Animal Rights in Islam vs the Bible — Dominion Versus Honor, a Comparative Study
·27 min read·6049 words
How to Navigate This Note The Foundational Difference — Dominion Versus Honor — Genesis 1:26 compared with Al-Isra 17:70 Animal Rights in the Bible — The Old Testament — the firstborn donkey, the Amalekite animals, the goring ox, and the Hammurabi parallel Animal Rights in the Bible — The New Testament — the Gadarene swine and the problem of Christ’s response Islam’s View of Animals — The Quranic Framework — the chapters named after animals, Surat al-Nahl, and the four deductions of the jurists Islam’s Praise of Specific Animals — hadiths honoring horses, camels, sheep, and the rooster Kindness to Animals as an Act of Worship — the man and the dog, the prostitute and the dog, the reward for every living creature Mistreating Animals is a Major Sin — the woman punished for the cat, the cursing of branding, the prohibition on mutilation and castration Prohibition of Harmful Practices Toward Animals — bullfighting, cockfighting, using animals as targets, bereaving a bird of its young Etiquettes of Slaughter — Kindness Even in Death — the detailed Islamic rules on humane slaughter Rights of the Riding Animal — grazing, rest, limits on riders, prohibition of overloading Jurisprudential Rulings Protecting Animals — the judge’s authority to sell a neglected animal, fatwas on ants and cats The Difference Between the Two Views — concluding comparison
The foundational distinction between the Biblical and Islamic approaches to animals is not one of degree but of principle: the Bible establishes man’s relationship to animals on the basis of !!dominion!!, while Islam establishes it on the basis of honor and mercy — and this difference at the level of principle produces, at the level of law and practice, a vast gulf between what the two traditions permit, forbid, reward, and punish in their treatment of the animal world.
The Foundational Difference — Dominion Versus Honor
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.
And We have certainly honored the children of Adam and carried them on the land and sea and provided for them of the good things and preferred them over much of what We have created, with definite preference.
The preference God grants human beings over the rest of His creation is rooted in reason — the gift that forms the basis of human responsibility. This is not the dominion of a conqueror over a subject, but the distinction of a steward whose superiority entails accountability. Where the Biblical framework establishes dominion, the Islamic framework establishes preference through honor — and honor carries with it the obligation to treat honorably that which falls beneath it.
Animal Rights in the Bible — The Old Testament
The Old Testament contains passages that are deeply troubling in their treatment of animals. We will examine several of them in order.
The Firstborn Donkey — Exodus 34:19-20
Exodus 34:19-20 Everyone who opens the womb is mine, and every firstborn male among your livestock, whether a bull or a sheep. But the firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a sheep; but if you will not redeem it, you shall break its neck!
Why was the donkey punished for the sin of its owner? The donkey committed no transgression. Its neck is to be broken not because of anything it did, but because its owner failed to provide a sheep for its redemption. The selfishness that dominates this legislation — an animal bearing the consequences of a human financial failure — raises serious questions about the moral source of such a command.
The Amalekite Animals — 1 Samuel 15:2-4
1 Samuel 15:2-4 Thus says the Lord of hosts: I will surely punish what Amalek did to Israel when he stood in the way for them as they came up from Egypt. Now go and attack the Amalekites and utterly destroy all that they have. Do not spare them, but put to death man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.
What does a donkey have to do with being ridden by an Amalekite or a Jew? The animals committed no act against Israel. They had no participation in the historical grievance invoked here. Yet they are included in the command of total extermination.
What was mentioned above is a carbon copy of the scorched earth policy — the most heinous type of genocide — one that is not limited to human beings but includes everything in the stricken area. And this is not a barbaric individual act carried out in passion or revenge. It is spoken in the name of “the Lord of hosts.”
The Goring Ox — Exodus 21:28-32
Exodus 21:28-32 And if an ox gores a man or a woman, and they die, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten. But the owner of the ox shall be blameless. But if the ox has been a goring ox before, and its owner has been testified against, and he has not restrained it, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death. If a ransom is set upon him, whatever is set upon him he must pay to redeem his life. Or if he gores a son or a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done to him. If an ox gores a male or female servant, his master shall give thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.
