Mehdi Hasan hates animals, particularly dogs:
In fact, you may have guessed by now, and it might upset some of you to hear me say this, but I’m not, by any standards, an animal-lover. Unless the said animal is dead and on my plate. For me, animals, as they say, have two functions: to taste good and fit well.
But, in particular, I despise and loathe dogs (which, of course, have neither a culinary nor a sartorial function — unless you live in South Korea). They are disgusting, dirty animals that should never have become pets, let alone such popular pets (there are an estimated eight million dogs in the UK. I feel like vomiting as I type out this gruesome and dispiriting statistic.)
Mehdi is free and easy with the “Koreans eat dog” factoid, but is careful not to mention, even once, another relevant factoid: “Muslims hate dog”. He’s not willing to explore the possibility that his own hatred of dogs might emanate from religious conditioning. As we know, Muslims in general, loathe dogs, because they are regarded as unclean, nasty animals that are defiled by their very existence, to the extent that even the slightest contact with a dog would profane a Muslim’s elaborate ablution. Islamic disgust of dogs could be the result of the tradition that is drummed into every Muslim of the Prophet’s dislike of dogs.
Mehdi quotes the avowedly “secular atheist leftie comedian”, dog-hater Mark Steel to hide behind:
The best insight I had into the mind of dog-owners was while I lived on a council estate, and one dog would regularly crap at the bottom of the stairs to the block. One day, I caught it in mid-dump, and asked the owner if he could not do it again.
He said, “Well, it’s a dog; it’s got to go somewhere.” I pledged that if I ever became a millionaire, I’d hire a huge herd of buffalo and get them to gallop through his flat. And when he complained, I’d say, “Well, they’re buffalo, they’ve got to stampede somewhere.”
woof woof!
Thankfully, we can always rely on those delightfully subversive sufis to puncture the turgid attitudes that underpin Muslim traditions. Here is the the story of Bayazid and the dog:
When the great Sufi Master Abu Yazid al-Bestami, called Bayazid, was walking in the desert on the pilgrimage to Mecca, the Hajj, he walked past a well where many people were gathered around drawing up water. Around them circled a mongrel dog, panting with thirst.
Bayazid called out to the crowd, “Will someone not give a cup of water in exchange for the blessings of fifty years of pilgrimage and prayers?”
One person who knew Bayazid said, “I will gladly do so.” And so he gave a cup of water to the Sufi Master, and received in return a lifetime of blessings.
Bayazid put the cup on the ground so the dog could drink.
Now if only Mehdi would articulate an equally forthright polemic about hatred of Muslim sectarianism as he does about his (shhh! don’t say it, Muslim) hatred of dogs.
21 Comments
I hate dogs.
By the way Bengali teenagers with scary dogs are the new- in- thing where I live. Do you think this trend might suggest the decline in political Islamic leanings in the youth?
Could be. Or maybe something to do with dogs being the new weapon of choice.
those delightfully subversive sufis
That would be the same set of people who traditionally stitched-up political power in Saharan and sub-Saharan Africa, are organised in self-serving sects led by unelected leaders drawn from particular families; and whose utter venality has led to the conditions of internecine struggle, the institutionalisation of tribalism and general political instability whereby Islamists have profited politically across the region.
Just so we maintain some balance.
No that would’t be the same set of people as Abu Yazid al-Bestami.
Ah, I see. There are Sufi and there are Sufi.
goodness, let the man express his views on dogs! Why do the witch-hunters always have to refer it back to politics?
If he loves chocolate, hates dogs, or eats Falafel, let him!
Yes, the Bengali youth with their dogs are making a fashion statement. It’s pretty much like owning a flashy mobile phone nobody else can or wants to afford. But I wouldn’t say it has anything to do with lack of ‘political Islam’…it is purely their lack of understanding or practising Islam. I mean when did dogs get into politics? Or are we trying desperately yet again to link this back to politics at all costs?
Krogan, I made a joke. Related to another blog post on this site.
goodness, let the man express his views on dogs! Why do the witch-hunters always have to refer it back to politics?
Because the “witch” in question is the Senior Political Editor of the New Statesman.
