Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 1: Chapter 13


Muhammad wanted riches: LOOT FOR MUHAMMAD

Both the Quran and Islam tell that Muhammad wanted no payment for his preaching and work. This is plainly not true. He demanded and got - in the name of Allah - 20% of all stolen/looted value, included captives/slaves and what was paid because of extortion, and 100% if the victims gave in without a fight. In addition there was the "poor tax" - "zakat" or "zakah" - normally 2.5% of the net value of what they owned, from all Muslims who were not too poor to pay, there was the Sadaqah (freely made offerings), there was the tax, "jizya", from non-Muslims (no fixed rate, which made some later rulers demand so much that sometimes the victims gave in and fled the country). And there was the land tax, which for non-Muslims often was 50% of the harvest - sometimes more. Beware that Muhammad used this for several purposes in addition to personal uses, bribes and warfare. Also beware that it is likely that it is true Muhammad did not spend too much on himself and his big family (lots of wives). Power - f.x. bought by bribes - counted more for him than material luxury.

And Muslims and Islam always "forget" to mention that in addition to much riches, Muhammad demanded and got lots of what was most valuable for him: Respect and power - and women.

To claim that Muhammad wanted and demanded nothing for himself, is strongly wrong and a strong al-Taqiyya (lawful lie). Any Muslim scholar and many lay Muslims know the facts here.

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

001 8/1c: “They (the warriors*) ask thee (Muhammad*) concerning (things taken as) spoils of war (riches and slaves and sometimes land*). Say: (Such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*)”. This is one of the rules Muhammad or the omniscient Allah had to change later (and not much later) - in the end Muhammad only got 20%, except if the victims gave in without a fight (then Muhammad still got 100%). (Islam has another explanation - all belongs to Allah, but 80% may be given to the warriors and to their leaders. But when a "may be" becomes a rule, it is not a "may be" any more). You meet Muslims saying Allah/the Quran never changed anything, but here is one point which was changed shortly afterward. Often Muslims explains changes with that the rules really were not changed, only made stricter or clarified (why should that be necessary for an omniscient god?) Here is an absolute rule which later had to be changed - the warriors demanded their share of the spoils. Besides: How primitive or greedy has a person to be in order to see a good and benevolent god in a god who permits stealing/robbing, rape, enslaving, suppression, murder, etc. in his name? Also incompatible with NT.

####But there is another and very - extremely - serious point here: When raids and stealing/looting and slave-taking expeditions and whatever are planned and executed just for that purpose: To be able to see this as anything but plain and dishonest thievery or robbing, you have be a very special person or belong to a very special culture.

####It happens that Muslims ask about why on Earth they are disliked just because they are Muslims? Parts of the Quran's moral code explain a large percent of that question - it is too far from normal moral codes. (But Muslims are so used to it, that they are unable to see its excesses, dishonesty and inhumanity, and honestly believe it is a perfect and most honorable code.)

002 8/1d: “(The spoils of war*) “are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -.” All that was stolen and looted and robbed in raids and war included, slaves and prisoners for extorting money (this early – 624 AD – it mainly was raids to steal/rob/extort) belonged to Allah – represented by his envoy on earth: Muhammad. But his officers and warriors were too greedy to accept this – they wanted a share of the riches, too. So a bit later in the surah – a few “revelations” later (?) there came a contra order – and abrogation:

  1. ###8/41: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah - - -.” Muhammad had to give the warriors their share – except that he saved everything for himself in the cases where the victims gave in without fighting – then the warriors had done nothing and could not demand a share. Muhammad needed riches. Though it is likely it is true he was not much interested in much luxury, he needed riches for bribes/"gifts" and for waging war to get more power and more riches, included slaves – war cost money even if he paid his warriors with religion and religious promises, then all the same food and equipment cost money – and he needed riches for “gift” to attract more warriors/followers/believers and to keep some of the lukewarm-warm ones - - - and some for social use (help to the poor). Muslims tries to explain away this contradiction and abrogation by saying that it all belongs to Allah/the leader, but 80% is given to the warriors/robbers. But the moment it becomes a right for the robbers in raids and warriors in war, the rank and file’s share no longer belongs to the leader.

