2

The website Al-Islam.org has the following hadith (This link will direct you to the narration on the website):

Muhammad b. Ja’far al-Bursi narrated from Muhammad b. Yahya al-Armani from Muhammad b. Sinan from al-Mufaddal b. ‘Umar al-Ju’fi from Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Sadiq, peace be upon him, from his forefathers from Amir al-Mu’minin, peace be upon him, that he said: ‘The Messenger of Allah, blessings on him and his family, said: “Beware of eating ganglia (al-ghadad), for it stirs up leprosy.”’ He said: “The Jews were restored to health because of their avoiding the eating of ganglia.” He said: “When you see those afflicted with leprosy, ask your Lord for good health and do not be unmindful of Him.”

I haven't found any sources apart from the one above which state any connection between ganglia and leprosy.

Are there any additional accounts or sources (scientific and otherwise) which confirm that ganglia can cause leprosy or at least state that they are inter-connected?

EDIT:

Thanks to Jan Doggen, I know that al-ghadad refers to endocrine glands. Is there any evidence to suggest that eating the endocrine glands of animals can cause leprosy? Additionally, is there evidence to back hdhondt's claim that leprosy can only be caused by the presence of a certain bacterium in the animal?

5

The only other animal that can catch leprosy is the Armadillo and eating Armadillo meat has been linked to catching leprosy in the southern USA.

However, armadillos are new world creatures, and leprosy is an old world disease.

So, the claim is nonsense unless they're talking about cannibalism.

  • 4
    Most religious claims from all religions are nonsense. You don't get a pass on skeptics. – Graham Chiu Mar 11 '18 at 17:23
  • 2
    @GrahamChiu Most religious claims from all religions are nonsense. This is your opinion. I urge you to refrain from making sweeping statements such as these. Besides, your answer, apart from the last line, proves your point. It won't hurt to be less blunt. – a_sid Mar 11 '18 at 20:57
  • 2
    The truth is often both blunt and disrespectful to religious figures... If there is some sort of dilemma in choosing here, I'd vote for the truth. The claim is literally non sense. – Stian Yttervik Mar 14 '18 at 9:14
  • 1
    @StianYttervik We can advocate the truth while being considerate towards one another. A milder word than "nonsense" is also sufficient to express one's sentiments about this subject. – a_sid Mar 15 '18 at 2:43
  • 2
    @a_sid How about complete fabrication ? – Graham Chiu Mar 15 '18 at 2:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .