Tuesday, September 30, 2025

Signs of a Possessed Prophet

The Unnatural Revelation of Muhammad

The Islamic claim that Muhammad received revelations from the angel Gabriel (Jibril) lies at the heart of the Qur’an’s authority. Yet a critical, honest examination of the earliest Islamic sources reveals a far more troubling reality—one that suggests his experiences bore the disturbing hallmarks not of divine inspiration, but of demonic possession. This article lays bare the unnatural, violent, and often pathological nature of Muhammad’s revelations, exposing how even those closest to him feared he was possessed or afflicted by a spirit.

1. Muhammad Thought He Was Possessed

The earliest and most authentic Islamic biographies confirm that Muhammad himself initially believed he was possessed by a jinn—a supernatural spirit commonly associated with madness or demonic activity in pre-Islamic Arabia. This fact is recorded in Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, the earliest known biography of Muhammad, and later preserved in al-Tabari and Ibn Hisham:

“Now none of God’s creatures was more hateful to me than an [ecstatic] poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, 'Woe is me poet or possessed—never shall Quraysh say this of me!’”
(Ibn Ishaq, p. 106 / Guillaume's translation)

This is not a minor episode—it’s Muhammad’s initial response to his so-called prophetic calling. He was so disturbed by the experience that he attempted suicide:

“I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest.”
(Ibn Ishaq, p. 106)

This is the behavior not of a prophet called by God, but of a man tortured by an affliction he did not understand—an experience he himself associated with madness or possession.

2. Convulsions, Swooning, and Pain: The Signs of Revelation

Far from peaceful or edifying, Muhammad’s “revelations” were violent, unnatural, and often physically destructive. According to multiple hadiths and eyewitness testimonies, Muhammad would:

Turn red and sweat profusely (even in winter)
Fall to the ground or go into convulsions
Hear ringing bells—a sound often associated with jinn or spirit communication in pre-Islamic Arabia
Swoon or lose consciousness
Speak with altered expression and strange sounds

Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith 2: Hadith 87:

“Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of inspiration is the hardest of all... Then that state passes off after I have grasped what is inspired. Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says.”

But why would a merciful God reveal His word through a painful, bell-like torment? The Qur’an claims that Allah is “gentle” and “kind” (Qur’an 16:7, 2:143), but Muhammad's experiences suggest cruelty, confusion, and domination—not divine clarity or peace.

Compare this to the biblical accounts: prophets like Moses, Isaiah, or even John in Revelation were sometimes overwhelmed—but they were conscious, communicative, and mentally coherent. The Word of God came with divine order and purpose, not convulsive chaos.

3. Muhammad Bewitched: The Satanic Spells of Labid ibn al-A'sam

Astonishingly, even the Sahih hadith collections confirm that Muhammad was bewitched by a Jewish magician named Labid ibn al-A’sam. This was no light illness. The bewitchment was so deep that Muhammad imagined things that did not happen—hallucinating events, conversations, and actions:

“He used to think that he had done a thing which he had not really done.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari 3268; also in 6391, and Sahih Muslim 2189)

This state lasted for six months. The Qur'an says the Prophet is “protected” from Satan (Qur'an 15:9, 5:67), but how then could Allah’s chosen messenger fall under a magic spell, unable to distinguish between reality and delusion?

The implications are staggering. If Muhammad could be deceived into thinking he had received revelations that never happened, what assurance is there that the Qur'an was not likewise contaminated by deception?

4. The Satanic Verses: A Prophet Deceived by a Demon

The infamous “Satanic Verses” episode—preserved by early Muslim historians like al-Tabari and Ibn Sa’d—tells of a moment when Muhammad recited verses honoring three pagan goddesses (al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat), declaring:

"These are the exalted cranes (gharaniq), whose intercession is hoped for."

Later, Muhammad confessed that these words were not from God, but from Satan, who had slipped them into his mouth. This story is so embarrassing that most modern Muslims deny it—yet the historical weight behind it is substantial.

If Satan could temporarily speak through Muhammad, even once, what stops him from having done so more often?

Moreover, the Qur'an itself seems to confirm the story:

“Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before you but when he recited the message, Satan cast into his recitation…”
(Qur’an 22:52)

This is a stunning admission: Satan can—and has—interfered with prophetic revelation.

5. Epilepsy or Possession? Modern Medical Hypotheses

Some secular scholars have proposed that Muhammad may have suffered from temporal lobe epilepsy—a neurological condition that can produce auditory hallucinations, convulsions, and trance-like states. But the spiritual implications are even more disturbing.

