Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 1: Chapter 6


MUHAMMAD'S WOMEN

Muhammad's main interests were to gain respect, power, riches - at least for bribes - - - and women. This is easy to see when you read the Quran, at least if you read it with also your brain and knowledge, not only your eyes, open. We may add that just these 4 points - respect, power, riches, and women - rather frequently were heavily interesting for many self proclaimed prophets through the times.

In addition there of course is the interest for religion. For some prophets this interest is honest and strong. For others it has been and is a means for power and riches - and women. As for Muhammad science tends to believe that he perhaps himself believed in the beginning, but became more "casual" about it later on. (This may indicate that the theory that he had f.x. Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE - cfr. BBC program "God on the Brain" 20. March 2003 and BBC Two 17. April 2003) is the correct one. Muhammad was an intelligent man - he may well have been shocked to begin with when he started to get the attacks and did not understand what it was, and may have believed it was supernatural. But science also tends to believe that over time perhaps he understood that they were illusions, and what is sure - and easy to see from both the Quran and from Hadiths - that over some time he became more calculating. This may be especially striking to see from the way Islam was changed from rater peaceful to a religion of thieving, rape, suppression, blood, and war, after Muhammad started as a highwayman and robber baron shortly after he came to Medina in 622 AD.)

Muhammad personally raped at least 2 women – Rayhana bint Amr in 627 AD and Safiyya bint Huayay in 628 AD. In both cases after he had had their families made slaves or murdered - included husbands murdered. Safiyya was just 17 and newly-wed – Muhammad approaching 60 (as one does not know for sure when he was born (even though 570 normally is said) he even may have been 60); it quite likely was a nice experience for her. They both were prisoners of war and made slaves by Muhammad. It is not known if he raped more captive women or slaves, but the casual way his men reacted to what he did, may indicate something. Also Hadiths may indicate things - like "we enjoyed to practice coitus interrupts" with female prisoners (= rape them, but "get out" before the semen "got in"), which tells miles about the Islamic moral of that time (and forever as the Quran is forever) - and the fact that Muhammad told them not to interrupt the rape, because it was for Allah to decide if there was going to be a child or not (from Al-Bukhari) - tells even more, also about Muhammad. And honestly it also tells something that at other times he demanded that they should interrupt the rapes, not because of humanity or anything towards the victims, but because pregnant women brought in less money than not pregnant ones.

There also is the question if Maria was raped - being his slave at least she had no choice but to "satisfy" him. (But some question if the likely sterile - at least nearly - Muhammad sired her son Ibrahim, or if she had "visited" a to her more attractive man some times.)

It is well known that he had something like a dozen wives (11 for sure). Less well known are his 2 concubines, his 16 short-time wives, and the 7 who may or may not have been formally married to him. 36 all together that we know by names (beware that the names may be a bit differently spelled from one source to another – it often is like that when one translate (or transcribe) from one alphabet to another).

This list is partly from Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation (Dr. Rous Hangar). Beware that different sources do not always agree exactly on when marriages took place. (When there are differences we follow Dr. Homa Darby’s information).

Muhammad’s “long-time” wives:

1) Khadijah. Married in 595 AD. She was 40 (though it is possible she was younger – some Muslims claim so, and the fact that there were 5 or likely 6 and perhaps even 8 children in the marriage, makes it possible that they here have a point, as having 5 or 6 or 8 children after 40 is a bit unusual). Muhammad was 25 (or may be 26 if he was born in 569 AD and not in 570 AD). It is said to have been a happy marriage, though there have been raised questions, based on at least 2 facts:

  1. Khadijah likely had 6 children during the marriage: 2 sons - Qasim (died as an infant, but from the name of his firstborn son Muhammad got the name - his kunja - abu Qasim = father of Qasim), Abdallah (= the same name as Muhammad's father - also died as an infant, and we seldom meet him in Islamic literature), and 4 daughters - Fatimah (the only one of his children who survived him, and only by half a year- married to Ali, later the 4. caliph, and had 2 sons Hasan - died 670 AD - and Husayn - died 680 AD), Zaynab (died 629 AD), Ruqayyah (died 624 AD), and Umm Kulthum (died 630 AD). (Muhammad himself died 8. June 632 AD) But none of all his other women except one single one (the slave Marieh) had children with him, even if he was said to be very active sexually. One easy explanation that circulates, is that it could have been a marriage of convenience so that Khadijah had an alibi when “tending” another "connection" she for some reason had to keep secret – such things has happened many times through history, and often what happened was just this; that a rich woman married a poor man to get this alibi. If then Muhammad was sterile, this easily explains his later lack of children. The son Marieh bore, Ibrahim, may be a result of Muhammad not being 100% sterile – or of one or more secret visits Marieh may have made somewhere.
  2. There also is a slight possibility that he had one or two more son(s) with Khadijah - Tahir and/or Tayyab - but also he/they in case died very young. But it is possible that one or both of these two names were other names for Abdullah or Qasim.

