1000+ Comments on the Quran: Surah 66 -- At-Tahrim (Prohibition)

Revelation: Medina, 629 AD

(See general comments on Surahs here: Introduction)


 

The quotes and comments

001 "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, the unjust/immoral parts of sharia, and the Quran's rules for lying, thieving/looting, enslaving, raids and wars, plus the rules for treatment of girls and women - free and captured - and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between words and corresponding demands and deeds, we personally believe in the demands and deeds. Glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds are reliable. Glorifying words and claims are too cheap for anyone to use and disuse - when you read, judge from realities, not from propaganda.

002 66/1a: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)!” But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet was a person who could see at least parts of the unseen, and thus a person who:

Has the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.

Makes prophesies which always or at least mostly come true.

Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.

A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for any person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said which did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). But he did not guess the future correctly often - actually he statistically and according to the laws of probability should have "hit the mark" far more often by sheer chance than he did - there just are a few cases where Muslims will claim he foretold something correctly, and few if any of them are "perfect hits". But then the Quran makes it pretty clear that even though he was intelligent, he had little fantasy, and that he also was nearly unable to make innovative thinking (nearly all his tales and his ideas in reality were "borrowed" ones - though often twisted to fit his new religion).

The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, that he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying - of "seeing the unseen" - that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 above), and finally that both he and Islam said and says that Muhammad was unable to see the unseen (extra revealing here is that the old Biblical title for a prophet, was "a seer" - one who saw the unseen (f.x. 1. Sam. 9/9)) and also that Islam even today admits there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” (prophesying is a kind of miracle - seeing what has not yet happened). (This fact that Islam admits there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the revelation of the Quran" also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths, are made up stories - but all the same many a mullah and imam and scholar use these stories, which Islam admits are made up ones, as "proofs" for that Muhammad had supernatural powers and was a prophet. Honesty is not the strong side of Muslim religious leaders.) Also see 30/40a and 30/46a, and we also should add that his favorite wife (and infamous child wife) Aishah according to Hadiths (f.x. Al-Bukhari) stated that anyone saying Muhammad could foresee things, were wrong.

Verse 7/188b also is very relevant here: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen (= what is hidden or what has not happened yet*), I should have - - -". IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MUHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE THE PROPHETS' ABILITY TO SEE "THE UNSEEN" - he was no real prophet. Similar in 6/50a, 7/188b, 10/20c+d, 10/49a+b, and 72/26. 

As mentioned: Also relevant here is that the original title of the Jewish prophets as mentioned was not "prophet" but "seer" - one who saw at least parts of the unseen. (F.x. 1. Sam. 9/9#, 1. Sam. 9/11, 1. Sam. 9/18, 1. Sam. 9/19, 2. Kings. 17/13, 1. Chr. 9/22, 1. Chr. 26/28, 1. Chr. 29/29, 2. Chr. 9/29, 2. Chr. 16/7, 2. Chr.16/10, 2. Chr. 19/2, 2. Chr. 29/25, Amos 7/12, Mic. 3/7 - some places the two titles even are used side by side). Muhammad thus so definitely was no seer - prophet - even according to his own words; he had no "knowledge of the unseen". One more proof for that he was not in the same line - not to say league - as Jesus, if the Bible and/or the Quran tell the truth about Jesus on this point.

Many liked - and like - the title prophet, and there have been made other definitions for this title - the most common of these are "one who brings messages from a god", or "one who represents a god", or "one who acts/talks on behalf of a god". But the fact remains: Without being able to prophesy, he or she is no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something - ok. An apostle - ok. But not a real prophet.

***This is a fact no Muslim will admit: Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet or seer. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.

It also is remarkable that Muhammad relatively seldom used the title "prophet" about himself in the Quran. He mostly used the title "Messenger", even though messenger in reality means an errand-boy (Muslims try to make this title something big and imposing, but this is the meaning of it). "Prophet" on the other hand is a heavy and impressive title telling a lot about the person. May the reason for why he did not use it so often, be that he knew he did not have what it took to merit that title, and was a little careful using it, so as not to provoke questions or comments? (And is this also the reason why Muslims try to pretend that "messenger" is something more impressive and heavy than "prophet"?)