Anyone who contemplates this punishment finds it strange by all standards. The goal of stoning is deterrence — preventing the recurrence of a harmful act. But deterrence requires that the deterred party be capable of learning from punishment. Does this apply to a goring ox? An ox cannot be deterred by the fear of future stoning. It cannot understand or respond to legal consequences. The entire premise of the punishment as applied to an animal is incoherent.
A more rational approach would have been to simply slaughter the ox — a natural and standard act in any agricultural society — thus eliminating the source of the problem, punishing the negligent owner through economic loss, and distributing its meat to the community as partial compensation for the damages caused. This achieves deterrence of the owner, removal of the danger, and benefit to the community — without torturing the ox with hundreds of individual stones, each causing separate pain. The existence of a more rational man-made solution that yields better results than the Biblical legislation strongly suggests that this legislation originates from a human source rather than a divine one.
The Code of Hammurabi — Paragraphs 250-251 (approximately 400 years before Moses) 250: If while an ox is passing on the street (market) some one push it, and kill it, the owner can set up no claim in the suit against the hirer. 251: If an ox be a goring ox, and it shows that he is a gorer, and he does not bind his horns, or fasten the ox up, and the ox gore a free-born man and kill him, the owner shall pay one-half a mina in money.
The Hammurabi parallel is significant. The Code of Hammurabi, written approximately four hundred years before Moses, addresses the goring ox in a more rational and proportionate manner — focusing on the owner’s liability and financial compensation rather than the stoning of the animal. The similarity in subject matter, combined with the greater rationality of the earlier code, supports the view that the Biblical legislation on this point derives from the legal traditions of the ancient Near East rather than from divine revelation.
Animal Rights in the Bible — The New Testament
The arrival of the New Testament might have been expected to improve the treatment of animals, especially with the coming of the one who described himself as the Good Shepherd and characterized those before him as thieves and robbers:
John 10:7-8 Then Jesus said to them again, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers.”
But the improvement did not come. Consider the following:
Matthew 8:28-33 And when he came to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two demon-possessed men, coming out of the tombs, exceedingly furious, so that no one could pass that way. And behold, they cried out, saying, What have you to do with us, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time? Now there was a herd of many pigs feeding at a distance from them. Then the demons begged him, saying, “If you are going to cast us out, let us go into the herd of pigs.” “Go,” he said to them. So they went out and went to the herd of swine. And behold, the whole herd of swine had rushed down the steep bank into the sea and perished in the waters.
What was the sin of these swine? Why did Christ permit the demons to enter the herd and drive them to their destruction, rather than simply binding the evil spirits — as the disciples were taught to do? The justification sometimes offered — that Christ was concealing his divinity from Satan and the devils — is difficult to sustain here, since the possessed men had already cried out “Jesus, Son of God” before the pigs were destroyed. The concealment, if that is what it was, had already failed before the animals perished.
Islam’s View of Animals — The Quranic Framework
Islam looks at the animal world with a realistic view based on its importance in life, its benefit to humanity, and its cooperation with man in building the universe and the continuation of life. The most immediate evidence of this is that God has given titles to several chapters of the Holy Quran from the names of animals: Surat al-Baqarah (The Cow), Al-An’am (Cattle), Al-Nahl (The Bee), Al-Naml (The Ant), Al-Ankabut (The Spider), and Al-Fil (The Elephant).
Al-Nahl 16:5-8 And the grazing livestock He has created for you; in them you have warmth and numerous benefits, and from them you eat. And for you there is adornment in them when you drive them back to their former habitations and when you send them out to pasture. And they carry your loads to a land you could not have reached except with great difficulty. Indeed, your Lord is Kind and Merciful. And the horses, mules, donkeys — that you may ride them and as an adornment, and He creates what you do not know.
The jurists and commentators of Islam deduced four principles from these four verses of Surat al-Nahl:
Al-Qurtubi — Tafsir al-Jami’ li-Ahkam al-Quran, 10/69 First: The animal is closely connected to man, closely related to him, and close in location to him, and from here the animal has a sanctity and a pledge from man.
Al-Razi — Mafatih al-Ghayb, 19/227 Second: The most honorable bodies in the lower world — after man — are all animals, because they are distinguished by the honorable powers, which are the apparent and hidden senses, desire, and anger.