There also is the possibility that some or all the children with Khadijah in reality were her children from her previous marriages (Islamic sources indicates that she had 4 when she married Muhammad), taken over by Muhammad - the knowledge about them really is that vague.

Khadijah died in December 619 AD). Already 2-3 months later (February 620 AD) Muhammad remarried – rather quickly for a sorrow-stricken man. (You never find these two facts mentioned in glossy “official” papers about Muhammad, but brains are speculating and tongues are wagging).

2) Sauda. As mentioned they married in 620 AD. She was 20 years younger than him. (He 50, she 30).

3) Aisha. His famous and infamous child bride. She was the daughter of his good friend and co-worker Abu Bakr (later the first caliph). Likely born in 613 AD. They married in 619 AD, when she was just 6 years old and he some 43 years older than her, though married life – sex – did not start until 3 years later, when she was 9. Many react against his marrying a child and having sex with a 9-year-old (the reason why many Muslims accept child marriage and sex from the girl is 9). But the really black spot is not that he had sex with a 9 year old girl. The really black spot is that he had a child as his favorite wife all through her childhood. (Some Muslims claim sex did not start until she was 17 – but the sources are pretty unanimous on this point).

4. Hafsa. Married in 625 AD. She was 18, he 55 – 37 years her senior.

5. Umm Salama in 626. She was 29, he 56 - age difference 27 years.

6. Zainab – also in 626 AD. She was 30 – age difference 26 years.

7. Juweria – taken as war booty, and married him to free her tribe in 627 AD. She was 20, he 57 – 37 years difference.

8. Zainab – another one with that name. Married in 628 AD – she 38 years, he 58 = 20 years difference. She was married to his adopted son Zaid, but divorced Zaid to marry Muhammad. Even though Muslims do their best to smooth over the moral questions here, this is a black spot almost as bad as the pedophile story with Aisha, partly because in Arabia it was reckoned to be incest. Also the “explanation” which was given – that Muhammad married her to show that a man could marry the divorced wife of an adopted son - was very lame and little intelligent (a “revealed” verse had done just the same – and how urgent was a demonstration? – after all it is not often a man and his daughter-in-law wants to marry.)

9. Ramla – also in 628 AD, and also she 38 years old and 20 years his junior.

10. Safiya – once more in 628 AD. She had married just days before, but Muhammad attacked their home (Khaybar). Her family was killed or enslaved and husband Kinana tortured to death to force him to tell about money Muhammad believed they had, which Muhammad wanted to steal, and the same night he "took her to his tent" and raped her – the story does not say how many times - and while one of his men kept guard outside in order to help Muhammad if she resisted so much that it might become dangerous for him. He married her shortly after. Safijja was just 17, Muhammad as said nearly 60 – yes, most likely a nice experience for her - - - and a serious question mark to the Islamic statement that Muhammad was free from sin.

11. Maimunah – the last one in 628 AD. She was 27 years – 31 years younger than him.

With the exception of the first time - the rich widow - he liked much younger wives – from 20 to 47 years younger than himself.

Muhammad’s concubines:

  1. Maria. An Egyptian colored slave given as a gift to Muhammad from the king (?) of Egypt. She got the child Ibrahim, but he died about 1 year old. Maria was Coptic Christian, and it is said the reason why she refused to marry him which he is said to have wanted, was that she refused to leave her religion and become Muslim.
  2. Rayhana bint Amr. Like Safiya, she was taken into slavery and raped in a similar way as Safiya (one year earlier than Safiya) – after her family was killed or enslaved as said above. (“bint” = “daughter of”). But unlike Safiya, Rayhana refused to marry him afterwards.

Muhammad’s short-time wives:

  1. Asma bint Neman.
  2. Ghotileh bint Ghaice
  3. Malaeke bint Kaab.
  4. Bent Jandeb bint Damareh.
  5. Fatima bint Sahahk.
  6. Omreh bint Yazid.
  7. Ayleh bint Zobyan.
  8. Saba bint Sofyan.
  9. Nesha bint Rafieh.
  10. Ghazieh bint Jaber.
  11. Fatima bint Shoreh.
  12. Sanaa bint Salim.
  13. Alshanba bint Omar.
  14. Kholeh bint Alhavhil.
  15. Shargh bint Khalifeh.
  16. Kolleh bint Hakim.

