:8, will become like molten brass, but the mountains, which were supposed to crumble in verse 56:5, now will become like cotton wool!

70: 9. “And the mountains will be like wool”
77: 8. “Then when the stars become dim”

It is an extraordinary irony that the Muslims read the Qur’an but do not notice any of the above colossal errors. They read appalling blunders like the sky is a solid structure, or roof (Q. 21:32) that has the potential to fall down on the earth without noticing anything wrong there. The Muslims’ brains have been numbed and became insensitive to all those errors; the only word that matters to them is the word ‘awtad’ (pegs), which the Qur’an once used to refer to the mountains (Q.78:7). When some Muslims happened to learn that some the mountains have deep roots underground they quickly remembered the word ‘awtad’ because the pegs are also partly underground. Thousands of articles and books were published about this ‘scientific miracle’ of the Qur’an. Radio and television programmes and scientific conferences were organised to celebrate the discovery. All this without any Muslim scholar ever noticing that the Qur’an also referred to the Pharaohs’ pyramids as ‘awtad’, not once but twice (Q.38:12, Q.89:10).

In the past, the Muslim scholars had no problems in the interpretation of the above verses or any other verses in the Qur’an. They only had to provide a simple and straight forward explanation of the language without any external pressures. It was only in the last century when they realised that the Qur’an, which they long claimed to be the perfect book, was actually at odds with proven scientific knowledge. To pre-empt any criticism to the Qur’an, the Muslim scholars adopted their strategy of ‘attack is the best defence’. By focusing on the ‘miracles’ of the word ‘awtad’, the Muslim scholars succeeded in diverting the attention of the Muslims’ minds and raised the standing of the Qur’an; rather than talking about Qur’anic errors, the Muslim scholars now talk about scientific miracles!

During my preparation of this article, I looked at the available English translations of the above verses and noticed the deliberate deception. I wasn’t surprised; this observation has become a regular pattern whenever I look at the English translations of the Qur’an. In the example of the above verses, the Muslim scholars deceived the readers when they avoided the proper translation of the Arabic word ‘alka’, meaning threw or dropped (the mountains), which they translated as placed or erected (the mountains) to conceal the obvious error.

As an example of extreme deception, one of the verses (73: 14) quoted above reads like this: One day the earth and the mountains will shake, and the mountains will be as a heap of sand”, but some Muslim scholars translated it like this: “The day is coming when the masses and the wealthy tyrants will shake and the leaders will be as a heap of sand” (5)!

Is there any point in debating Muslims when they are so determined to lie?

References:
1. A famous statement by Caliph Ali“The Qur’an is a multi faced book” which means it lends itself to multiple interpretations.
2. Q.3:7
3. 12:1 “these are the Verses of the Clear Book…”, 26: 2 “these are the Verses of the Clear Book…”, 28:2 “these are the Verses of the Clear Book…”
4. Q.71:19 And God has laid the earth for you as a carpet (bisata).
5. Translation by ‘OXP’ seen on islamawakened.com

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/10/28/the-Qur’an-the-mountains-are-extra-terrestrial/

IHS

The Sexual Powers of Prophet Muhammad

Many Muslims believe that the prophet Muhammad was a man endowed with super human powers in the realm of sexuality. Muslim males are especially proud of this Islamic tradition and often use it as material for jokes and boasting.

During my days in Islam, I remember a product being sold in an Islamic book store that was designed to give men extra sexual energy. It was a glass jar containing a mixture of pistachio nuts and honey as well as some other ingredients.

The guy working the cash register was grinning from ear to ear trying to make fun while explaining that studly Muhammad had the sex drive of thirty men and used to bed all of his women in one night when the horny little freak got the urge. I just smiled back at the guy and laughed at his stupidity.

Here is an authentic hadith documenting the great sexual prowess of one Muhammad of Arabia:

Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268: Narrated Qatada: Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).

See, Muhammad really was a playboy who scored with the ladies! So what if some of those women were in actuality slaves and concubines, right? It is likely that both Muhammad’s slave and non-slave women would have left (…) were it not for fear of losing their lives. After all, he had killed some of their husbands.

Jihadis are blowing themselves up and killing both Muslim and non-Muslim peoples on a daily basis trying to get to “the goodies” waiting in Paradise that “Muhammad promised them”. Those deluded fools think that Mr.Allah up there in 7^th heaven is going produce an endless supply of perfect virgins for them.

These programmed robots are trying to kill their way into Paradise so that they can “get busy with all of those willing cuties”. The Qur’an, (…) contains many passages describing the carnal rewards of Islamic heaven. Here is a small sample of what Muslim males expect to enjoy when they die:

Qur’an, 056.012-039: They shall recline on jeweled couches face to face, and there shall wait on them immortal youths with bowls and ewers and a cup of purest wine (that will neither pain their heads nor take away their reason); with fruit of their own choice and flesh of fowls that they relish. And theirs shall be the dark-eyed houris, chaste as hidden pearls: a guerdon for their deeds…We created the houris and made them virgins, loving companions for those on the right hand…

055.054-059: They shall recline on couches lined with thick brocade, and within reach shall hang the fruits of both gardens. Which of your Lord’s blessing would you deny? Therein are bashful virgins whom neither man nor jinnee will have touched before. Which of your Lord’s blessings would you deny? Virgins as fair as corals and rubies. Which of your Lord’s blessing would you deny?