Third: God — the Almighty — intended through these verses to distance man from looking at animals with a narrow view that is only related to the material aspects of food, transportation, clothing, and warmth. He expanded man’s view of them, indicating that animals have a spiritual aspect and aesthetic qualities that require kindness in dealing with them, kindness in companionship, and approaching them with love and pride. He said: {And for you there is beauty in them when you drive them back and when you send them out to pasture}, and He said: {That you may ride them and as an adornment}.
Al-Razi — Mafatih al-Ghayb, 19/228 And know that the reason for beautifying them is that when the shepherd takes them out in the evening and lets them out in the morning, the courtyards are adorned when they are driven back and let out, and their bleating and roaring respond to them, and their owners are happy, and their impact on people is great because they own them.
Al-Qurtubi — Tafsir al-Jami’ li-Ahkam al-Quran, 10/70 The beauty of livestock and beasts is part of the beauty of creation, and it is visible to the eyes and in agreement with the insights. Part of their beauty is their abundance, and people say when they see them: These are the livestock of so-and-so. And because when they go out, their beauty is abundant, their status is great, and hearts are attached to them.
Al-Razi — Mafatih al-Ghayb, 19/231 Fourth: Mentioning some animals by name in these verses does not mean that others are not like that. Rather, they are mentioned as an example, not as an exhaustive list, as evidenced by His statement: {And He creates what you do not know.} Because their types, kinds, and divisions are many and beyond limit and enumeration, so it was best to mention them in general terms.
Islam’s Praise of Specific Animals
Islam has linked the obligation of treating some animals kindly to their moral benefits and good qualities, and has made kindness to them obligatory for that reason.
Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim — Narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Goodness is tied to the forelocks of horses until the Day of Resurrection.”
In the narration of Ibn Idris from Husain, there is an addition: “Camels are a source of pride for their owners, and sheep are a blessing.” Al-Barqani included it in his Mustakhraj, al-Hamidi noted it, and Ibn Hajar transmitted it (Fath al-Bari 6/395).
Sunan al-Nasa’i, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih — Narrated by Zaid ibn Khalid al-Juhani, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Do not curse the rooster, for it wakes one up for prayer.” In the narration of Ibn Hibban: “For it calls one to prayer.” (Al-Mundhiri, 5/133)
Kindness to Animals as an Act of Worship
There are many texts indicating that kindness and gentleness to animals is an act of worship that can sometimes reach the highest levels of reward and the strongest reasons for divine forgiveness.
Narrated by Malik, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Hibban — on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him While a man was walking on a road, the heat became intense. He found a well, so he went down into it and drank. Then he came out and saw a dog panting and eating dirt from thirst. The man said: This dog has become as thirsty as I was. So he went down into the well, filled his shoe with water, then held it in his mouth until he climbed up and gave the dog water to drink. Allah thanked him for that and forgave him. They said: O Messenger of Allah, do we have a reward for animals? He said: “For every moist liver there is a reward.” In the narration of Ibn Hibban: “So Allah thanked him and admitted him to Paradise.”
Sahih Muslim — on the authority of Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “A prostitute saw a dog on a hot day circling a well, its tongue hanging out from thirst, so she drew water for it with her shoe, and was forgiven.” Allah forgave this woman her sins because of what she did in giving water to this dog.
Narrated by Ahmad, with trustworthy and well-known narrators — on the authority of Abdullah ibn Amr, may Allah be pleased with him A man came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said: I draw water from my cistern until I fill it, and then a camel belonging to someone else comes to me and I give it water to drink. Is there any reward for that? The Messenger of Allah said: “Indeed, there is a reward for every living thing.”
Narrated by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, Ibn Majah, and al-Bayhaqi — on the authority of Mahmud ibn al-Rabi’ on the authority of Suraqah ibn Ju’tham, may Allah be pleased with him O Messenger of Allah, a lost animal comes to my cistern, is there any reward for me if I give it water to drink? He said: “Give it water, for in every living creature there is a reward.”