Women who may be or may be not were (formally) married to Muhammad:

  1. Habibeh bint Sahl.
  2. Laili bint Khatem.
  3. Omeh bint Abi Taleb.
  4. Dobeh bint Amir.
  5. Safieh bint Beshameh.
  6. Emareh or Emameh bint Hafzeh.
  7. Omeh Habib bint Alabas.

These are the ones one knows by name. As said it is not known whether or not he raped more slaves or war prisoners or in other ways had other women.

Muhammad had special license from Allah to have many women – something which is not unusual for prophets - or “prophets” - of new sects or religions. Some "prophets" do like sex and women.

There is another side with Muhammad's sex life that Muslims never discuss: Why did a man so fixated on sex - like too many self proclaimed "prophets" - have so few children?"

One theory is that he in reality was sterile.

Well, he had most likely 6 children (or perhaps 8) with his first wife. There are 3 possible explanations for this:

  1. The children or some/many of them were Khadijah's from her earlier marriage, but adopted by Muhammad.
  2. He for some reason became sterile later.
  3. Or his marriage to Khadijah was a formality. There are lots of cases through history where rich women bought herself a husband as an alibi to be able to have "connections" with another interesting, but prohibited man. And a poor man was cheaper to buy than a rich one - Muhammad at that time was a poor man. It also here should be remembered that the sexual moral was very much looser in Arabia before Islam - sex and alcohol were the "two delightful things". The idea of an arranged marriage to be able to have another, secret lover would be very far from impossible at that time.

He also had a son (Ibrahim) with his colored slave Maria - a son who died 1 year old. Also here two explanations are possible:

  1. He was not 100% sterile, and once under very lucky conditions he succeeded.
  2. Or Marieh visited someone one or more dark night(s).

Also see 8/69a-d.

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

001 13/38b: "We (Allah*) did send Messengers before thee (Muhammad*), and appointed for them wives and children - - -". We quote A1861: "All prophets of whom we have any detailed knowledge, except one (Jesus*), had wives and children (= Muhammad was a normal prophet also in this way - well, extra normal with 36 known women). But this claim needs a selective use of the expression "detailed knowledge". Also not all prophets are known to have had wives - f.x. it is unlikely John the Baptist had a wife - and for many that situation simply is not mentioned in the Bible. Also the Quran does not mention any wives for the claimed Arab prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb. Use the expression "detailed knowledge" selectively enough, and you get the answer you want.

But more dishonest here - a Kitman (lawful half-truth) - is that one does not mention that none - not one - of the prophets in the Bible had a big harem (beware that f.x. David and Solomon are kings, but not reckoned among the prophets in the Bible). Of claimed prophets only Muhammad had - science knows the name of 35 women who for shorter or longer time belonged to his harem (in addition there was Khadijah, but she died before he got a harem). Also in this way Muhammad does not belong in the line of Yahweh's prophets in Israel.

002 24/11b: The background for this verse was that Muhammad's wife Aisha - his child wife - in one occasion spent several hours alone in the wilderness together with a young man, and there was a lot of rumors because of this. According to our point of view it is highly unlikely that anything happened between them, but the only "proof" for that it was so, was that Muhammad some weeks later claimed he received verses from Allah saying she was not guilty - hardly a strong proof as it came from a man with Muhammad's morality and reliability. An extra point here is that this child - around 626 AD - was Muhammad's favorite wife, and he could hardly keep her if her reputation was tarnished, so he had a strong motif for getting (?) such verses. This was one of the not few times Allah(?) was a nice helper for Muhammad. But remember that when Muslims say Aishah was proved not guilty, it is not true - neither the Quran nor Muhammad is reliable witnesses/proofs. It is likely she/they told the truth, but nothing was ever proved. Also see 24/11-16 below. It also is very clear from Hadiths that Muhammad himself suspected her - his behavior the first weeks clearly shows that. So when he scolds others for suspecting immoral things had happened, it was double moral form his side. Not a very sympathetic side of human nature.

Another point: The Quran claims it is a copy of the "mother book" in Heaven - revered by Allah and made before the Earth was created. How come that this insignificant episode in the then distant future could be noted down in such a book some billion years before it happened? - especially so if man has free will, so Allah could know nothing for sure? And how much did the 124ooo (according to Hadiths) earlier prophets understand from these verses in their copies of the "mother book"/Quran?

003 24/11-16: This refers to the incident with Aisha - Muhammad’s child wife - and a young man. The slander afterwards was not an obvious lie like Muhammad later liked to claim. That it was not obvious - something also his own initial reaction clearly demonstrated - was and is so obvious that it is clear an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was not telling the truth when he said it was obvious. (He used many days to decide to believe her.) Also they were not really proved innocent - there only were some convenient verses in the Quran some weeks later, and the Quran far from is reliable. (But there is a fair chance that the two told the truth). Also see 24/11b above.