Are Yahweh and Allah the same god? Or Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion? The rules of war - and of spoils of war - are strong mathematical strength proofs to the fifth power for that none of those two never documented claims are true.

003 8/1e: “(The spoils of war*) are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -.” Incompatible with the Bible. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god - and for that Jesus and Muhammad was not in the same line of prophets - Just try to think about Jesus demanding his share of things stolen in war, not to mention his share of slaves taken!! - the very thoughts are utterly impossible for anyone knowing NT. In OT it was permitted to take booty, but for the warriors. Only once (4. Mos. 31/28-29) did Yahweh ask for a share of the booty: 1 in 500 from half and 1 in 50 from the other half for the priests and Levites (the priest tribe). In NT there is no question about booty at all. Allah demands 1 in 5 if there was fighting and everything if the victim gave in without fighting. The same god? Just guess!! (When it comes to treatment of victims and also of their possessions, it is easy to think about the Mafia or the Triads, and about primitives and greed, when we read about Muhammad's and his Muslims' raids and wars - not about somebody like Jesus).

004 8/7c: "- - - one of the two (enemies) - - -". Muhammad and his some 300 men set out from Medina to attack and plunder a big and rich caravan - some 1000 camels with much to steal. That was the first of the two enemies. Instead they met a small army which had come to the rescue of the caravan. That was the second enemy. The "good and benevolent and just example for all Muslims" simply was a robber baron.

#####005 8/41a: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” These 20% - 100% in some cases - in reality were for Muhammad to use. Did he "demand no payment for what he did" like he claims some places in the Quran?

All this is totally foreign to Yahweh and Jesus - one more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion: Too different moral codes, etc.

006 8/41b: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” Part of the background for paragraphs in the sharia law.

007 8/41c: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) (an all if the victims gave in without a fight*) - - -.” Try to find something like this in the Bible, not to mention in the NT! Yahweh and Allah the same god? An imbecile question. (The only time Yahweh asked for part of a booty - and then for his priest and the Levites (4. Mos. 31/28-29) he asked for 1/500 of half and 1/50 of the other half).

008 8/41d: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” Which means that 80% is for the warriors and leaders in the war – an economical incentive which for many a poor man counted much more than the religion – war and terror = good business. Many became well-to-do, many became rich, and some became very rich – and were dream models for new generations of robber warriors and robber barons. But Muslims and Islam never mentions the cost in destruction and destroyed lives which were the price millions had to pay for this unjust prosperity of the robbers and destroyers. It frequently took (the surviving) locals 100-200 years and more just to regain their standard of life, not to mention freedom. The warriors of the good and benevolent god of “the Religion of Peace” frequently mass murdered and massacred and enslaved “en gross” – and stole everything. Jerusalem f.x. got a hunger catastrophe after being occupied in 638 AD - the Muslims stole everything, included the food.

009 8/41e: "- - - out of all the booty that ye may acquire - - - a fifth share is assigned to Allah - and to the Messenger (and to be paid to Muhammad*) - - -". No place in the NT Yahweh or Jesus demand part of stolen things (politely called booty). One single place in OT Yahweh demands a small share (see 8/41c above). Even compared to this Muhammad - not one, but each time - demanded on behalf of Allah 10 - 100 times as much - and not for sacrifice (mostly for "gifts" (bribes) to stay popular and stay in power, for "gifts" to buy new or keep doubting followers, to pay for more war, and some for Muhammad and his family - and some for the poor). The same god, like the Quran and Islam claims? - and Muhammad and Jesus in the same line of prophets like that book and Islam claims? - believe it if you want, but you have to want to believe it to be able to do so".

010 8/41g: "- - - to Allah - and to the Messenger (Muhammad*), and to near relatives (In YA1209 we find "In the Prophet's (Muhammad's*) lifetime a certain portion was assigned to him and his near relatives"), orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer- - -". He forgot to mention (?) for the expansion of Islam and for war. Also see 63/5a below.