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim — on the authority of Abdullah ibn Maslama on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “Horses are for three: for a man they are a reward, for a man they are a cover, and for a man they are a burden. As for the one who has a reward, it is a man who tethers them in the way of Allah and they spend a long time in a meadow or garden. Whatever they find in the meadow or garden in pursuit of that will be good deeds for him. If they cut their path and reach a high place or two, their watering and their tracks will be good deeds for him. If they pass by a river and drink from it and he does not want to give them water, that will be good deeds for him.”
Mistreating Animals is a Major Sin
To the same extent that Islamic law has elevated kindness to animals to the highest levels of worship, it has elevated abuse and torture of animals to the deepest levels of sin and disobedience.
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim — on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him “A woman was punished because of a cat that she did not feed or give water to, nor did she let it eat from the vermin of the earth.”
Narrated by al-Bukhari — on the authority of Asma’ bint Abi Bakr, may Allah be pleased with her The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “The Fire came close to me until I said: ‘O Lord, I am with them.’ Then there was a woman.” He said: “What is wrong with her?” They said: “She kept her cat until it died of hunger.”
Al-Nawawi — Sharh Sahih Muslim, 9/89 The woman was a Muslim and she entered the Fire because of it. This sin is not a small one, but rather it became a major one because of her persistence.
Narrated by Muslim — on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, passed by a donkey that had been branded on its face and said: “May God curse the one who branded it.” In another narration: “The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, forbade striking the face and branding the face.”
Narrated by al-Tabarani on the authority of Junada ibn Jarad, may Allah be pleased with him I came to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, with camels that had been branded on their noses. The Messenger of God said: “O Junada, you did not find a part of your body to brand except the face. You have retaliation before you.” He said: “You have to do it, O Messenger of God.”
Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, authenticated by him — on the authority of Jabir ibn Abdullah, may Allah be pleased with him A donkey passed by the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, with its face branded and its nostrils gushing with blood. The Messenger of Allah said: “May Allah curse whoever does this.” Then he forbade branding the face and striking the face.
Islamic law has forbidden the tying of animals — keeping them locked up and left until they die — and has likewise forbidden mutilation, which is the cutting off of an animal’s limbs.
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim — on the authority of al-Minhal on the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him “The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, cursed whoever mutilates an animal.”
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani — Fath al-Bari, 8/84 Cursing is one of the signs of prohibition, as is clear.
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani — Fath al-Bari, 12/65 In these hadiths there is a prohibition on torturing animals. Prohibition requires punishment, and punishment is an effect of the crime. This means that abusing and torturing an animal and not being kind to it is considered a crime in the view of Islamic law.
The prohibition on castration of animals is also mentioned in Islamic law. It is reported in Sharh Ma’ani al-Athar by al-Tahawi from the hadith of Abdullah ibn Umar that the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, forbade the castration of camels, cows, sheep, and horses.
Prohibition of Harmful Practices Toward Animals
Among the practices prevalent here and there are those that can only be carried out by torturing animals — such as bullfighting, cockfighting, ram fighting, and the like — or setting them up as targets for shooting, or killing them without benefit or legitimate purpose, or exhausting them with excessive hard work. Islamic law has considered all of these forbidden acts deserving of punishment.
Narrated by Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi — on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade inciting animals against each other before people.”
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim — on the authority of Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him We were with the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, on a journey. He set out to relieve himself, and we saw a red bird with two chicks. We took her chicks, and the red bird came and began to nest. When the Messenger of God came, he said: “Who has bereaved this bird of its young? Return her young to her.”
Narrated by al-Nasa’i and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih — on the authority of al-Sharid, may Allah be pleased with him “Whoever kills a bird in vain, it will cry out to God on the Day of Resurrection, saying: ‘O Lord, so-and-so killed me in vain and did not kill me for any benefit.’”
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim — on the authority of Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him Ibn Umar passed by some young men from Quraysh who were using a live bird as a target for their arrows, and they had given the owner of the bird every missed arrow. When they saw Ibn Umar, they dispersed. Ibn Umar said: Who did this? May God curse whoever did this. The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, “cursed whoever takes something with a soul as a target.”
Al-San’ani — Subul al-Salam, 4/86 The hadith forbade making an animal a target to be shot at, and the prohibition is for the sake of prohibition because it is its origin, and it is supported by the strength of the hadith “May Allah curse whoever does this.” The reason for the prohibition is that it causes pain to the animal.