Muhammad in this case definitely did not behave like a gentleman, and it is very unlikely that his behavior did not "put wood to the fire" and provoke more and/or stronger slander. Not the right man to blame others for bad conduct.

The story also tells not a little about the person Muhammad.

004 24/12d: "This (charge against Aisha) is an obvious lie". It might have been a lie, but it was not an obvious lie, something Muhammad's own reaction very clearly prove - so clearly that an intelligent person like Muhammad understood he was lying when he used the word "obvious" - and it is not the only time he lies in the Quran. He also was intelligent enough to know that as it far from was an obvious lie, he here was slandering those he talked to.

005 24/13b: "Why did they (the ones talking about Aisha*) not bring four witnesses - - -?" For the very obvious reason that no witnesses existed, as the two had been alone - this is a rhetoric and hypocritical question where Muhammad knew the answer very well on beforehand. A dishonest way of augmenting, and a dishonest way to move the focus away from Aisha to others. Psychologically may be a wise sentence - but dishonest. This question was nonsense from the moment it was asked.

The request also is a bit ironic, as Muhammad never proved anything himself - claims and invalid "signs" and as invalid "proofs", but never a valid proof for anything central in his new religion.

06 33/28c: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Say to thy Consorts - - -". Allah frequently took part in the private life of Muhammad - via a book may be made before the universe (see 51/47c) was made (13.7 billion years ago) and in any case revered by Allah and his angels as the "Mother of the Book" (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22). Believe it if you want - if it is true, it is a 1000% (one thousand %) proof for that no living being ever had a trace of free will throughout the billions of years, and that physicians are wrong about things like chaos and entropy - some of the most basic elements of physics.

007 33/28-29: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Say to thy Consorts: ‘If it be that ye desire the life of this World, and its glitter – then come! I will provide for your enjoyment and set you free in a handsome manner. But if ye seek Allah and His Messenger, and the Home of the Hereafter, verily, Allah has prepared for the well-doers amongst you a great reward”. Muhammad had his women problems – and Allah (?) helped him – this is not the only time. Look at this text, take into account the intense religious fervor of Medina at that time, the impression and one-mindedness that is the normal effect on people in intense, one-sided religious hotspots – Islam is just not the only one through history or resent history - plus the naivety that follows lack of education and one-sided propaganda, plus the fact that the women knew what they had, but had every reason to fear the future if they were alone in a society with small possibilities for earning their own living, and in a society where they would forever be stamped for leaving “the Prophet” if they were “set free” - - - there is no doubt that Muhammad knew his psychology and people. He used one of the age-old strategies the powerful and resourceful through ages has used, and uses, to manipulate his surroundings – included his women. And at places in the Quran he is backed up by his god – is that really a task for a god? – and is it something that belongs in a “Mother Book” revered by the omniscient and omnipotent god in his Heaven? (And if man – and women – has free will, so that the future is not locked – how could these details be written in the book billions of years before it happened? – that could only be done if man and animals all are puppets on a string totally without a free will.)

Muhammad was intelligent and manipulating.

And to the degree this story could be a model for others, this was how life was and is for Muslim women for all future, for Muhammad was and is the great idol and moral ideal.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proven efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is very normal.

008 33/28-33a: This about Muhammad's wives and rules to make them stay quiet and satisfied - double punishment and double reward, etc., and other places in the Quran forbidden to remarry, ordered to talk from behind a curtain, his daughter Fatima promised a top position in Heaven, etc. contradicts the Bible in that such rules were not given to any of the Biblical prophets The same god would give at least somewhat similar rules to all his representatives - which he did to all the Biblical prophets, but not to Muhammad. Muhammad even had permission to rape women (f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), an absolutely NO for all other prophets. Very clear indications for that Muhammad did not belong to the same line of prophets as the Biblical prophets included Jesus, and did not get his claimed revelations from the same god. Too different rules.

009 33/28-33b: One question: Do private stuff like this belong in a holy book? - or as part of a religion?

010 33/30b: “O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled for her, and that is easy for Allah”. For comments see 33/28-29 above – and also note that the god is easy to use, for Muhammad like for many self centered human manipulators in societies where religion is a dominant presence.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is typical for many such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - we include it also in the chapter about women’s life under Islam.

This strong warning also means that Muhammad did not trust his women too much - his reaction to Aisha's "adventure" proves the same.

But: Do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?

011 33/31a: “But if any of you (Muhammad's many women*) is devout in the service of Allah and His Messenger (also to solve such problems he glues himself to his platform of power – the god*), and works righteousness – to her shall We (Allah*) grant her reward twice: and We have prepared for her a generous sustenance.”