If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others.

Also see 30/40h and 30/47b above.

003 66/1b: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)!” A historical anomaly.

004 66/1c: "Why holdest thou (Muhammad*) to be forbidden what Allah has made lawful to thee?" It is unclear exactly what this refers to, except that it seems to have to do with "disturbance"/jealousy in his harem, which made him swear something he later regretted (and found an excuse for breaking his promise: It was something Allah had made lawful.)<`p>

005 66/1d: "- - - that which Allah has made lawful to thee (Muhammad*) - - -". This only is possible if Allah exists and is powerful enough to make laws.

006 66/1e: "But Allah is Oft-Forgiving - - -". Allah can forgive exactly nobody unless he exists and is a god.

007 66/1f: "But Allah is - - - Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, and the unjust/immoral parts of sharia, and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between words and corresponding demands and deeds, we at least always believe in the demands and deeds - words are too cheap to use and disuse.

#####008 66/2a: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are: 

Oaths you have given without really meaning them.

Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".

Can anyone please tell us what remains of trustworthiness of a Muslim's words and oaths - especially when you add to this the al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and the Kitman (the lawful half-truth) and permitted betrayals? - and his point of view that "war is deceit" (and everything is war). And much worse in this case: WHAT REMAINS OF MUHAMMAD'S TRUSTWORTHINESS - NOT TO MENTION THE QURAN'S THRUSTWORTHINESS?

##009 66/2b: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are:

Oaths you have given without really meaning them.

Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".

One of the at least 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus not in any line morally connected to Muhammad. NT tells you not to swear at all ( f.x. Matt. 5/34), and if you do it all the same, you have to keep your word.

010 66/2c: "- - - Allah is your (Muslims'*) Protector - - -". Not unless he exists and is something supernatural - preferably a god.

011 66/2d: “- - - He (Allah*) is full of Knowledge and Wisdom.” Not if he made the Quran. Also see 13/1g and 40/75 above.

012 66/3a: “- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -.” Wrong. See 66/1a above.

013 66/3b: "When the Prophet (Muhammad*) disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his consorts, and she divulges it (to another) - - -". It is not known who the two were or what it was all about.

014 66/3c: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

015 66/3d: "- - - and she the divulged it - - -". See 62/11c above.

016 66/3e: "- - - and Allah disclosed it to him (Muhammad*) - - -". Allah or somebody - but to name Allah, gives a better and more lasting effect.

017 66/3f: "- - - (Allah*) knows and is well acquainted with all things". The old enigma: Why then 2/233f above?

018 66/3-5: These are family problems in Muhammad's family. Do they belong in a holy book? And: The Quran is a copy of the "mother book" which Allah and his angels revere in his "home". For one thing, how did Muhammad's family problems end up in the "mother book" written may be billions of years earlier? - and for another; would a god revere texts like this?

019 66/4a: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

020 66/4b: "- - - truly - - -". See 2/2b above.

021 66/4c: "- - - truly Allah is his (Muhammad's*) Protector - - -". The same old fact: Only if Allah exists and is something supernatural. The same goes for Gabriel, who is not necessarily (unlikely) Yahweh's arch angel Gabriel, even if the name is the same. This will especially be the case if Muhammad's Gabriel in reality was someone from the dark forces, dressed up like Gabriel.

022 66/4d: "- - - truly Allah is his (Muhammad's*) Protector, and Gabriel, and (every) righteous one among those who believe - and furthermore, the angels will back him up". Muhammad had a formidable protection and help against his wives and others!

023 66/4e: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

024 66/4f: "- - - those who believe - - -". Muslims.

025 66/4g: "- - - and furthermore, the angels will back him (Muhammad*) up - - -". A point to remember when Muhammad explained Allah could not send down angels (to prove Allah's existence and Muhammad's connection to him), because that would mean the Day of Doom had come. It does not even belong in a book given to 124ooo prophets and messengers through all times and places, like the Quran and Hadiths claim (the Quran does not give any number).