055.072-075: Dark-eyed virgins, sheltered in their tents (which of your Lord’s blessing would you deny?), whom neither man nor jinnee will have toughed before. Which of your Lord’s blessing would you deny?

Muslim males actually expect 72 virgins each when they die and go to heaven! Muslims believe this nonsense because it is specified in a Hadith contained within the Al-Tirmidhi collection: (volume IV, chapters on The Features of Paradise as described by the Messenger of Allah [Prophet Muhammad], chapter 21, About the Smallest Reward for the People of Paradise, Hadith 2687).

“The Prophet Muhammad was heard saying: ‘The smallest reward for the people of paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 houri, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana’a [Yemen]‘.”

The sensual pleasures that Muslims expect to experience in Paradise have been described in graphic detail by Egyptian scholar and Islamic theologian, Imam Al-Suyuti (died 1505). He wrote:

“Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas.”

Though fear and hatred are the real engine of Islam, sex and other luxuries are a damn close second! No wonder so many Muslims are eager to kill and die and go to heaven!!

Saleem Smith is a Canadian Ex-Muslim. He has his own site in which he expresses his views on Islam and other issues. Here is a link to his site: http://www.considerationsofacanadianex-muslim.org

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/10/25/the-sexual-powers-of-prophet-muhammad/

IHS

Muhammad and Dogs

Idiosyncrasy at its extreme

Some years back I started to begin my journey of renouncing my faith and love of god. This happened while a good Muslim friend of mine started to relate to me how great Islam is and how I would be rewarded into heaven of being the ashraful maqluqat. This all started when he visited my house for dinner and when he is being greeted at our doorsteps by my dog –roady, he started to say ass-traffullahs… This led to his ranting about how I am not being blessed by angels and that my house is haram for him. He left after a short while and did not take dinner with me… The following when I enquired about his sudden change of attitudes towards me, I was given a big rude Islamic lecture about keeping dogs as pets and what is forbidden in Islam. By now, I was so shocked to find him to be so naïve…? That’s when I started to search for answers on the internet and came upon this website called http://www.answering-islam.org

I wanted to share this with you so here is that wonderful article by Silas…

MUHAMMAD AND THE DOGS

By Silas

INTRODUCTION

Muhammad made strange and harsh statements about dogs and these edicts affect dogs in a tragic way until this very day…! His teachings may have come from cultural bias, Pagan concepts, or his own imagination, but wherever they came from they led to the cruel treatment of dogs.

None of the statements regarding dogs are found in the Qur’an but they abound in the various collections of Islamic traditions (hadith). These traditions are a primary foundation of Islamic theology and are the basis of many Islamic laws. They render dogs as “impure” and worse. As per Muhammad’s orders, most dogs were to be killed and all dogs of a specific color (black) had to be killed.

Muhammad claimed to be a prophet of God and as such, his word as to be dearly obeyed. With the teeth of Islam, biting worldwide it is vital that Muhammad’s teachings to be scrutinized to determine if he were a nut or a prophet…???

STATEMENTS FROM THE HADITHS

Below are a number of Hadiths on various aspects involving dogs. All Hadiths are from the Sahih collections of Bukhari^[1] and Muslim^[2], or the Sunan of Abu Dawud^[3]. After the Qur’an, Bukhari’s set of Hadiths are regarded to be the second most important books in Islam, followed closely by the Hadiths of Sahih Muslim. I quote from these sources to prove that these Hadiths are not just a few isolated or unsupported cases. I have sorted Muhammad’s statements concerning dogs into 5 (five) categories. All of these illustrate different facets of his beliefs regarding dogs.

1) KILL THE DOGS

From Bukhari Vol. 4, #540; Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar: Allah’s Apostle ordered that the dogs should be killed.

From Abu Dawud #2839; “Abd Allah B. Mughaffal reported the apostle of Allah as saying: Were dogs not a species of creature I should command that they all be killed; but kill every pure black one.

The Hadith’s note for #2839 says, “The prophet did not order the killing of all the dogs, for some are to be retained for hunting and watching. He ordered to kill the jet-black ones. They might be more mischievous among them”.

From Muslim #3814; “Ibn Mughaffal reported: Allah’s messenger ordered the killing of dogs and then said, “What is the trouble with them (the people of Medina? How dogs are nuisances to them (the citizens of Medina)? He then permitted keeping of dogs for hunting and (the protection of) herds… [and for] for the protection of cultivated land”.

From Muslim #Number 055; “Ibn Mughaffal reported: The Messenger of Allah ordered killing of the dogs, and then said: What about them, i. e. about other dogs? And then granted concession (to keep) the dog for hunting and the dog for (the security) of the herd, and said: When the dog licks the utensil, wash it seven times, and rub it with earth the eighth time”.

From Muslim #3813; “Abu Zubair heard Jabir Abdullah saying: Allah’s messenger ordered us to kill dogs and we carried out this order so much so that we also killed the dog roaming with a women from the desert. Then Allah’s apostle forbade their killing. He said: “It is your duty to kill the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes) for it is a devil”.

The note for #3814 says, “The Hadiths gives us an idea why the prophet commanded to kill dogs. There must have been an excess of stray dogs and thus the danger of rabies in the city of Medina and its suburbs. The prophet therefore ordered to kill them. Later on when it was found that his Companions were killing them indiscriminately, he forbade them to do so and told them that only the ferocious beasts, which were a source of danger to life, should be killed. The word “Devil” in the Hadiths clarifies this point. Here devil stands for ferocious”.