As said above: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proven efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but all what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - for everybody and for all times.

33/30+31 together make a case of "the stick and the carrot" - presumable from Allah. But does private details from the claimed prophet's wives' and other women's private life belong in a holy book delivered by a god?

But do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - or as part of a religion? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?

012 33/31f: "- - - We (Allah*) have prepared for her (any of Muhammad's wives and other women*) a generous Sustenance (in Paradise*)". Also for the wives of Muhammad parts of the reward were promises of a nice next life - - - if Allah and his paradise exist. And if not Muhammad had his pleasure for cheap money.

But do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"?

013 33/32b: “O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled for her, and that is easy for Allah”. For comments see 33/28-29 above – and also note that the god is easy to use, for Muhammad like for many self centered human manipulators in societies where religion is a dominant presence.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is typical for many such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - we include it also in the chapter about women’s life under Islam.

This strong warning also means that Muhammad did not trust his women too much - his reaction to Aishah's "adventure" proves the same.

But again: Do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - or as part of a religion? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?< And does this kind of stuff belong in a book a god would revere?/p>

014 33/32d: “O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (Allah), be not too complaisant of speech lest one in whose heart is disease should be moved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just".

Once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life. Here Muhammad puts extra pressure on his women to make sure they "behave".

##Another question: Does Muhammad's private sex life and problems with all his women - married and not married - belong in a timeless holy "Mother Book" revered by the god and his angels in Heaven? - or in a religion? And how come it could be reliably written in that book before the world was created, if Muhammad or his women or anybody else had free will and could change their minds and thus history?

015 33/33a: “And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger (!!*). And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye Members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.” Yes, this is how the omnipotent, mighty god speaks to solve Muhammad's daily family life according to the revered "Mother Book" in his own home in his Heaven (of which the Quran is a copy, according to Islam).

Like said before: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life. Allah orders Muhammad's wives to be good girls - a nice help for Muhammad. But is it a job for a god? - and is it text worthy a "Mother of the Book" that an omniscient god reveres - reveres - in his Heaven?

As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are taught that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers - the two are mutually excluding each other.)

016 33/33i: "- - - Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you (Muhammad's women, included his wives*) - - -". Does this private matter (included trouble with Muhammad's women) belong in a holy book sanctified and revered by a god? - or in a religion? And are texts like this something for an omnipotent god to revere?

017 33/34a "- - - in your (Muhammad's women's) homes (they had one each*) - - -". The women are time anomalies for everyone reading a copy of the timeless claimed "Mother Book" - like the Quran - before this took place. There are legion such anomalies in the Quran.

p>018 33/37a: This verse does not at all belong in any holy book, nor as part of a religion - this is solving of Muhammad's family affairs. (Muhammad fell in love - or in desire - with the wife, Zaynab, of his adopted son, Zaid. According to old Arab law an adopted son was a son, and a father-in-law could not marry his daughter-in-law. But Allah changed the law for Muhammad, there was a divorce - what could Zaid say against his mighty "father"? (Muslims claim the marriage with Zaid was not a good one - that be as it may, it anyhow was a betrayal of Zaid, and even most Muslims do not feel entirely well about this marriage) - - - and Muhammad had himself yet another wife. Also see 33/37.

019 33/37c: "- - - one who had received the grace of Allah and thy (Muhammad's*) favor - - -". This refers to Muhammad's adopted son Zaid bin Harithah. Muhammad became interested in his wife, and with some help from Allah (?) he got her.

Zaid originally was adopted by Muhammad, and his name was Zaid bin Muhammad - in accordance with local laws. When Muhammad fell for Zaid's wife, Zaynab, Muhammad created artificial distance between Zaid and himself, partly by decreeing that adoption was not permitted, and thus his adoption of Zaid not valid (Muslims after this story can take children into their family, but not formally adopt them), and partly by decreeing that it was wrong not to use the name of the natural father, as the official father (bin = son of, bint = daughter of). All this because according to the local laws it was prohibited and a grave sin for a man to marry the wife of his son - adopted or real. Not bad for a god to change laws to settle family problems and satisfy lust for Muhammad.

020 33/37g: "- - - We (Allah*) joined her (Zaid's wife Zaynab*) in marriage to thee (Muhammad*): in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marrying with the wives of their adopted sons (after divorce - widows not mentioned*)". This is perhaps the thinnest excuse we have ever heard for a serious selfish deed.