Narrated in Sunan Abi Dawud — on the authority of al-Miqdad ibn Ma’dikarib, may Allah be pleased with him I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbidding the slapping of the cheeks of animals.
It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that a woman was riding a camel and it became frightened, so she cursed it. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, heard that and ordered that the camel be stripped of what was on it and sent away, as a punishment for its owner.
Etiquettes of Slaughter — Kindness Even in Death
Islam has given man the right to slaughter animals that are permitted to be eaten, but has commanded that slaughter be carried out with kindness.
Authenticated by al-Hakim according to the conditions of al-Bukhari — on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him A man laid a sheep down while sharpening his blade, so the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “Do you want to kill it twice? Why didn’t you sharpen your blade before you laid it down?”
Authenticated by al-Hakim — on the authority of Muawiyah ibn Murrah on the authority of his father, may Allah be pleased with him A man said: O Messenger of Allah, I feel pity for a sheep when I slaughter it. He said: “If you have pity on it, Allah will have pity on you.”
Narrated by Abd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf — on the authority of al-Wahin ibn Ata’ A butcher opened the door on a sheep to slaughter it, but it escaped from him, so he followed it and began to drag it by its leg. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “O Butcher, drive it gently.”
The Commander of the Faithful, Omar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “It is kindness to the slaughtered animal that you do not drag the slaughtered animal to the one who slaughters it.”
Rabi’a al-Ra’i said: “It is kindness that you do not slaughter one animal while another is looking at it.”
The Islamic jurists have determined that the slaughterer should not sharpen his blade in front of the animal being slaughtered, and should not violently throw it down. And Omar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, upon seeing a man dragging a sheep by its leg to slaughter it, said: “Woe to you, drive it to death in a beautiful way.”
Rights of the Riding Animal
The Right to Graze and Rest
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim through various chains of transmission — on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “If you travel in a fertile land, give the camels their share of the land.”
Al-Nawawi — Sharh Sahih Muslim, 8/128 The meaning of the hadith is to encourage kindness to animals and to take care of their interests. If they travel in fertile areas, they should shorten their pace and let them graze during some of the day and during the journey, so that they can take their share of the land with what they graze. The beginning of this hadith, narrated by Malik, states: “Allah is gentle and loves gentleness.”
The Limit on Riders
Al-Tabarani narrated in al-Awsat on the authority of Jabir: “The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade three people to ride on an animal.” In the narration of Abu Sa’id: “No one should ride on an animal more than two people.” Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated from Mursal Zadan that he saw three people on a mule and said: “Let one of you get off, for the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, cursed the third.” Al-Tabarani narrated on the authority of Ali: “If you see three people on an animal, stone them until one of them gets off.”
Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani — Fath al-Bari, 12/520 What was reported regarding the warning of this applies to the case where the animal is unable to bear it, such as a donkey, for example, and vice versa, such as a camel or a mule.
Al-Nawawi — Sharh Sahih Muslim, 9/135 Our school of thought and the school of thought of all scholars is that it is permissible for three people to ride on an animal if it is able to bear it.
The Prohibition on Using Backs as Pulpits
Narrated in Sunan Abi Dawud — on the authority of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace “Beware of using the backs of your animals as pulpits, for Allah has only subjected them to you so that they may take you to a land that you would not have reached except with great difficulty.”
The Right Not to Be Overloaded
Narrated by Ahmad and Abu Dawud — on the authority of Abdullah ibn Ja’far, may Allah be pleased with him One day the Messenger of Allah had me ride behind him. He entered a garden belonging to a man from the Ansar, and there was a camel in it. When it saw the Prophet, it moaned and its eyes welled up with tears. The Messenger of Allah came to it and stroked its hooves, and it remained silent. He then said: “Who owns this camel? Who owns this camel?” A young man from the Ansar came and said: “It belongs to me, O Messenger of Allah.” He said: “Do you not fear Allah regarding this animal that Allah has given you control over? It complained to me that you starve it and overwork it.”