HOWEVER, THE REASONING WITHIN THE NOTE ABOVE IS INCORRECT –READ BELOW.

From Muslim #5248; “Maimuna reported that one morning Allah’s Messenger was silent with grief. Maimuna said: Allah’s Messenger, I find a change in your mood today. Allah’s Messenger said: Gabriel had promised me that he would meet me tonight, but he did not meet me. By Allah, he never broke his promises, and Allah’s Messenger spent the day in this sad mood. Then it occurred to him that there had been a puppy under their cot. He commanded and it was turned out. He then took some water in his hand and sprinkled it at that place. When it was evening, Gabriel met him and he said to him: You promised me that you would meet me the previous night. He said: Yes, but we do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture. Then on that very morning he commanded the killing of the dogs until he announced that the dog kept for the orchards should also be killed, but he spared the dog meant for the protection of extensive fields or big gardens”.

COMMENT
These Hadiths tell the story of Muhammad’s order to kill dogs. Muhammad said he would like to have all dogs killed. He wanted them killed, NOT because packs of dogs were tormenting the citizens of Medina, but rather, because a puppy stopped the mighty angel Gabriel. Muhammad’s solution was to kill the dogs. He first said he wanted all dogs killed but then made exceptions for dogs that are used for farming, hunting, or watching (outside). Further, he ordered that all black dogs be killed and called them “a Satan”.

2) COMMERCE IN DOGS

From Bukhari Vol. 3, #299; Narrated ‘Aun bin Abu Juhaifa: “My father bought a slave who practiced the profession of cupping. (My father broke the slave’s instruments of cupping). I asked my father why he had done so. He replied, “The Prophet forbade the acceptance of the price of a dog or blood, and also forbade the profession of tattooing, getting tattooed and receiving or giving Riba, (usury), and cursed the picture-makers.”

From Bukhari Vol. 3, #482; Narrated Abu Mas’ud Al-Ansari: “Allah’s Apostle regarded illegal the price of a dog, the earnings of a prostitute, and the charges taken by a soothsayer.”

From Muslim #3803; Abu Masud reported that Allah’s messenger forbade the charging of price of the dog and earning of a prostitute and sweets offered to a kahin.

COMMENT
Muhammad believed that money made from the sale of a dog (for other than already mentioned purposes) was considered as evil as the money made from prostitution, witchcraft, or usury. Something about dogs disturbed Muhammad deeply.

3) LOSS OF REWARD OF GOOD WORKS FOR OWNING DOGS

From Bukhari Vol. 3, #515; Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah’s Apostle said, “Whoever keeps a dog, one Qirat of the reward of his good deeds is deducted daily, unless the dog is used for guarding a farm or cattle.” Abu Huraira (in another narration) said from the Prophet, “unless it is used for guarding sheep or farms, or for hunting.” Narrated Abu Hazim from Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “A dog for guarding cattle or for hunting.”"

From Muslim Number 3815: Ibn Umar reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: He who keeps a dog other than that meant for watching the herd or for hunting loses every day out of his deeds equal to two qirat.

From Muslim Number 2062: Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: He who attends the funeral till the prayer is offered for (the dead), for him is the reward of one qirat, and he who attends (and stays) till he is buried, for him is the reward of two qirats. It was said: What are the qirats? He said: They are equivalent to two huge mountains. Two other narrators added: Ibn ‘Umar used to pray and then depart (without waiting for the burial of the dead). When the tradition of Abu Huraira reached him, he said:” We have lost many qirats.”

COMMENT
Having a dog as a pet is prohibited in Islam. In fact, if a Muslim keeps a dog as a pet God will take away some heavenly reward for his good deeds! Notice that the amount taken away changed from one to two qirats.

4) DOGS ANNULLING PRAYER

From Bukhari Vol. 1, #490; Narrated ‘Aisha: “The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people).” I said, “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away, for I disliked to face him.”"

From Muslim Number 1032; Abu Dharr reported: The Messenger of ‘Allah said: When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him (a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog. I said: O Abu Dharr, what feature is there in a black dog which distinguish it from the red dog and the yellow dog? He said: O, son of my brother, I asked the Messenger of Allah as you are asking me, and he said: The black dog is a devil.

From Abu Dawud Number 0704: Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: Ikrimah reported on the authority of Ibn Abbas, saying: I think the Apostle of Allah said: When one of you prays without a sutrah, a dog, an ass, a pig, a Jew, a Magian, and a woman cut off his prayer, but it will suffice if they pass in front of him at a distance of over a stone’s throw.

COMMENT
These hadiths state that if a dog passes in front of people praying it annuls their prayer. Annul means, “to reduce to nothing”, or “to make ineffective or inoperative”. If a group of people are praying and a dog walks in-between them and the Kaba (in Mecca), then their prayer is made null.

5) DOGS STOP THE ANGELS

From Bukhari Vol. 4, #448; Narrated Abu Talha: “I heard Allah’s Apostle saying; “Angels (of Mercy) do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal).”"

From Bukhari Vol. 7, #843; Narrated Salim’s father: “Once Gabriel promised to visit the Prophet but he delayed and the Prophet got worried about that. At last he came out and found Gabriel and complained to him of his grief (for his delay). Gabriel said to him, “We do not enter a place in which there is a picture or a dog.”"

