TWO WEEKS ago Arab News published a news item about a ban on the sale of dogs and cats. The item explained that the Makkah Governorate was acting upon a request from the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice. The commission evidently made the request after it noticed “young Saudis going out in streets with their pet dogs in violation of the Kingdom’s culture and tradition.”
I really have no idea whose culture or tradition the request was referring to. If someone decided to buy a horse and keep it, would that be against our “culture and tradition”? How about birds? Some people like birds and they like to keep them; there is also in fact a big market for pigeons. What about rabbits or fish? Both are animals that some people like to keep in their homes. But, it seems, that keeping these animals are not in violation of our “culture and tradition.” Only cats and dogs, it seems, are violations. Leaving aside everything that I’ve said, what if we just talk about religion since it is the law of the land and the law we live by. We all know — and every child in Saudi Arabia has been taught — that the prophet’s close companion was “Abu Horaira” which means “ the man with the kitten.” He was given that name because he always carried a kitten around with him, fed it and took care of it. There is no indication whatsoever that the prophet ever told his companion that he should abandon the kitten. On the contrary, there are stories of how the prophet loved animals and how he fed them. Once he let a cat drink from the water that he was going to use for his ablutions and he did not touch the water until the cat had finished drinking. There is another story of how he gave food to stray animals and also one of how his companions took baby chicks from their mother and the prophet told them to return the chicks since the mother was so disturbed.
How about the Hadith concerning a man who went to make his ablutions from a well and noticed a thirsty dog nearby so he brought up water for the dog in his slippers and helped the animal to drink. The prophet said the man would go to heaven for that.
All these things considered, it is obviously not against our religion or our tradition to have dogs and cats as pets. As there was no violation of anything, it looks to me as if the ban should not have been announced — or even considered.
In the story I read, the municipality said it was dispatching special squads to close down pet shops. With all the things that the municipality could and should be doing for the public good, I sincerely hope they will leave the cats and dogs alone and concentrate on what should be their real business. It is interesting to note that the municipality has failed to protect animals on the streets of Jeddah as well as in the zoo. Everyone knows how the streets of Jeddah are full of stray cats which are regularly run over. I wonder if the officials at the municipality have considered taking these stray animals to municipality-funded shelters to save their lives? No, it seems that the danger to our “culture and tradition” comes from dogs and cats inside houses. Those outside are outside any rules and regulations.
A last word about our traditions. In Ottoman times in Egypt, there was an endowment for animals, stray animals and old animals. Shelter was provided for them in order to protect and feed them and also to keep the streets clean. Here is a thought and an idea that we could implement; fortunately, it fits very well with our “culture and tradition.”