026 66/5a: "It may be, if he (Muhammad*) divorced you (all (his wives*)), that Allah will give him in exchange Consorts better than you - who submit (their will's), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility) - - -". This verse simply does not belong in a "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is claimed to be an exact copy) revered by an omnipotent, omniscient god in Heaven.

027 66/5b: "- - - if he (Muhammad*) divorced you (all (his wives*)), that Allah will give him in exchange Consorts better than you - - -". Try to find something even remotely similar in NT!. One more at least 200% proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not on the same line of anything essential in the moral world.

028 66/5c: "- - - (for Faith) - - -". For Islam.

029 66/6a: "- - - ye who believe - - -". Muslims.

030 66/6b: "- - - a Fire - - -". Hell.

031 66/6c: “- - - a Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones - - -“. A fire is a chemical reaction – normally an oxidation – which releases heat, and so much heat that the reaction continues by itself and still releases enough surplus heath to make a visible flame. This does not happen with stones – and definitely not with the stones Muhammad and his congregation knew about. (There are Muslims telling Muhammad meant coal, but coal as a means of heating, was unknown in Arabia at the time of Muhammad and his congregation – which means it is very clear that his followers were meant to understand normal stones). Wrong.

032 66/6d: "- - - the Commands they (angels*) receive from Allah - - -". This only can be the case if Allah exists and if he in addition has power over angels. By the way: Why does a claimed omnipotent god who just can say "Be" and things are, need to order angels to do this and that?

033 66/6e: "- - - the Commands they (angels*) receive from Allah - - -". This verse is about Hell. Is this a proof for a theory many Islamic scholars have - that Allah is the real ruler of Hell? (The theory says that as Allah is omnipotent, Iblis cannot run Hell without Allah's permission, and he also cannot run it unless it is part of Allah's Plan.)

In that case Allah is quite a "good and benevolent" god.

034 66/7a: "- - - Unbelievers - - -". Non-Muslims.

035 66/7b: "- - - this Day - - -". The Day of Doom.

036 66/7c: "Ye (sinners in Hell*) are but requited for all that ye did!" Wrong. Very few sinners did so grave and many sins that they justly deserve the sadism they meet in Hell - and also the punishment is by far too long compared to the after all limited sins most sinners perform.

037 66/8a: "- - - ye who believe - - -". Muslims.

038 66/8b: "- - - in the hope that your (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) will - - - admit you to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow - - -". This only is possible if he exists and in addition is a major god.

039 66/8c: "- - - Gardens beneath which Rivers flow - - -". The Quran's and Islam's Paradise - see 10/9f above. It also is the most frequently used Arabism in the Quran.

040 66/8d: "- - - the Day that Allah will not permit to be humiliated - - -". The Day of Doom.

041 66/8e: “- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -.” Wrong. See 66/1a above.

042 66/8f: "- - - those who believe with him (Muhammad*) - - -". Muslims.

043 66/8g: "- - - their (Muslims'*) Light - - -". This is claimed to be the light of Allah - it at least cannot come from a book of a quality like the Quran - and besides the Quran overflowing with mistakes, etc., is not from any god. But even if here may be claimed a different kind of light from Allah, the claim is not true unless Allah exists and in addition is a god (if he is something from dark forces pretending to be a god, he hardly offers real light).

044 66/8h: "- - - their right hand - - -". The right hand was the good or lucky hand in the old Arabia, whereas the left was the bad or unlucky one. A number of references to this, may indicate that Allah had some superstitions, and partly the same superstitions like the old Arabs - likely a coincidence (?)

045 66/8i: "- - - Forgiveness - - -". Only 2 can forgive - the victim and a god. Thus Allah cannot forgive unless he exists and is a god. (He cannot forgive if he is no god, because then there is no sin in disbelieving that he is a god, and thus there is nothing to forgive).