From Muslim, #5276: Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: Angels do not accompany the travelers who have with them a dog and a bell.

From Muslim, #5279: Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: “The bell is the musical instrument of Satan.”

COMMENT
The story behind these hadiths was mentioned earlier. A little puppy stopped an angel from entering the house because it was “unclean”. Note that angels do not enter a place with a dog, or accompany people who travel with a dog.

THE TOMES

The tomes also details the same aspects found in the traditions. We’ll start with the Reliance of the Traveler^[4] which is a compendium of Shafi’i law.

On filth, page 95; e14.0 FILTH (NAJASA); e.14.1 Filth means: (8) dogs and pigs, or their offspring

On purification, page 98; e14.7 Something that becomes impure by contact (def: below) with something from dogs or swine does not become pure except by being washed seven times, one of which (recommended not to be the last) must be with purifying earth (def: e12.1 (b)) mixed with purifying water, and it must read all of the affected area. One may not substitute something else like soap or glasswort in place of earth.

(n: The contact referred to is restricted, in the Shafi’i school, to contamination by traces of moisture from dogs or swing, whether saliva, urine, anything moist from them, or any of their dry parts that have become moist…)

On trade, page 382: k2.2 It is invalid to transact something that is impure in itself (najasa, def: e141) such as a dog or something affected with filth that cannot be purified (O: by washing), like milk or shortening, though if it can be, like a garment, then it may be transacted.

The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam^[5] entry on dogs (Kalb).

Page 215: Kalb (the dog), is also in Islam one of the “unclean beasts” (hence kalb as an abusive word, specially to unbelievers), primarily because its flesh may not be eaten (al-Nawawi ..) and further because, according to the Hadiths, there are several special regulation regarding it. For example dogs render food which they lick impure and render unavailable water intended for ritual purifications…) Vessels, likewise, which have been licked by dogs, require to be cleaned several times including once with sand. In a certain way they render impure the whole room in which they are; for angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog and Muhammad had first to sprinkle the place on which a young dog had lain concealed with purificatory water before Djibril would appear to him….)

Dogs “cut off the salat”, i.e. they make the salat worthless when they come into the immediate vicinity of the man at prayer (Ibn Madja, Ikama, bab 30), and one is all the more inclined to attribute this rule to the impurity of the dog as it also holds for menstruating women. The Arab commentators, however, explain it by saying that the dog frightens the worshipper and distracts him from his devotions (al-Sindi commentary on Ibn Madja as cited above). This is especially true of the black dog, for “he is Satan”). This saying is either to be interpreted literally as meaning that Satan occasionally appears in the form a black dog (cf. Faust) or it only means that black dogs in general are considered particularly dangerous. Dogs in general are considered noxious and should therefore be exterminated (al-Nasa’i, Said wa’l-dhaba’ih, bab 9-14_, but as “Allah does not create anything in which there is not a trace of His wisdom” (al-Sindi, commentary on this passage), this rule is applied only to black dogs.

It is only permitted to keep dogs for hunting, for herding and for watching (al-Nasa’i, op. cit.); whoever keeps a forbidden dog has to forfeit a portion of his possession daily (cf. Babylon. Talmud Shabbath, fol 63: “whoever possesses a dangerous dog keeps good fortune away from his house”). Dealing in dogs on the other hand is strictly forbidden (al-Bukhari, Buyu’ bab 25).

But in spite of its impurity and dangerousness the Arabs are able to appreciate the good qualities and services of the dog. Muhammad himself promises a woman a divine reward for a kindness which she had done a thirsty dog (al-Bukhari, Wudi, bab 33), and al-Kazwini (p. 403) characterizes the dog as “a particularly intelligent, very useful animal, patient in hunger an on the watch, whose cleverness and fidelity are shown in many ways”. …

COMMENT
The tomes echo the hadiths statements. That’s’ because the hadiths statements are theological bedrock for Islam’s denigration of dogs, hence the scholars detail the rulings in their books of jurisprudence or theology. Islam has a formal, establish, legal position that dogs are unclean and it rejects dogs as pets.

OTHER SOURCES
There are many Muslim sites that discuss dog ownership. Real Muslims believe in obeying the Islamic law – the Sharia’h, which states that keeping dogs as pets is not permitted. Below are a few samples.

The Muslim Q&A site Albalgh^[6] answers a young Muslim’s question regarding keeping a dog as a pet:

Q.) I am a 15 year old Muslim American and my mother is buying a dog. I heard that if I touch the dog, I cannot pray. Is this true? What should I do?

Similarly Allah Taãla created the dog from among His creation. This does not mean that we should love the dog. It is perhaps the indoctrination of the Western culture that ‘The dog is Man’s best Friend’. The theory that ‘dogs are very dependent on Human affection’ is a myth – again culture and custom has helped to develop this unnatural behavior.

Allah Taãla the Creator of this Universe – having created the dog would surely have known that the dog requires Human affection and love to exist in this world. Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu Álayhi Wasallam) would have advised us to keep dogs as pets. On the contrary, we are instructed not to keep dogs as pets and ‘love’ them as exemplified by the non-Muslims. Remember our life is structured and bound by the Shariah i.e. The Noble Qurãn and the beautiful example of Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu Álayhi Wasallam). Consider these Ahaadith:

… Salaam) said that we, the group of Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or pictures. (Sahih Muslim Hadith no.3928)

In the light of these Ahadiths and other narrations, it is not permissible to keep dogs as pets. The household is deprived of the Mercy of Allah Taãla.