011 12/104a: “And no reward dost thou (Muhammad*) ask of them (people/Muslims*) for this (the new religion*) - - -“. No, nothing except 20% of all stolen/robbed values and slaves from raids and wars, 100% of all values taken from victims who surrendered without fighting, plenty of women and lots and lots of absolute and undisputed power/dictatorship, and lots and lots of free warriors – he only had to pay them with promises about paradise and promises about rich spoils of war stolen from humans and countries. And the “poor-tax” - zakat - (normally 2,5% - 10% not of your income, but of your possessions each year if you were not too poor) – which he far from only spent for the poor – and the jizya – the tax from non-Muslims (free for the ruler to say how much – and that sometimes meant really much). Much of this like said was spent for waging more wars and for “gifts”/bribes to make neighboring Arabs good Muslims + some was given to the poor.

And the price for their riches was neighboring cultures and humans and lives they destroyed – to gain more power for him and riches and slaves for his warriors. It is indisputably clear from the Quran that he at least liked women and respect and power, and that he needed riches for bribes - f.x. up to 100 camels to a chief. You must steal a lot to be able to give lots of such bribes - and who cares about the victims?! Long live the Quran's moral code! Similar claims in 25/57a – 34/47 - 38/86 – 42/23.

###012 25/57a: “No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you - - -“. Nothing - - - except 20% of everything stolen or extorted in/after raids and wars, 100% of what was looted or extorted without fighting, plenty of women and total and unrestricted power. And 2.5% (up to 10%) of your possessions each year in “poor-tax” - - - partly for the poor, but also at least as partly to pay the lukewarm to become or stay Muslims, and not to forget to use for waging war. And a little to himself and all his women and few children (may be not of the "poor-tax", but plenty from the looting - Muhammad f.x. had estates 3 different places (Medina, Khaybar and Fadaq), something which is never mentioned by Muslims, when they talk about how poor he was personally). Hypocrisy.

###*To be exact the "poor-tax" - zakat - according to Hadiths after Al-Bukhari (comment 1 to Chapter 24) is for 8-9 different purposes:

  1. 1. Help the "Fuqara" - a category of poor people.
  2. 2. Help the "Al-Masakin" - another category of poor people. (These two points = the purpose of helping the poor. Lump them together, and you get 8 purposes.
  3. 3. Paying the persons administrating the zakat. (Originally Muhammad).
  4. 4. Bribing people to become Muslims and in other ways to promote Islam.
  5. 5. Bribing lukewarm Muslims to stay Muslims.
  6. 6. To free Muslim captives.
  7. 7. To help indebted persons.
  8. 8. To wage war for the religion - and for its leader(s).
  9. 9. To assist travelers (often pilgrims to Mecca).

It seems that a sizable percentage was used for points 4, 5, and 8. (You also will find claims that there are 5 purposes for the zakat. Then they lump 1 and 2 together and omit something - often 6 and 8. We some places in this book have used that list.)

013 26/109a: "No reward do I (Noah*) ask of you (people*) for it (my preaching*) - - -". Another - and wrong - of Muhammad's mantras - see 26/108 just above. Muhammad also demanded much from his followers; obedience, respect, women, riches for bribes and women, and total power.

014 26/127a: "No reward do I (Hud*) ask of you for it - - -". Also this was one of Muhammad's claims about himself - see 26/125 and 26/126 above. At least for Muhammad this claim was enormously wrong, as he at least claimed total power over his followers, enormous riches (which he according to Islamic books mostly used for bribes to attract and keep followers + not a little to wage war) and lots of women - typical for some false prophets throughout history and even today, whereas real prophets seldom had or wanted much riches and as seldom had more than one wife if any at all (a man like Solomon with all his wives is reckoned to be a powerful king, not a prophet, except in the Quran - the same goes for David (though the word prophet is mentioned)). Also see 26/209a above.

015 36/21a: "Obey those who ask no reward of you (for themselves) - - -". This is reflecting Muhammad's often repeated, but very wrong claim that he demanded nothing from his followers. He demanded much - extremely much - included their lives, total power, huge fortunes to use as gifts/bribes to attract and keep followers, respect, lots of women, etc. Persons like Jesus and Buddha really claimed nothing for themselves, and there is an irony in that if Muslims are to follow verses like this in the Quran, they cannot follow Muhammad but have to follow f.x. one of the two mentioned.

