Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

claraalberta t1_j9aw93n wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in TIL: The domestic cat is a revered animal in Islam and One of Muhammad's (PBUH) companions was known as Abu Hurairah (literally: "Father of the Kitten" PBUH) for his attachment to cats. by ElectroFlannelGore

It's a ritualistic cleaning, once with water mixed with soil and another seven times with just water. In countries like Malaysia there are also products like soap with the soil incorporated in it for convenience.

[The schools of Islamic jurisprudence (not to be confused with the Sunni/Shi'a denominations) disagree on whether dogs are najis (i.e. unclean). In practice, it really... depends on the Muslim whether they consider dogs unclean as a whole or by part. Growing up, I was taught the Shafi'i opinion that dogs as a whole are unclean, but in the last 10 years I had adjusted this principle to the Maliki opinion that the saliva of wild dogs are unclean.]

3

Gilamath t1_j9bs9au wrote

Actually, the Maliki position you mentioned is a minority position, though it is the majority position of the Hanafis. The Maliki majority consensus is that, so long as the dog is alive, it is pure (najasa). This is because dogs are animals, and all animals are pure when they are alive

Upon death, unless they were killed in the name of God for a clear purpose and killed in a way that minimizes pain to the greatest feasible degree, they are impure to touch (this, of course, is the basis of “zabihah”). However, transforming the remains of the animal, for instance my tanning its hide, removes its impurities. Thus, Malikis will say that pig leather is pure, but boar-bristle brushes are impure, for instance

The other Sunni schools disagree with this, and I believe the Jafaris come to somewhat similar conclusions but using a different logic. I’m afraid I’m not quite sure, though

2