The website Islam-qa^[7] addresses a person’s question regarding owning dogs:

Question: What is the ruling on raising dogs in the house?

Answer…It is not permissible for a Muslim to keep a dog, unless he needs this dog for hunting, guarding livestock or guarding crops.

Al-Bukhaari (2145) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever keeps a dog, a qiraat from his good deeds will be deducted every day, except a dog for farming or herding livestock.”

Muslim (2978) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever keeps a dog that is not a dog for hunting, herding livestock or farming, two qiraats will be deducted from his reward each day.”

With regard to keeping dogs, this is haraam and is in fact a major sin, because the one who keeps a dog, except those for which an exception has been made, will have two qiraats deducted from his reward every day.

It is by the wisdom of Allah that like calls to like and evil calls to evil. It is said that the kaafirs, Jews, Christians and communists in the east and the west all keep dogs, Allaah forbid. Each one takes his dog with him and cleans it every day with soap and other cleansing agents. But even if he were to clean it with the water of all the seas in the world and all the soap in the world, it would never become pure! Because its impurity is inherent, and inherent impurity cannot be cleansed except by destroying it and erasing it altogether.

But this is by the wisdom of Allah, and the wisdom of Allah is that like calls to like and evil calls to Shaytaan because this kufr of theirs is by the inspiration of the Shaytaan and the command of the Shaytaan, for the Shaytaan enjoins evil, immorality, kufr and misguidance. So they are slaves to the Shaytaan and to their whims and desires, and they are also evil and love vile things. We ask Allah to guide us and them.

COMMENT
These Muslim sites are only stating what the Sharia’h teaches: You can’t own dogs. The site above says that not only is it not permissible for Muslims to own dogs, but that the dogs must be destroyed. And note that it ends with a denunciation of non-Muslims (kufr) and states that owning dogs comes from the inspiration of Satan and dog owners are slaves to Satan.

TO OBEY OR NOT OBEY MUHAMMAD? –THAT IS THE QUESTION.

Islam has branded the dog as unclean, speaks against owning dogs as pets, and ordered that they be killed. However, some Muslims know the joy of pet ownership and are caught in dichotomies: To kill or not to kill? Unclean or not unclean? To obey Muhammad or disobey Muhammad? That is the question. The Muslims that are honest and rational know that the commands in the hadiths are nonsense. That leaves them with two options: 1) deny the validity of the “authentic traditions” (Sahih Hadiths), or, 2) tailor the anti-dog commands to make them more palatable. We’ll sample a few of their arguments and provide brief responses.

ARGUMENT 1: THE HADITHS ARE FALSE –Variation 1.

One way to deal with the problem is to claim that the anti-dog Hadiths are false. Here is a quote from the Qur’an-Islam blog^[8]. The editor wrote:

It is traditional among Muslims all over the world to regard the dog as a dirty animal that when touched would void your wudu (ablution) and give you nagasah (dirty impurity!)

Sadly, this concept comes from fabricated hadiths which claims that the prophet ordered the killing of dogs and gave numerous hadiths that prohibit the keeping of dogs except for hunting and guarding, due to their dirty status!

However, by studying the Qur’an we find no such claims. Nowhere in the Qur’an are dogs prohibited. Consequently, we must dismiss all these hadiths that fabricate lies against the prophet.

And then an article written by Linda Kelly follows the above which supports the wholesomeness of dogs. Kelly refers to the “Seven Sleepers” story in the Qur’an, (that was taken from New Testament Apocrypha), and says that because there was a dog with them, God approved of dogs as companions. She wrote:

Hadiths tells us that angels won’t enter a room where there is a dog. That means that for 309 years that the sleepers were in the cave, no angel ever entered. Yet God says “We turned them….” The use of “we” clearly indicates the participation of angels. There is absolutely no reason to mention the dog as part of this story, except to make it clear to future generation that dogs are permitted to live among people, right “in their midst.” And 18:22 clearly shows that the dog was counted right along with the believers.

ARGUMENT 1: THE HADITH ARE FALSE –Variation 2.

The argument below is similar to the one above. It comes from the website “islamicconcern”. This argument also acknowledges the wholesomeness in dog ownership and the irrationality of the hadiths statements on dogs. This argument quotes from a Muslim professor living and teaching in America, Abou El Fadl. It details his position on dogs:

After a lengthy process of textual research and prayer for divine guidance, he concluded that reports against dogs were passed on through questionable chains of transmissions or contradicted by more favorable reports – for instance, one story of Muhammad praying with his dogs playing nearby.

“Dogs represent my rebellion against ignorance about the basis of actual historical law,” Abou El Fadl says. “They are a symbol of the irrationality of our tradition, the privileging of law over humaneness.”

How, he asks, pointing to Honey, who constantly follows him and nestles at his side, does God “create animals with these natural tendencies and then condemn them as thoroughly reprehensible?”

From Newsweek, April 15, 2002: Take that matter of dogs, for instance. To the literalists, the prohibition against dogs as pets is clearly delineated in one of the hadiths, the traditional accounts of the life and sayings of the prophet Mohammed. In their view, the hadiths and the Koran unambiguously set forth the laws of sharia’h. But, as Abou El Fadl points out, determining which of the tens of thousands of hadiths are authoritative requires both knowledge and critical analysis. One must evaluate the reliability of the sources and assess how consistent the hadiths are with the moral vision of the God who speaks in and through the Koran. In the case of the dog hadiths, Abou El Fadl found it hard to believe that the same God who created such companionable creatures would have his prophet declare them “unclean.”

Investigating the sources, he discovered that the hadiths in question not only derived from an unreliable chain of sources but reflected views far more consistent with pre-Islamic Arab customs and attitudes. What’s more, he says, he found that a hadiths from one of the most trustworthy sources tells how the Prophet himself had prayed in the presence of his playfully cavorting dogs.^[9]

RESPONSE
Linda Kelly and Fadl attack the validity of the Sahih Hadiths. Yet in the theology of the Sunni Muslim world, these hadiths classified as completely reliable. They have stood in the hallowed halls of Islamic theology for a thousand years plus. They are foundational to Islam for they command and explain many of Islam’s facets that are omitted or missed by the Qur’an. Devout Muslims would say that Kelly and Fadl have been seduced or deceived away from Islam’s true teaching on dogs and that they are sinning.

Kelly claims that these hadiths contradict the Qur’an. But her argument is based on the assumption that “We” includes angels. God could have turned the sleepers himself. If God can create the world, he can turn sleeping men and angels need not be in the cave.

Fadl points out correctly that the hadiths is often “irrational”. But Fadl hides deceitfully behind a smoke screen. He says, “Determining which of the tens of thousands of hadiths are authoritative requires both knowledge and critical analysis.” In the context of the discussion that’s a laughable statement because the critical analysis has already been done. And the results of this analysis are now, and have been, deeply rooted and well established in Islamic theology. This “critical analysis” has produced the “sahih” collections of hadiths, i.e. Bukhari and Muslim. The other four authentic collections of hadiths are Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, and an-Nasi. Five of these collections are available in English and much of them is available on the internet for free. You’ll find that they all agree about the status of dogs. Nobody needs to sift through “tens of thousands of hadiths”. It’s already been done and established for over 1000 years. Fadl is deceptive and misleads a naive and trusting Western audience.

Linda Kelly and Fadl both believe that it is nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous disobedience to Muhammad, denigrate the hadiths, and bear the whips and scorn of the fundamentalist Muslims, than it is to turn their backs upon man’s best friend. Obviously it’s a dog eat dog world in Islam and these more rational people recognize the value of dogs as pets, so they attack Muhammad’s bizarre statements.

ARGUMENT 2: THE HADITH ARE MISUNDERSTOOD
There are several variations of this argument and an example is below. It is from a site that wrote a response to my original “dog” article. His reasoning is that the dogs Muhammad referred to were hyenas:

Has it occurred to you that the “black dogs” that Prophet Muhammad talked about were what we call today “Hyenas”? Don’t we even call Hyenas “black devils” today as the Prophet peace be upon him called them 1500 years ago???

They’re also sometimes called “Desert Wolfs”. What Silas? I know you’re Middle Eastern! Have you forgotten your region already? Or are you just acting plain stupid to deceive your Western reader and to make Islam look like you?!

Now tell us Silas, why shouldn’t you kill a Hyena, or a Coyote or a Jackal, or even a Wild Dog when you encounter them?

I agree that dogs are helpful and beneficial to humans. That is why he didn’t completely prohibit owning dogs from all aspects. We can still use dogs to benefit us. But petting a dog in a house causes the house to be unclean. Dogs are unclean animals. Their saliva are unclean and disgusting.^[10]

RESPONSE
Osama is attempting to modify the hadiths meaning. “Muhammad didn’t mean dogs, he meant hyenas.” The Arabic word for dog is “kalb” and the Arabic word for hyena is “dab” (roughly transliterated). If Muhammad wanted to distinguish between dogs and hyenas he would have used the correct word.

Lets re-visit Abu Dawud, #2839: Abd Allah B. Mughaffal reported the apostle of Allah as saying: Were dogs not a species of creature I should command that they all be killed; but kill every pure black one.

The Hadith’s note for #2839 says, “The prophet did not order the killing of all the dogs, for some are to be retained for hunting and watching. He ordered to kill the jet black ones. They might be more mischievous among them”.

Obviously, Muhammad classified together all dogs that did or did not perform jobs and distinguished between them based on their color: black ones were more evil. Think about what Osama implies: Was that a baby hyena puppy in Muhammad’s home, or was it a dog? Were Muslims using hyenas to hunt and watch their flocks? Osama’s argument becomes idiotic once the contexts are taken into account.

Finally, who is right, Fadl or Osama? Is Fadl right in claiming that dog as pets ownership is permitted today? Or is Osama right in saying that dogs are unclean and as pets make the house unclean?

BENEFITS OF DOGS AS PETS
I ask the Muslim readers to view the articles linked below and determine whether or not Muhammad’s statements were rational. Don’t just read the snippets I provide, spend some time and read the entire articles (linked in the Reference section). If you are honest, like Fadl and Kelly, you’ll admit that Muhammad’s statements were superstitious, stupid, and just plain wrong. The studies mentioned below prove the value of owning a dog simply as a pet. They are a sampling of the many available articles stating that pet ownership is very beneficial to humans.