Narrated by Ahmad in a long hadith on the authority of Yahya ibn Murrah I was sitting with the Prophet one day when a camel came trotting until its hump struck in front of him. He said: “Woe to you! Whose camel is this? It has something to do with it.” So I went out to look for its owner, and I found that it belonged to a man from the Ansar, so I called him to it. He said: “What is the matter with your camel?” He said: “By God, I do not know what is the matter with it. We worked on it and sprinkled water on it until it was unable to provide water for the thirsty. Last night we were ordered to slaughter it and divide its meat.” He said: “Do not do that. Give it to me or sell it to me.”
Narrated by Abu Dawud and Ibn Khuzaymah — on the authority of Sahl ibn al-Hanzaliyyah, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, passed by a camel whose back had stuck to its stomach and said: “Fear God with regard to these animals and ride them in a healthy manner.”
Narrated in Sahih Muslim — on the authority of Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: “While a man was leading his cow that had been loaded, the cow turned to him and said: I was not created for this, but I was only created for cultivation.”
Al-Qurtubi — al-Jami’ li-Ahkam al-Quran, 10/72 This hadith indicates that a cow is not to be loaded or ridden. In this verse is evidence of the permissibility of traveling with animals and carrying loads on them, but only to the extent that they can bear, without being excessive in the load and walking gently.
Abu Dawud narrated on the authority of al-Musayyab ibn Adam: I saw Umar ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, striking a camel driver and saying: Are you loading your camel with more than it can bear?
Jurisprudential Rulings Protecting Animals
Islamic jurisprudence is filled with rulings related to preserving the rights of animals. Among them is what the jurists decided regarding the obligation to water and feed animals. If an owner is negligent in this, the judge will compel him to do so. If he does not provide the animal with what is required in terms of proper feeding and watering, the judge has the authority to sell the animal and will not leave it in the hands of its owner to suffer.
Judge Abu Ya’la — Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah, p. 305 If there is someone among the livestock who uses it for something that it cannot bear to do all the time, the muhtasib will deny it and prevent him from doing it. If the owner claims that the animal can bear the burden of what he is using it for, the muhtasib may think about it, because even if it requires ijtihad, it is customary — it is referred to the custom and traditions of people, not to legal reasoning.
Al-Bazzaziyyah Fatwas, 6/370 The chosen opinion is that if an ant starts causing harm, there is nothing wrong with killing it, otherwise it is disliked, and throwing it into water is absolutely disliked — because it is unjustified torture. Killing a louse is not disliked, and burning it and burning a scorpion with fire is disliked. And if a cat is harmful, it should not be beaten or its ear scratched, but rather it should be slaughtered with a sharp knife.
Al-Nuwayri — Nihayat al-Arab, 9/258 And they heard some of the commentators say regarding the words of Allah the Almighty, “And those in whose wealth is a recognized right for the beggar and the deprived,” that the deprived is the dog.
Al-San’ani — Subul al-Salam, 1/232 After the hadith of the woman who entered Hell because of a cat she had locked up: The hadith is evidence of the prohibition of killing a cat because there is no punishment except for a forbidden act.
Muslims have reached an almost extraordinary level of kindness to animals in practice. Adi ibn Hatim used to break bread for ants and say: They are neighbors and they have a right — as narrated by Al-Nawawi in Tahdhib al-Asma’.
Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi was walking on a road accompanied by some of his companions when a dog appeared to them. His companion rebuked it, but the Imam forbade him and said: Didn’t you know that the road between me and it is shared?
Conclusion — The Difference Between the Two Views The contrast between the Biblical and Islamic approaches to animals is not incidental but structural. The Bible begins with dominion and produces, in its legal texts, the stoning of an ox for goring, the collective slaughter of animals belonging to an enemy people, and the destruction of a herd of swine for the accommodation of demons. Islam begins with honor and produces, in its law and its scholarly tradition, the entry of a man into Paradise for giving water to a dog, the condemnation of a woman to the Fire for starving a cat, the authority of a judge to forcibly sell a neglected animal, and the moral teaching that the road is shared between the imam and the dog walking beside him. The motivation for all of this, as the tradition makes clear, was the strong desire to apply the provisions of Islamic law in both letter and spirit — because in Islam, mercy to a living creature is not charity. It is worship.