  1. For one thing: Is this a situation which happens so often that it merits a dramatic demonstration?
  2. For another: Many a doubter would be willing to bet that if Muhammad had not been "hot" on this woman, this old Arab law - forbidden to marry your adopted son's former wife - had existed today.
  3. For a third and the main point: A verse from Allah had had JUST the same effect.

Hypocrisy. It is not the only time in the Quran where it is possible to place Muhammad among the hypocrites.

021 33/38a: "There can be no difficulty to the Prophet in what Allah has indicated him to do (here: To marry Zaid's wife Zaynab)". Anyone able to believe Muhammad married her because it was a duty, are permitted to do so - but it will tell a lot about their brain. Also see 33/37i just above.

Hypocrisy.

022 33/38d: "- - - what Allah has indicated to him (Muhammad*) as a duty (to marry Zaynab*) - - -". More too easy to see hypocrisy. See 33/37g+i above.

023 33/38e: "It was the practice (approved) of by Allah amongst (earlier prophets*) - - -" - - - to obey Allah. The same comment as to 33/38d just above.

024 33/39a: For the total of this verse: See 33/38d above.

025 33/50c: “O Prophet! We (Allah*) have made lawful (for sex*) to thee (it is not unusual that the god "permits" this towards the founder of a religion or a sect – it happens not infrequently*) thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers: and those to whom thy right hand possesses out of the spoils of war (which was quite a huge number*) whom Allah has assigned to thee; and the daughters of thy parental uncles and aunts, and the daughters of maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makkah (= Mecca*)) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her – this is only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); we know that We have appointed for them (permitted sex*) as to their wives and those whom their right hands possess – in order that there should be no difficulty for thee.” As for slaves, a huge number passed through Muhammad’s hands – perhaps 2000 or more only from the Qurayza tribe. We do not know if and in case how many of them he personally raped, except Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay (which we know about because the first later became one of his concubines, and the other one of his wives), but the casual way and the minimal fuzz with which two rapes happened and made, makes it easy to think that they neither were the first, nor the only ones – to rape ones captives and slaves was (and formally still is) completely ok in Islam. That just was the way life was/is for slave women and captive women under Islam.

And once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use or disuse of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam, it became the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life under Islam.

Besides: Does Muhammad's private sex life belong in a claimed holy book for all times and the entire world? - or as part of a religion?

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.

Another point: The fact that marriages between close relatives is clearly permitted and mentioned, may be a reason why this is very common in many Muslim countries and areas. Some facts from today:

INBREEDING IN MUSLIM AREAS

Marriages between 1. cousins in some Muslim countries:

  1. Nubia (in south Egypt) 80%
  2. Pakistan 70%
  3. Saudi Arabia 67%
  4. Kuwait 64%
  5. Jordan 64%
  6. Sudan 63%
  7. Iraq 60%
  8. Qatar 54%
  9. United Arabic Emirates 54%
  10. Libya 48%
  11. Mauritania 47%
  12. Bahrain 46%
  13. Yemen 45%
  14. Lebanon 42%
  15. Syria 40%
  16. Tunisia 39%
  17. Egypt 33%
  18. Turkey 25-30%
  19.  

If this has been going on for 1400 years, it may have had some effect. Inbreeding often has negative effect, and can affect both the psychology and the intellect of the children made and later generations, and the possibility for such negative effects naturally grows if it is repeated over more generations.

########026 33/50d: "- - - We (Allah*) have made lawful for you (Muhammad and Muslims*) - - - those whom thy right possesses (= your slaves*) out of the spoils of war - - -". This plainly tells that Muslims are permitted to rape any female captive of war (and remember all wars in reality are named jihad, so Muslims cannot explain that it only is for jihads - and honestly it is quite a god who says: "When you fight for me - or at least your leaders claim you are - you are permitted to rape any female child (at least if she is 9 years or older - Muhammad's start of sex with Aisha), girl, woman or married not pregnant woman you come across if you just can call her your captive. But just look at armed conflicts the last couple of generations included Bangladesh and Eritrea - that is just what even regular Muslim armies have practiced - with inhuman examples in Bangladesh, where the hundreds of thousands of or more rape victims even were fellow Muslims (We have read that in Bangladesh there after that war was born some 200ooo illegitimate children from the rapes. This in case means a few million cases of rape of fellow Muslim girls and women. On average each Pakistanis soldier in case made several rapes. (The same we were told when we visited the national monument for this war in Bangladesh, though some said 200ooo raped girls and women, not 200ooo children.)) This sentence tells more about reality in the Islamic moral code and about the benevolence of Allah, than all the nice claims about such things in the Quran combined - acts and rules showing reality, always are more reliable than nice claims. And honestly: To steal or rape or torture or kill in the name of their god, makes the deeds even more disgusting, and tells a lot about the real Allah - - - if he exists.