If his symptoms were not medical but spiritual, then they resemble classical signs of demonic possession:

Violent fits
Voices from unseen beings
Periods of unconsciousness or stupor
Suicidal tendencies
Obsession with spirits and darkness

Far from being unique to Muhammad, these symptoms match reports from other cult founders and mediums—such as Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, or Ellen G. White, founder of Seventh-Day Adventism—who also claimed divine visions amidst strange physical episodes.

6. The Qur’an: A Book of Jinn and Spirits

The Qur’an itself frequently discusses jinn, even devoting an entire chapter (Surah 72, al-Jinn) to them. Muhammad regularly interacted with these beings, and some were said to have believed in him. But the Bible strictly forbids any communication with spirits, mediums, or those who consort with the dead or the unseen (Deuteronomy 18:10–12). God does not work through such channels.

The presence of jinn in Muhammad’s prophetic career is not evidence of divine endorsement—it’s a flashing red warning.

Conclusion: A Spirit, but Not the Holy One

By every standard—spiritual, psychological, and historical—Muhammad’s revelation bears the marks not of God’s Holy Spirit, but of spiritual delusion or possession. His initial fear of being possessed, his convulsions and hallucinations, the bewitchment by sorcery, the Satanic interjections into his scripture—all reveal a man under spiritual oppression, not divine guidance.

The Bible warns us:

“And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.”
(2 Corinthians 11:14)

If Satan ever wanted to mislead billions under the guise of a prophet, he could scarcely have done better than what we find in the life of Muhammad.

Monday, September 29, 2025

Muhammad's Night Journey to the Non-Existent Temple

A Historical and Theological Contradiction

One of the most famous yet puzzling claims in Islamic tradition is that Muhammad was miraculously transported by night from Mecca to Jerusalem’s “Farthest Mosque” (Masjid al-Aqsa), where he allegedly led the prophets in prayer and ascended through the heavens. This claim is based on a single Qur’anic verse (Surah 17:1) and elaborated through various Hadiths and early Islamic sources. However, upon critical examination, this alleged journey—known as al-Isra wal-Mi'raj—unravels into a theological and historical problem that Islamic apologetics struggles to resolve.

This article will expose the gaping contradictions within the narrative, the historical impossibility of the journey, and the theological consequences that undermine the credibility of both Muhammad’s prophethood and the Qur'an's divine authorship.

1. Surah 17:1 and the Masjid al-Aqsa Dilemma

The cornerstone verse for the Night Journey reads:

“Glory be to Him who took His servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, whose precincts We have blessed, to show him of Our signs.”
— Surah 17:1

Muslims universally identify al-Masjid al-Aqsa with the mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. However, this presents a serious anachronism:

There was no mosque in Jerusalem during Muhammad’s lifetime.

The Al-Aqsa Mosque that stands today was not built until decades after Muhammad's death, during the Umayyad Caliphate, under Caliph Abd al-Malik (r. 685–705 AD) and completed by his son al-Walid. Therefore, for the Qur’an to mention a “mosque” in Jerusalem at a time when no such structure existed is either:

A historical blunder, if taken literally, or
A symbolic reference, which contradicts the entire tradition of a literal physical journey.

But Islamic traditions do not allow a symbolic interpretation. They explicitly claim that the journey was physical, literal, and historical.

2. Hadith and Sirah Sources Confirm a Literal Journey to a Real Structure

The hadith literature and early biographies of Muhammad (Sirah) reinforce this claim repeatedly:

Sahih al-Bukhari 6:60:233 — Muhammad describes the features of Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem temple/mosque) in detail and answers the Quraysh when they test his knowledge of it.
Ibn Sa’d’s Al-Tabaqat and Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasulullah both insist that Muhammad went to the actual “Temple of Aelia” (Roman name for Jerusalem) and prayed with previous prophets in a physical building.
Sahih Muslim 1:309 — Muhammad ties al-Buraq to a ring outside the Temple and enters to pray two rak‘ahs.

The Islamic claim is unmistakable: Muhammad was physically transported to the actual Temple or mosque in Jerusalem. He saw it, described its doors, tied his heavenly beast Buraq to its hitching post, and physically entered and prayed there.

But there's a fatal problem: The Jewish Temple had been destroyed in 70 AD by the Romans, and no mosque or religious structure stood on the Temple Mount until over 50 years after Muhammad’s death.