The Siskin Hospital in Tenn. has a “Pet Therapy” program to assist in rehabilitation. They state:

The Pet Therapy Program uses carefully screened dogs and cats as an integral part of physical, speech, recreational and occupational therapies to address treatment goals including improving range of motion, strength and endurance, balance, mobility, and sensation. In addition to the physical benefits of pet therapy, patients form a connection with the animal; reducing stress and building self-esteem through the animals’ unconditional acceptance.^[11]

From the BBC: Dog-owners ‘lead healthier lives’. If you want to live a healthier life get a dog, research suggests. The companionship offered by many pets is thought to be good for you, but the benefits of owning a dog outstrip those of cat owners, the study says.

A psychologist from Queen’s University, Belfast, said dog owners tended to have lower blood pressure and cholesterol. Writing in the British Journal of Health Psychology, she says that regular “walkies” may partly explain the difference.

Dr Deborah Wells reviewed dozens of earlier research papers, which looked at the health benefits of pet ownership. She confirmed that pet owners tended in general to be healthier than the average member of the population was. However, her research suggested that dog ownership produced more positive influence than cat ownership. As well as lower blood pressure and cholesterol, she said dog-owners suffered fewer minor ailments and serious medical problems. There was also the suggestion that dogs could aid recovery from serious illnesses such as heart attacks, and act as ‘early warning’ to detect an approaching epileptic seizure. ^[12]

The Swedish Medical Center in America, Seattle, Washington, lists the benefits of pet ownership^[13]:

Why We Benefit From the Company of Animals
There are several benefits to having a pet:
• Companionship and pleasurable activity
• Facilitate exercise, play, and laughter
• Have something to care for and a source of consistency
• Allow feeling of security
• Are a comfort to touch and a pleasure to watch
• Provide a link with reality to enhance emotional stability
• Become a receptive partner in a relationship of mutual trust that promotes self-awareness
• Provide nonjudgmental acceptance and love
• Are an outlet for one’s ancient primate grooming urges
• Improved sense of well-being

Google’s Answers^[14] provides benefits to owning a dog as a pet. Below is a brief excerpt:

QUESTION: What are the top ten health benefits of dog ownership? I want measurable physical and mental health benefits such as decreased blood pressure. Not qualitative anecdotes about how they make you feel good.

ANSWER:
- Pet owners have lower blood pressure
- Pet owners have lower blood cholesterol levels
- Pet owners have a higher survival rate after serious illness
- Pet owners have fewer doctors’ visits
- Pet ownership reduces loneliness
- Pet ownership fights depression
- Pet ownership helps us cope with stress
- Pet ownership aids childhood development
- Pet owners enhance family life

Please note that for each category above the doctor cites studies that determined those results.

COMMENT
The benefits of dogs as pets are well established and the evidence is irrefutable. Yet Muhammad, claiming to be a prophet of God, commanded that they be killed and not kept as pets. Either the research evidence is false, or Muhammad was wrong in depriving humanity of a friend and ordering that innocent animals be killed.

BENEFITS OF DOGS AS PETS CONTINUED
Take a look at this video below and tell me that this animal is “unclean” and should be killed. Tell me if this dog is a beneficial pet, an admirable animal, or just another target of Muhammad’s irrationality.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5249518974978628334

Does this animal deserve to be killed because Muhammad uttered a brutal command? Devout Muslims, true Muslims, must answer “Yes” to that question, because their “prophet” said so.

Do an internet search for real life stories of dogs saving or helping humans. There are many out there. Below are excerpts from a small sample of the benefit, the good, the blessing, that dogs have been to their owners or other people. Remember, if Muhammad’s words were obeyed, these dogs would be dead, or have never existed at all.

1) A story about a pet dog that saved his master’s life during a heart attack: Mark Hanrahan kneels next to his golden retriever, Murphy O’Dawg. The dog woke him up while he was having a heart attack.^[15]

2) Selma Hayek’s dog saved her life: Salma said she decided to take a nap at her home in California, not realising there was a gas leak in the house: “I had a headache and went to lie down when Diva woke me up by grabbing my sleeve in her mouth and trying to pull me out of the house. Then I realised the gas was on!”[16]

3) A pet saves the lives of his two elderly owners: Eve and Norman Fertig, who are both 81 years old, were out treating injured birds in the Wildlife Sanctuary on their Alden property on the night of October 12th. They left as the storm intensified but, were soon trapped by falling trees and heavy snow as they tried to walk back to their home. Eve realized they could die in the bitter cold but, fortunately, Shana was with them.
As the cold and snow chilled them both without heavy coats and gloves, Shana started digging under the snow and trees. The dog actually dug a foot wide tunnel about 20 feet to the home.
Shana barked but, the couple hesitated, so they say the dog came back and tugged on Eve’s jacket. She says the 160 pound dog actually pulled her onto its broad back and crawled through the tunnel. Her husband held on as well as they slowly crawled all the way back to their home. They made it back to the back deck, opened their door and fell in to the house exhausted but safe.^[17]

Ok, if you are a Muslim, be honest with yourself. Didn’t these pets make an important difference in the lives of their owners? Is there any justification to kill them?

DISCUSSION: THE BIGGER PICTURE
Think about the bigger picture. If Islam had taken over the entire world, what would it have meant? How would that have affected our society, and you?