046 66/8j: "- - - Thou (Allah*) hast power over all things". He at least never clearly has shown that power - till now it all has been only empty words.

047 66/9a: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)!” Wrong. See 66/1a above.

048 66/9b: “O Prophet! (Muhammad*) Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them.” Muhammad is the example for all Muslims. Muslims will excuse Muhammad with that this is about war – but is that any excuse, when practically all raids and wars were initiated by the Muslims? This verse abrogated (and contradicts) at least these verses (here are 88 out of the 124 Muslim scholars say are abrogated by 9/5): 2/109, 2/190, 2/256, 2/272, 3/20, 4/62, 4/81, 4/90, 5/3, 5/28, 5/48, 5/99, 6/60, 6/66, 6/70, 6/104, 6/107, 6/112, 6/158, 7/87, 7/188, 7/193, 7/199, 8/61, 9/68, 10/41, 10/99, 10/102, 10/108, 11/12, 11/121, 13/40, 15/3, 15/94, 16/35, 16/82, 16/125, 16/126, 16/127, 17/54, 18/29, 18/56, 19/39, 20/130, 21/107, 21/112, 22/49, 22/68, 23/54, 23/96, 24/54, 26/216, 27/92, 28/50, 28/55, 29/18, 29/46, 32/30, 34/25, 34/28, 35/23, 35/24a, 36/17, 39/41, 41/34, 42/6, 42/15, 42/48, 43/83, 43/89, 44/59, 45/14, 46/9, 46/135a, 46/135b, 46/135b, 50/39, 50/45, 51/50-51, 51/54, 52/45, 52/47, 53/29, 67/26, 73/10, 73/11, 79/45, 86/17, 88/22, 109/6. They are all quoted under 9/5. (At least 88 abrogations).

049 66/9c: "- - - Unbelievers - - -". Non-Muslims.

##050 66/9d: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell - - -.” A clear order and a clear explanation why they are sub-human, and thus deserve to die. “Untermench” always are ok to kill – they deserve it. It also is the right of the “Übermench” to do so – and in the Quran no doubt the Muslims are the “Übermench”. (Quite like the Nazi philosophy - except that according to the Nazis, Arabs were "Untermench".(Übermench = super humans, Untermench = sub humans.)

051 66/10a: "Allah sets forth - - -". This he only can do if he exists.

052 66/10b: "- - - Unbelievers - - -". Non-Muslims.

053 66/10c: "- - - the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut (Lot*) - - - were false to their (husbands) - - -". This contradicts the Bible. There is mentioned nothing like this about the wife of Noah, and as for the death of the wife of Lot it had nothing to do with being false to her husband - she just turned to look at what happened, something the angels had warned against, but it is not indicated it was because of disobedience (when dramatic things happen, it is normal and human to react to them). Simply contradicted by the Bible by not mentioning anything like the Quran claims. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

054 66/10d: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

055 66/10e: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

056 66/10f: The contents of 66/10 are not from the Bible. The Bible is the only source for information about this. As the Quran is not from a god, and the information thus not from a god, from where did Muhammad get this information - or "information"?

057 66/11a: The wife of the Pharaoh (Ramses II) is indicated to be a strongly believing Muslim. Now a pharaoh normally had a number of wives – and a mighty one like Ramses II not least (it is known he had 67 sons (though the number varies some), but we have not seen the number of wives). They may have had different religions – especially the possible ones not born in Egypt. But it is utterly unknown to science that one of them can have been a Muslim 2000 years before Muhammad. Actually – and in spite of the Quran’s and of Islam’s repeated claims of being an age-old religion, science has found not one single trace of a religion like Islam anywhere or any time before 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission (and worse: Also Islam has been unable to find provable such traces) – and of really monotheistic religions only the Mosaic (Jewish), the Christian, and to a degree the Zoroastrians in Persia (+ the episode with the sun god of Akn Aton and the small monotheistic sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by the Jews and the Christians). Islam has to bring proofs. Actually with our knowledge to the mighty Ramses II, we believe the whole of this verse is (part of) a made up tale.