3. Historical Reality: No Temple, No Mosque, No Journey

Let’s examine the timeline:

70 AD – The Second Temple was destroyed by Titus.
610–632 AD – Muhammad’s lifetime and prophethood.
685–705 AD – Construction of the Dome of the Rock under Caliph Abd al-Malik.
705 AD – Completion of al-Aqsa Mosque by al-Walid.

In other words:

During Muhammad’s Night Journey (c. 621 AD), there was no mosque, no temple, and no significant religious structure on the Temple Mount.

Islamic sources say he described the building’s features. But what did he see? Rubble? Roman ruins? Open space?

The Quraysh challenged him to describe the building. If he passed this test, then either:

They were unaware that the Temple had been gone for 550 years, or
The description was fabricated, or
A supernatural vision filled in imaginary details to deceive—none of which validate Islam’s truth claims.

4. Theological Implications: False Prophecy or Fabricated History?

If Muhammad claimed to go to a temple or mosque that didn’t exist, then there are only three possibilities:

a. He Lied or Fabricated the Event

This would mean Muhammad created a false story to boost his credibility and spiritual authority. Early Muslims leaving Islam after hearing this tale (as recorded in Ibn Sa’d and others) suggests even his contemporaries found it unbelievable.

b. He Hallucinated or Dreamt the Journey

Some Muslim scholars have suggested the Night Journey was a dream, not a literal trip. But this directly contradicts the major hadiths:

Ibn Abbas (Bukhari 5:58:228) – Asserts the Prophet saw the sights “with the eye,” not in a dream.
Ibn Kathir – Explicitly defends the physicality of the journey in his tafsir.

A dream undermines the Qur’an’s claim of miraculous physical travel (asra bi-‘abdihi laylan – “He took His servant by night”) and renders the entire Mi‘raj theology meaningless.

c. The Qur’an is Not Inspired by God

If the Qur’an refers to a mosque that didn’t exist, then it contains a historical error. This alone disqualifies it from being the eternal, perfect Word of God. A truly divine book should not make such a basic, verifiable mistake.

5. The Bait al-Maqdis Problem: Confusion of Terms

Some Muslims claim that “Masjid al-Aqsa” doesn’t refer to the modern mosque, but to a broader blessed area. But this is inconsistent:

The hadiths describe a structure with doors, a hitching post, and a prayer space.
Muhammad’s Quraysh critics ask for a detailed description.
Islamic traditions say the prophets prayed inside.

If it was only a region or “blessed land,” such descriptions would be absurd. The very existence of a mosque or temple structure is essential to the story’s credibility.

6. The Crumbling Foundation of Islam's “Great Miracle”

The Night Journey is one of the foundational miracles of Islam. It allegedly confirmed Muhammad’s status as the seal of the prophets, superior to Moses and Jesus, and intimately connected him to Abraham’s legacy. Yet:

This miraculous journey depends entirely on the existence of a structure that had not existed for over five centuries and would not exist for another 80 years.

The story collapses under the weight of its own historical contradictions.

Conclusion: A Journey Into Fiction

Islam presents the Isra and Mi‘raj as one of the most sacred and awe-inspiring events in Muhammad’s life. But when examined under the light of history, it becomes clear:

The Qur’an makes reference to a non-existent mosque.
The hadiths describe a detailed physical structure that was not there.
The temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed for over 550 years.
The Al-Aqsa Mosque wasn’t constructed until decades after Muhammad’s death.

What Islam claims as a divine miracle turns out to be a devastating anachronism—a relic of either fabrication, delusion, or deceit. In any case, it exposes a fatal contradiction within the Islamic narrative.

If Muhammad claimed to visit a non-existent temple, then he cannot be trusted as a prophet. If the Qur’an speaks of a mosque that did not exist, then it is not the Word of God.

The Night Journey isn’t a miracle. It’s a mirage—a fiction that dissolves when confronted with truth.

Sunday, September 28, 2025

What “Jihad” Really Means

The Truth Islam Doesn’t Want You to Know

In a world increasingly shaped by politically correct narratives, few topics are more misunderstood—and more deliberately obscured—than the Islamic doctrine of jihad. Western apologists insist jihad is merely a personal struggle or spiritual discipline, akin to resisting temptation or striving for self-improvement. But Islamic sources tell a very different story.