Another point:

  1. 1. To steal and rob is dishonesty, even though the Quran - like f.x. the Mafia - permits it, and even glorified it as it attracted warriors and gave Muhammad riches
  2. .
  3. 2. To steal humans (for slavery) is dishonesty to at least the second or third power. Firstly they stole their freedom, which is very valuable to most humans. Secondly they stole their future. Thirdly they stole the economic value they had as slaves.
  4. 3. And they often stole children’s' and women's sexual "services" (= raped them), the privacy which definitely has a deep value for most humans. To what power and inhumanity is this?
  5. 4. And not to forget: There - then and now - is all the verbal dishonesty, the lies.

All this was and is "lawful and good". A "Religion of Honesty"? #### What is the claim "the Religion of Truth" worth, when the use of dishonesty of all kinds are so accepted as "lawful and good" working tools, that even the slogan "the Religion of Truth" may be a lie?

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.

##### Christianity abhors dishonesty. Buddhism abhors dishonesty. Hinduism abhors dishonesty. Judaism abhors dishonesty. Nearly all religions abhor dishonesty. Of all religions we have come across, there only are two who have dishonesty, deceit, and betrayal as an integrated part of the religion: Islam and a small primitive pagan religion on New Guinea.

#### 027 33/50e: "- - - We (Allah*) have made lawful (for sex/rape) for you (Muhammad and Muslims*) - - - those whom thy right hand possesses (= your slaves*) out of the spoils of war - - -". "Do unto others like you want others do unto you".

#####There are other moral rules in Islam which are worse and more immoral, but this is the one we find most repulsive - this one and the one permitting sex with/rape of children.

028 33/50f: "(Muhammad may have for a wife*) any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet (Muhammad') - - -". The literally correct translation according to M. Azad (A33/59 - A33/60 in the English 2008 edition): "if she offered herself as a gift (Arab: "in wahabat nafsaha") to the Prophet (Muhammad*)". Here is an interesting piece of information: Most Muslim commentators take this to mean "without demanding or expecting a dower". The dower was and is an integrated part of the Muslim formalities of a wedding. Here it seems that also here Muhammad got special treatment from Allah: Cheap wives. This in addition to that he could take a prisoner of war, make her slave, marry her and "give" her her freedom - except from her new husband - as a dower. Muhammad did this at least with Safiyya bint Huayay - a very cheap wife, as the dower cost him nothing.

Muhammad was pretty different from Jesus, also on this point. Definitely not from the same religion.

Besides: Does Muhammad's private sex life belong in a claimed holy book for all times and the entire world? - or as part of a religion? ####And is this the kind of stuff an omniscient god and his angels would revere in their Heaven?

029 33/50i: "- - - this (the permission for a nearly unlimited number of women - he had at least 36 (not some 11 like Muslims often mention - those only were his long-time wives) is only for thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Special rules for self proclaimed prophets far from are unheard of in fringe sects and religions - like Islam was at that time. Normally they have turned out in the end to be false prophets.

But does Muhammad's personal sex life belong in a claimed "holy book"?

#030 33/51b: "Thou (Muhammad*) mayest defer (the turn of (for sex*)) any of them (Muhammad's women - wives and slaves*) that thou pleasest, and thou mayest receive any (of his women for sex*) thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn (for sex with Muhammad*)) thou hadst set aside". Honestly what has this to do in a claimed holy book for all times, a book which is claimed to be a copy of the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven - a "Mother Book" all the may be 124ooo or more claimed earlier prophets got their copies of (but a claimed "Mother Book" not giving the same rights to the 124ooo claimed earlier prophets who Muhammad claimed were in the same line of prophets as himself), and a "Mother Book" claimed revered by the god and his angels in Heaven. What kind of god reveres texts like this - a sex freak?

The ones saying there are serious similarities between the person Jesus and the person Muhammad, knows very little about what he/she is talking about.

Normally in the old times one found stuff like this only in pornography (Greek = writings about whores).

031 33/51c: “Thou (Muhammad*) mayst defer (the turn (of having sex*) of) any of them that thou pleasest, and thou mayst receive any thou pleasest (for your bed/sex*): and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hast set aside.” It is the man’s wish and pleasure which counts, and here this fact is confirmed by the almighty god in his "Mother Book" of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy – though written only to Muhammad and nothing similar is said in that book to any of the thousands of former prophets (124ooo ?) or to ordinary men. But as Muhammad is the great idol, this like everything he (or Allah?) said and did was and is the correct thing to do if nothing special is said that prohibits it.

Once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use or disuse of the god is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life.