Muhammad said: “Kill all the dogs!” Kill Snoopy Kill Lassie Kill Rin Tin Tin!
Muhammad said: “Kill all the dogs!” Kill Scooby Doo Kill Pluto Kill the Taco Bell dog!
Muhammad said: “Kill all the dogs!” Kill Dogbert Kill Goofy Kill the 101 Dalmatians!

I am trying to make a point by presenting Muhammad in the light of today. The dogs above are fictional, or they were real dogs representing fictional dogs in Hollywood. Nevertheless, these fictional dogs have affected billions of people’s lives for the better. They have brought us laughter and tears and have taught us about life and love. Those fictional dogs represented the bond between dog and man and humanity has judged the dog to be a beneficial and loving pet. Yet if Muhammad’s word was obeyed they would have never existed. Never!

Muhammad said: “Kill all the dogs!” Kill your pet!

People’s pets have made a positive difference in their lives. Did you own a pet dog? If not, did you know someone who did? If so, I’ll bet that your dog, or the dogs you saw were a blessing, not a curse, to their owners. Were they really the “unclean” animal that deserved to be killed because Muhammad said so?

Too bad Muhammad did not have a pet dog to share life with while he was growing up. If a dog was with him in the cave Hira, it would have helped him fend off the dark spirit that assaulted him. Following that visit Muhammad was often very depressed and attempted suicide many times during the next 3 years or so. (See the article Muhammad’s Suicide Attempts).

QUESTIONS AND TALKING POINTS
Below are some brief questions and thoughts on Muhammad’s statements.

1) Prayer is annulled by a dog. Why should a dog nullify prayer? What difference does it make if the dog is in front of you, or behind you? Jesus taught that God judges the heart, and the outward performance is irrelevant.

2) Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog. Why would an angel be stopped by a puppy if he were on a mission from God? What power does this “unclean” characteristic possess to stop an angel?

3) Whoever keeps a dog, one Qirat of the reward of his good deeds is deducted daily, Why would Allah double the punishment of dog ownership? And, how much exactly is 1 qirat in heavenly currency and what is it needed for? Is it a huge mountain of gold, silver, or diamonds? After all, if Allah is penalizing you for something, the thing he is taking away must have value to the owner.

The points above are some quick thoughts I’ve had about this topic. I’m sure that if you think it through you’ll be able to find additional flaws in Muhammad’s statements.

CHALLENGE TO THE MUSLIM
You have to take Muhammad at his word. Don’t deceive yourself like Fadl and Kelly and pretend that Muhammad didn’t say to kill the dogs. Take a stand. Either obey Muhammad, or admit that Muhammad was wrong and was a wacko. If he were false, then leave him. Don’t put your eternal fate in the hands of an abusive, deluded, false prophet.

CONCLUSION
Muhammad’s bizarre beliefs regarding dogs were irrational, superstitious, and very cruel. I am thankful that Western countries have laws that protect pets and animals and make killing dogs, as Muhammad commanded, a crime. I hope that Muslims will obey the law. Muhammad’s absurd beliefs are now part and parcel of established Islamic dogma. Muslims who intend to obey Muhammad and obey the Sharia’h must kill their dogs. Any rationalization for disobeying the Sharia and owning a pet dog is going to be punished by Allah. There are no intelligent or logical foundations supporting Muhammad’s beliefs, rather they go against modern medicine, modern science, and practical experience. Muhammad’s order is a blight, not a blessing. Muhammad’s superstitious belief, coupled with his brutality, bring out the worst in men. Muhammad is to be rejected for he is a curse upon humanity. Consider Jesus. He did not teach to kill animals because of their species or color. Christ’s teachings were based upon faith, love, and obedience to God. When Christ taught prayer, He taught that God judges the heart, not the form or outward appearance. When Christ taught about heaven, and its rewards, He did not state that owning an animal would cost you your good works. Christ’s message was simple: love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself…

Maranatha,
Silas; Rev A: 8-3-98, Rev B: 9/3/01, Rev C: 25 Jan, 2007

Further reading: Muhammad and the Animals

This article first appeared here: http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/dogs.htm#_Toc158088979

REFERENCES
[1] Bukhari, Muhammad, “Sahih Bukhari”, Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi, India, 1987, translated by M. Khan
[2] Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, “Sahih Muslim”, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971, translated by A. Siddiqi
[3] Abu Dawud, Suliman, “Sunan”, al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan
[4] Misri, Ahmad, “Reliance of the Traveler”, Amana, Beltsville, MD, 1994
[5] Gibb, H.A.R., Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, Brill, Netherlands
[6] http://www.albalagh.net/qa/dogs_islam_prayer.shtml
[7] http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=69777&ln=eng
[8] http://www.Qur’an-islam.org/119.html
[9] http://www.islamicconcern.com/dogs.asp
[10] http://www.Qur’ansearch.com/dogs_rebuttal.htm
[11] http://www.siskinrehab.org/patient/pet.asp
[12] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6279701.stm
[13] http://www.swedish.org/15309.cfm
[14] http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=710564
[15] http://www.gmtoday.com/news/local_stories/2006/May_06/05052006_07.asp
[16] http://www.news24.com/News24/Entertainment/Off_Beat/0,,2-1225-2107_2057110,00.html
[17] http://www.wbir.com/news/archive.aspx?storyid=40172

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/10/22/muhammad-and-the-dogs/

IHS