058 66/11b: "- - - those who believe - - -". Muslims.

059 66/11c: "- - - the Garden - - -". The Quran's and Islam's paradise - see 10/9f above.

060 66/11d: "- - - those that do wrong". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with their own partly immoral moral code.

061 66/11e: "- - - the Wife of Pharaoh (indicated by the context that it was she who found Moses, and thus of the family of Pharaoh Ramses II*) - - -". Comment (YA5549): "Traditionally, she is known as 'Aishah, one of four perfect women, the other three being Mary, mother of Jesus, Khadijah the wife of the prophet, and Fatima his daughter.

In the Bible it was a daughter of the pharaoh who found Moses, not a wife of him. The Bible also gives no other information about her, than that she was the daughter of the pharaoh, and that she found Moses. From where did Muhammad get the claimed information about her? As the Quran is not from a god, the only possible source is the Bible - and there the information about this is partly different and partly not existing.

As for Mary we refrain from commenting. 

As for Khadijah only the positive sides of her are ever mentioned by Islam - a correct picture is impossible to make. But a woman finding a 15 year younger husband not very often is a perfect human being.

Also for Fatimah Islam tries only to tell the positive sides. But no perfect woman would fight the caliph so as she should get the inheritance after Muhammad instead of Islam, like she did. A perfect woman also would not be angry and upset for the rest of her life for this (though admittedly she lived only half a year after Muhammad's death) because she did not get that inheritance instead of Islam.

062 66/11f: "- - - do wrong - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

063 66/11g: Short statement: The contents of 66/11 are not from the Bible. The Bible is the only source for information about this. As the Quran is not from a god, and the information thus not from a god, from where did Muhammad get this information - or "information"?

**064 66/12a: “And Mary the daughter of ‘Imran - - -”. Once more this famous mistake. Imran was the father of Moses and Aaron - - - but they lived (if they are not fiction) some 1200 years before Mary, mother of Jesus. The pharaoh of Moses f. x. was Ramses II according to science, and we know when he lived. Muslims try to explain this with that it was another Imran, but science agrees on that it is the same one, and that Muhammad here made a genuine mistake. This even more so as Hadith shows that Muhammad later was told about his mistake, and tried to “explain” it away, but without success.

#####065 66/12b: "- - - (Mary*) who guided her chastity - - -". In itself this is not an essential piece of information, and well known to all Christians. But there are Muslims throwing around dirt about Mary just being a prostitute, Jesus being the son of a Roman soldier, etc. - if one has no valid arguments against an opponent, one at least can slander her or him. If you meet one of those, you may tell him - it is mostly from men you hear it (or see if f.x. on Internet) that if he is right, this means that the Quran in case is lying at least 4 places - 4/47c, 19/20-21, 21/91a, and here.

066 66/12c: (A66/26): “- - - We (Allah*) breathed into (her (Mary’s*) body) Our spirit - - -.” Does this refer to how Jesus was created? – or does it refer to the normal transfer of spirit that according to Islam makes a fetus to a human, and which according to Islam happens 5 months before the baby is born? Nobody knows – and this is an essential question in just this case. But the text is not clearer than this.

067 66/12d: "- - - truth - - -". See 2/2b and 66/11d above.

068 66/12e: "- - - he (Mary's*) Lord (god*) - - -". The Quran claims that Mary believed in Allah. If you know nothing about Israel at that time, you of course are free to believe it. But it is strongly contradicted by the Bible, which says her god was Yahweh, not Allah. We also now are far enough into the twilight of history to know that it is highly unlikely that any Jews believed in al-Lah/Allah or in a religion like Islam around year 1 BC (or really around ca. 6 BC, as our year numbers are not 100% correct - they made a mistake when they calculated the year of the birth of Jesus, when they started to recon time from his birth). No Allah involved in Israel at the time of Jesus according to historical science. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

Surah 66: Sub-total: 68 + 19.066 = 19.134 comments.


>>> Go to Next Surah

>>> Go to Previous Surah

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".