Krogan, it’s more the fact that the New Statesman is the wrong kind of Left than the allegation that Mehdi H is the wrong kind of Muslim that really detains Faisal.
I have always thought you can tell a lot about someone’s character by their likes and dislikes. If Hasan also states that he does not drink, and that he does not like football, he is probably a lost cause.
Faisal, I loved that quote about the Sufi. I see you’ve posted it on the original comments thread on the New Statesman too.
I’ve just posted the following comment over there, on the same thread:
“Medhi,
First of all, I’d like to mention that I thought you were absolutely brilliant on last Sunday’s edition of the BBC’s ‘The Big Questions’, specifically the debate “Is Islam Misunderstood ?” You made a considerable number of much-needed points and argued the matter superbly. The main panel was very good too.
On to your article about dogs…..
There are a number of issues which need to be clarified. Much of this was covered in a scientific BBC documentary called ‘The Secret Life of Dogs’ a few months ago, although it will also be familiar to anyone who has actually owned a dog themselves, especially one of the larger, more intelligent and ‘wolflike’ breeds like Alsatians/German Shepherds. (There’s also some information here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_domestic_dog )
Dogs were deliberately domesticated by humans more than 10,000 years ago, with one of the specific purposes being their use as guards (along with hunting companions). Subsequent selective breeding by humans coupled with dogs living in very close proximity to us within settled human communities over the course of thousands of years all over the world has resulted in dogs becoming instinctively attached to, emotionally sensitive towards, and psychologically geared towards humans.
To give one example: when you point at an object, dogs are the only non-human species in the world which will understand exactly what you mean by that “fetch” or “go there” gesture without requiring any prior training. Even chimpanzees, the closest primates to humans, do not automatically understand or respond to this gesture. Furthermore, the continuous eye-contact dogs maintain with humans (especially people they’re close to) is because they’re closely watching our facial reactions & behaviour, a result of the fact that over the millennia they’ve become extraordinarily emotionally sensitive towards us. And the unique way that dogs sometimes bark, sounding as though they’re trying to “talk” (dog owners will understand what I’m referring to), isn’t a coincidence – the dog really is trying to mimick human speech patterns when trying to communicate with us this way. Again, this doesn’t occur with other animals.
Dogs aren’t “wild animals” who “just happen” to behave this way towards humans “randomly”. It’s all a specific result of thousands of years of selective breeding by humans and thousands of years of living very close to us, at the very least as guards and especially as “members of the extended family”. Dogs are automatically affectionate & friendly towards humans (unless they’ve been mistreated or are from one of the notorious “vicious” breeds) because we trigger that kind of instinctive emotional reaction in them.
It’s basically like dealing with an intelligent and friendly two-year-old kid who is highly emotionally attuned to us (albeit one who can’t communicate with us in our own language), and it has to be treated with the same level of kindness, understanding and sensitivity. This is an important point, because the persistent mistreatment of dogs, including hostile rejections of their instinctive affection, attachment and empathy towards us, really is like mentally abusing a small child.
In a nutshell, there is nothing “unnatural” about dogs living within human society or the emotional attachment dogs and humans may feel towards each other; on the contrary, it’s a result of the shared, closely-connected and interdependent history of our two species worldwide for more than 10,000 years. There is therefore an argument to be made for the fact that people who do not share this amicable attitude (especially if it literally involves extreme disgust towards dogs) are perhaps themselves displaying unnatural and/or abnormal behaviour as human beings, and this is something they may need to reflect on and address, including the specific origins & reasons for their reactions.”
Narrated Adi bin Hatim:
I asked Allah’s Apostle. “We hunt with the help of these hounds.” He said, “If you let loose your trained hounds after a game, and mention the name of Allah, then you can eat what the hounds catch for you, even if they killed the game. But you should not eat of it if the hound has eaten of it, for then it is likely that the hound has caught the game for itself. And if other hounds join your hound in hunting the game, then do not eat of it.”
- Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 67, Number 392
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah’s Apostle said, “While a man was walking he felt thirsty and went down a well and drank water from it. On coming out of it, he saw a dog panting and eating mud because of excessive thirst. The man said, ‘This (dog) is suffering from the same problem as that of mine. So he (went down the well), filled his shoe with water, caught hold of it with his teeth and climbed up and watered the dog. Allah thanked him for his (good) deed and forgave him.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! Is there a reward for us in serving (the) animals?” He replied, “Yes, there is a reward for serving any animate.”
- Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 40, Number 551
It was a commonly-held view in medieval Catholic Europe that angels would not enter homes where there were dogs present.
The concept of a “pet” was fairly alien to the medieval European mind. Charles VII of France (who sometimes thought he was made of glass and was, for a while, actually walled up in his palace to stop him wandering mad the streets of Paris) kept pets – and this confirmed to many in his court that their monarch was off his head.
Arabs actually hold dogs as working beasts in very high regard – the sleeky desert sight hounds, kept by the Omani bedu and others, trade for enormous prices.
Arabs also don’t like donkeys or camels much; but value their usefulness.
On camels – I would remind readers of the ahadith that deal with the need for full ritual ablutions after consuming camel meat and the fact that it is prohibited from praying amongst camels. Anecdotally, I have never met an Arab who has any dealings with camels who especially likes the beasts – their intelligence is acknowledged, but so too is their violence and spite.
Objections that Arabs traditionally have even written poems about camels do not understand the close connection between notions of esteem, honour and utility in the Arab world. Equally, one might point out that Arabs raise up the nomadic desert life as an ideal and yet everywhere absolutely despite the bedu who follow the same.
My point being that one wonders if an editor of the New Statesman who happened to be an Arab declared his undying enmity for donkeys or camels, whether there would be such a fuss.
I was also unaware that it was a damning indictment of the New Statesman that its senior political editor disliked an animal on religious or any other grounds. I’m not keen on spiders, they creep me out, should I mention that?
I think the point here is that there is a very strong undertone in Hasan’s article of an irrational disgust towards something that western civilisation holds very dear. Personally, I like dogs, but couldnt live with one in my house as I find all animals somewhat dirty. That said, I still hugely admire the selfless and unbending devotion of a dog to its master. This article was strange and had a very indignant and hateful undertone to it.
absurd quote from Hasan – “all dogs are dangerous”, ya…right – I shat myself last time i saw a chihuaha..
I wonder why Hasan didn’t develop the Korean civilisation’s love of eating dog as the undertone for his ‘hate dog’ harangue. My guess is because he’s far too astute and politically correct to do that. But mostly likely because Korean gastronomy is less hateful than Western animal husbandry.
ya…right – I shat myself last time i saw a chihuaha..
They are vicious little beasts. I had the misfortune to have as a good school friend someone whose parents bred the little horrors; and I can assure you that a riled Chihuaha is a beast to be reckoned with – especially when it come attached to a pack of others to back it up.
Most smaller dogs are fairly feisty – the bigger ones probably have less to prove. I’ve stood on the tail of an English Mastiff (by accident) and all she did was look up, stare at me with utter contempt and yawn. Mind you I have that effect on a lot of women. I’ve accidentally got between an irate Jack Russell and its quarry (the postman) and I have been well bitten for the mistake.
I would recommend Mehdi take up with Springer Spaniels, none to bright, stink to high heaven if they get anywhere near water, but the gentlest, nicest hounds you could find.
I grew up and worked with dogs for much of my formative years. I don’t mind people not liking dogs; it’s an improvement on not liking people.
However bad dogs may be, compared morally to many of the Spitoon shower they have superior qualities.
The dogs vs spittoon debate is nicely summed up by the title of Ibn Al-Marzuban’s classic Fadl al-kilab ala kathir miman labisa al-thiyab ( The Superiority of Dogs Over Many of Those Who Wear Clothes)
Spittoon regularly uses the Daily Telegraph as a source to bash Muslims
The same Daily Telegraph which published this
“All Muslims, like all dogs, share certain characteristics.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3608849/Muslims-are-a-threat-to-our-way-of-life.html
Mehdi Hasan may not like dogs but Spitoon and its allies hate Muslims.