This article cuts through the smokescreen. Using Islam’s own authoritative texts—the Qur’an, Hadith, classical commentaries, and Islamic law manuals—we will expose the truth: Jihad in Islam is a religiously sanctioned, divinely commanded war against non-Muslims until the world submits to Islamic rule.

Classical Definitions of Jihad: Warfare Disguised as Worship

Let’s begin with how Islamic authorities, not Western academics, define jihad.

1. Hanna Kassis’ Qur’anic Concordance (1983)

Definition: Jihad = Jahada: “To struggle, strive, fight for the faith.”
This definition, derived from Qur’anic usage, already includes the concept of fighting—not merely inner striving.

2. Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, p. 89

“The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty... It is a fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya (a collective obligation)... It must continue until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.”

This is not some obscure extremist opinion—it’s mainstream Islamic theology, codified in one of the most respected encyclopedic works on Islam. The implication is chilling: Jihad is not a defensive response; it is an offensive mission until global conquest is achieved.

Spiritual or Violent? The Mask of “Greater Jihad”

Some Muslims claim that the “greater jihad” is an inner spiritual struggle, and war is just a “lesser” form. But even this distinction is deceptive.

Reliance of the Traveller, a canonical manual of Shariah law (page 599), says:

“Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word ‘mujahada’, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the lesser jihad. As for the greater jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self...”

Notice: Even the so-called “lesser” jihad is not minor or metaphorical. It is literal warfare. And guess what? It’s the jihad the Qur’an, Hadith, and early Muslims focused on most.

The Qur’an on Jihad: Commanding Warfare

The Qur’an mentions jihad and related terms over 35 times. And when jihad is mentioned, it almost always refers to physical combat. A few key verses:

Qur’an 2:216 – “Fighting has been prescribed for you...”
Qur’an 4:89 – “Slay them wherever you find them...”
Qur’an 9:29 – “Fight those who do not believe in Allah...until they pay the jizya and feel themselves subdued.”
Qur’an 9:36 – “Fight the idolaters utterly...”

These are not defensive instructions. They are imperialistic marching orders.

Hadith: Muhammad’s Own Words on Jihad

The Hadith, second only to the Qur’an in authority, make it crystal clear that jihad means fighting to spread Islam.

Sahih Bukhari 1:2:25

“The Prophet said: ‘I have been commanded to fight the people until they say: La ilaha illallah (There is no god but Allah).’”

Sahih Muslim 33:6392

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

The Prophet of Islam explicitly declared his divine mission was to fight until people submit to Islam—either through conversion or surrender.

Ibn Kathir’s Commentary: Violence > Disbelief

In his Tafsir on Qur’an 2:191, the famous Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir explains:

“As Jihad involves death and the killing of men... Allah says, ‘Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing.’”

In other words, the mere presence of unbelief is a greater evil than mass murder. Hence, violence is not only permissible—it is righteous.

Islamic Law Codifies War on Unbelievers

The Reliance of the Traveller, the definitive manual of Islamic jurisprudence, teaches:

Jihad is a communal obligation (fard kifaya).
Muslims must invite non-Muslims to:
1. Convert to Islam,
2. Accept second-class dhimmi status and pay the jizya tax, or
3. Be fought and killed.

“The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim...”
— Reliance of the Traveller, p. 603

This is not some ancient practice abandoned by time. It remains part of Sharia law today, cited by Islamic courts and scholars worldwide.

Conclusion: Jihad is Religious Violence, Not Spiritual Struggle

The overwhelming evidence from Islam’s most authoritative sources proves beyond doubt:

Jihad is not primarily spiritual.
Jihad is not merely defensive.
Jihad is a religiously mandated war against unbelievers until they submit.

Despite the efforts of modern apologists to sanitize Islam, the core teachings remain unchanged. Islamic jihad is violence in the name of Allah, enshrined in its scriptures, exemplified by its founder, and codified by its scholars.

The Choice Offered to Non-Muslims? Submit, Pay, or Die.

Islamic theology offers non-Muslims three choices:

Convert to Islam.
Live as a humiliated dhimmi under Islamic law, paying the jizya tax.
Resist—and be slaughtered.

This is not coexistence. This is coercion.

Until the world wakes up to the true doctrine of jihad, the cycle of denial and destruction will continue.

Saturday, September 27, 2025

Muhammad Allowed and Practiced Temporary Marriage (Mut'ah)

Islam’s Sanction of Legalized Prostitution

📜 The Hadith Evidence

“We used to do Mut’ah during the lifetime of the Prophet and during the time of Abu Bakr.”
— Sahih Muslim 1405

This is not a fringe narration. It’s found in Sahih Muslim, one of Islam’s most authentic hadith collections.