032 33/51d: (A33/61 - A33/62 in the English 2008 edition): "Thus, the Prophet (Muhammad*) was told (by Allah*) that he need not observe a strict "rotation" in the conjugal attentions due to his wives - - -". Really some stuff for a "holy" book - and for 124ooo earlier prophets who had gotten copies of the claimed "Mother Book". Not to mention an interesting text in the "Mother Book" from which the Quran is copied, for Allah to revere in his Heaven.

####But is this the kind of stuff an omniscient god and his angels would revere in their Heaven?

The ones saying there are serious similarities between the person Jesus and the person Muhammad, knows very little about what he/she is talking about.

Normally in the old times one found stuff like this only in pornography (Greek = writings about whores).

Yahweh and Allah the same god? Perhaps - if he is strongly schizophrenic. Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion and moral code? Once more: You bet!

033 33/52a: “It is not lawful for thee (Muhammad*) (to marry more) women after this - - - except any thy right hand should possess - - -”. Slave women did not count, so Muhammad still had a way out if he wanted more women.

034 33/52c: (A64 – in 2008 edition A65): “It is not for thee (Muhammad*) (to marry more) women after this - - -.” Does this relate to no more than the 4 categories women that he in verse 52 was told were lawful for him? Or does it refer to all women – except slaves? Islam tends to believe the last, but f. ex. Tabari said the first. And no-one will ever know. Clear language? (This verse is from 629 AD or later according to Islam - it has to be, as he married his last wives, Maymuna bint al-Harith, in February 629 AD, and Safiyya bint Huayay around the same time, and if the verse is older, he broke the rule of the Quran on this point). Muhammad then was nearly 60. May be he felt the pressure from having to satisfy a dozen wives and concubines?) plus short-time wives and women one does not know if he was married to or not. (Muhammad over the years had 11 wives, 2 concubines, 16 short-time wives and 7 with unclear status known by name = 36 all together which are known by name.) All the same some Muslim scholars believe this verse is from 627 AD - before he married Zaynab. Not good in case. (Surah 33 is from some time between 625 and 629 AD, so that this prohibition may be from as early as 625 AD. If it is from any time before 629 AD, Muhammad broke this order from Allah.

p>035 33/53f: “And when ye (Muslim men*) ask (his (Muhammad’s*)) ladies for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen - - -.” Note: #### A screen, not a veil. This is all that is said about the hiding of women in the Quran. Nothing more: A screen, not a veil, and only concerning the wives – and likely also his other women – of Muhammad. (But you find veils in the Hadiths – which is written 200 – 250 years later, and where it is very clear that a lot is made up stories (the Quran f.x. proves that all the stories in the Hadiths about miracles and foretelling around Muhammad are made up ones)).

Further: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use or disuse of the god is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam, this is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life under Islam.

036 33/53k: The whole of this verse is about Muhammad's private life. It does not belong in a claimed "holy" book or as part of a religion. It also does not belong in a claimed "Mother Book" copied to 124ooo earlier prophets for whom this was totally irrelevant. Not to mention that no god would revere texts like this in his Heaven, like claimed in the Quran (13/13b, 43/4, 85/21-22).

037 33/59c: “O Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad) - - -.” What is “outer garments”? – the veil at least is neither mentioned nor indicated. And what is “when abroad”? - his wives never left Arabia.

038 33/59d: “O Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad) - - -.” Part of the basis for the sharia laws.

###039 42/24j: “And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words.” Muhammad was asked many times to prove his - or presumably Allah’s - words, but he never did, and seemed never to be able to, this even more so, as f.x. some of his “explanations” for why he never could prove anything, an intelligent man like him knew were lies (f.x. that real miracles would make no-one believe anyhow). And the words of the Quran prove not a thing, among other reasons because:

  1. Far too many mistakes pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  2. Far too many loose statements pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  3. Far too many invalid “signs” pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  4. Far too many invalid or even wrong "proofs" pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  5. Some obvious lies – f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, or that Muhammad wanted no payment (in spite of what Islam and Muslims claim, Muhammad was well off when he died - estates in Mecca, Medina, and Fadaq, and more - even though he had spent fortunes for bribes for followers/power, and lots of women also cost something). (Swindle.)
  6. Muhammad was unable to present anything but fast-talk when asked for proofs. (Swindle?)
  7. Lots of invalid use of logic. (Swindle?)
  8. Lots of contradictions (– proves for lies?)
  9. Lots of unclear language - at least 500+ confirmed by Muslim scholars. (Not from a god.)
  10. Lots of fast talk. (Suspicious.)

 

These all are hallmarks of a crook and a cheat and a deceiver.

####What does this mean for the religion?

Sub-total Chapter6 = 39 + 335 = 374


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

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".