Is it permissible to use animal dung as fuel for cooking, particularly in preparing bread? Taking into consideration that the bread is exposed to smoke which comes from the ignited dung.

All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, is His Slave and Messenger.

According to the soundest of the scholars' relevant opinions, it is permissible to use animal dung as fuel for cooking. If it is an eatable animal, its dung is pure and it is permissible to use it as fuel. The smoke in this case is pure because it comes from a pure source. If it is an uneatable animal, its dung is transformed into smoke and ash when it is used as fuel. According to the sounder of the scholars' two relevant opinions, when the impure substance is transformed into another one, this renders it pure. Consequently, the emitted smoke is pure and does not render the bread impure. Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Tayamiyyah said: "As for the smoke of the impure item, judging it is based on the following principle: when the impure substance is transformed into another one, it becomes pure and is treated like other pure things."

Scholars also unanimously agree that when wine is naturally transformed into vinegar, it becomes pure and lawful.  Meanwhile, transformation of such things is greater than transformation of wine. Those who adopt the opinion that there is a difference argued: The wine has become impure by transformation and it becomes pure by transformation as well. This is unlike the blood, the dead animal and the swine flesh.

Nevertheless, this differentiation is weak since all impurities are turned as such by means of transformation. That is because the blood is transformed from pure items and likewise the excrement and urine. Also, the impure animal was created from a pure substance.

Given that, the smoke and vapor which comes from an impure substance is pure because it is just molecules of air, fire and water. They do not include any impure components. This is according to the sounder of the relevant two opinions.

As for the other opinion which judges that such things are impure, an exception should be made for what is difficult to avoid according to the sounder of the two relevant opinions. Nevertheless, to judge that such things are impure and meanwhile consider unpardonable the things which are difficult to be avoided, this is the weakest of all the relevant opinions.