016 36/21d: (YA3967): "Prophets do not seek their own advantage". If you read the Bible, you will find that this mostly is correct. Which is another indication/proof for that Muhammad was no prophet - he wanted and got power (in addition to riches for bribes for more power and women - he was well off when he died (in spite of Muslims' claims about his poverty), f.x. with estates in Medina, Fadaq, and Khaybar).

017 38/86a: “No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask for this (Quran) - - -“ - - - except absolute power over you all + plenty of women + plenty of valuables for bribes + free or nearly free warriors for raids and wars to gain more power and more riches for more raids and wars and bribes and power.

018 42/23f: “No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you (Muslims/people*) - - -“. - - - except total dictatorship over you, total obedience from you, plenty of women, cheap warriors, plenty of riches for bribes, etc., etc.

019 42/23g: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin". Well, except 20% of all stolen goods and enslaved people - 100% if they gave in without a fight - 2.5% (average) of all your belongings each and every year in tax (though it is likely Muhammad used little or nothing of just this point personally), plenty of women and undisputed and total power over you, + lots of warriors to fight and may be die for me, among other things. One of the in reality most and strongest contradicted and abrogated by reality verse in all the Quran. Good propaganda towards followers unable to think for themselves.

Yes, and Jizya from non-Muslims - tax with no specified upper limit (and later rulers sometimes demanded much) - and from the ones using land he had taken from them and thus "belonged" to him also land tax (here he normally took 50% of everything produced - this also became the norm for other land grabbers, but up to 70% happened). Life could be difficult for non-Muslims - so difficult and meager that they had to flee to get out from the dire poverty or worse.

Two words: Hypocrisy. Dishonesty.

One of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran.

020 52/40a: "Or is it that thou (Muhammad*) dost ask for a reward - - -". Muhammad liked to claim he asked for no reward from his followers - and unbelievably his followers believed and still believe it, even though they saw his demand for respect and power, his demands for wealth (mostly used for bribes, and he also had 3 estates) and all his women.

##021 59/6a: “What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (Muhammad*) (and taken away) from them (Banu al-Nadir - the Jewish Nadir tribe*) – for this ye (the Muslim warriors*) made no expedition with either cavalry or camelery - - -.” This was very nice for Muhammad, because when there was no fight and the enemy just gave in, all the spoils of war was called “fay” and was for Allah/Muhammad alone. Muhammad in a short time got a good economy. We may add that you often find Islam boasting about rich plunder. But you will never - never - find Islam reflecting over what terror, what destruction, what catastrophe - and what setbacks to the culture - the Muslim attacks and destruction and murdering meant to others. Empathy with others, not to mention with non-Muslims, at least was outside Islam's capability - and still is at least within some parts of Islam.

#####It must be added that to be thieves, robbers, enslavers and murderers - and rapists - in the name of a god, makes both the religion and the god extra distasteful - and it makes the claim that Allah is a good and benevolent god an unintended, black joke. Compare Islam to the gold standard; "do against others like you want others do against you" and shudder in distaste. ####Also remember that dishonesty is not only words, but also deeds - to steal/rob/extort is dishonest - to say the least of it - deeds.

022 74/6a: "Nor expect, in giving, any increase for thyself (Muhammad*)!" This is an easy claim, and a claim followed up by Islam, telling how poorly Muhammad lived and how little his family inherited after him. They normally never mention that the reason why his family inherited so little, was that he had said that what he owned should go to the religion, not to his family. He at least had 3 estates (in Medina, Fadaq, and Khaybar), and each of his long time wives had her own house (though possibly small ones) according to Hadiths. His daughter Fatima fought the first caliph, Abu Bakr, the rest of her short life to get the inheritance after her father - also never mentioned by Muslims. It also takes a good increase in wealth to run a family with 10 longtime wives (1 - Khadijah - was dead) + concubines + short time wives + others (one knows the name of 11 short time wives, 16 short time wives, 2 concubines and 7 where one does not know whether was married to him or not = 36 all together - see the chapter about Muhammad and his women in .)

But the real increase was his increase in power - parts of it built on rich bribes stolen from the surroundings.

Sub-total Chapter 13 = 22 + 604 = 626.

>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

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