The companions of Muhammad openly state that Mut’ah — temporary marriage for sex — was sanctioned and practiced during the life of the prophet and even under the first caliph, Abu Bakr.

🤔 What is Mut’ah?

Mut’ah is a form of “marriage” with a pre-agreed time limit, often as short as one night, and with payment in return — usually money or goods.

It is a contract that looks like this:

Man: “I marry you for X time and X price.”

Woman: “I accept.”
— The “marriage” is legal for the agreed duration — then automatically ends.

This is not an eternal covenant. It is a religiously rubber-stamped one-night stand.

🧠 The Implications

Let’s be blunt:

Mut’ah = sanctified prostitution.

It’s sex for a price, under a thin legal veneer.

Even early Muslim scholars admitted this. Renowned Hanafi jurist Ibn Humam stated:

“Mut'ah is a marriage contracted for a limited time and with a known dower. It is essentially a form of hired intercourse.”

This was not an accident. It was authorized by Muhammad himself.

❗What This Says About Muhammad’s Character

1. He Permitted and Endorsed Sex-for-Hire

Rather than abolish pagan sexual practices, Muhammad legitimized them:

Early Islam allowed Mut’ah for traveling men, soldiers, or anyone desiring sex.
No requirement for long-term commitment.
No lifelong responsibility or spiritual covenant — just sex, payment, expiration.

This violates every basic standard of morality taught in the Bible — or even by common human conscience.

2. **He Only Forbade It Later, Conveniently**

Some traditions claim that Muhammad later “abrogated” Mut’ah — others say Umar did.

But this raises serious issues:

If it was wrong, why did a prophet of God permit it for years?
If it was right, why did later caliphs forbid it?
How can a moral law change based on convenience or political pressure?

This exposes Islam’s alleged “perfect moral system” as unstable, contradictory, and pragmatically driven — not divinely inspired.

3. Sunni vs. Shia Chaos Proves Islam’s Moral Confusion

Sunnis claim Mut’ah was abrogated.
Shia Muslims still practice it today, calling it a valid Islamic tradition.

So who is right?

Both claim the Qur’an supports their position. The Shia cite Surah 4:24, which allows “marriage with enjoyment.” Sunnis scramble to reinterpret it.

This split reveals a disturbing truth:

Islam can’t even agree on what counts as marriage vs. prostitution — and both claim Muhammad’s example.

📉 Moral Comparison: Muhammad vs. Christ

Jesus	Muhammad
Taught that lust is sin (Matthew 5:28)	Permitted temporary sex-for-pay
Elevated women as image-bearers of God	Treated women as disposable pleasure vessels
Promoted lifelong covenantal marriage	Allowed short-term sexual contracts
Died unmarried, sinless	Had multiple wives, concubines, and permitted sex-for-hire

The contrast could not be more striking.

🔥 Final Verdict: A Prophet Who Sanctioned Sin

If Muhammad allowed and practiced Mut’ah, then:

He enabled exploitation of women,
He endorsed transactional sex,
And he failed to establish a consistent moral standard.

This is not prophetic behavior — it is opportunistic indulgence wrapped in religious language.

❗Christian Challenge to Muslims:

How can a prophet who permitted what even modern Muslims consider shameful be your moral example?

If Islam’s founder couldn’t tell the difference between marriage and prostitution, why should you trust his revelations?

This is not holiness. This is hedonism cloaked in theology.

Friday, September 26, 2025

Women Are Deficient in Intelligence and Religion

Muhammad’s Misogyny in His Own Words

📜 The Hadith Muslims Can’t Explain Away

“I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you (women).”
— Sahih Bukhari 304

This statement isn’t hidden in a fringe book — it’s from Sahih Bukhari, Islam’s most authoritative hadith collection.
And it’s not a paraphrase. These are Muhammad’s own words, spoken during a public address to women.

🧠 What Did Muhammad Mean?

He goes on to explain:

Deficient in intelligence: Because a woman’s testimony is worth half a man’s in Islamic law (Qur’an 2:282).
Deficient in religion: Because women cannot pray or fast during menstruation — something beyond their control.

Let that sink in:

Muhammad equates a woman’s biological design with religious inferiority and legal mental deficiency.

❗ What This Reveals About Muhammad’s Character

1. Institutional Misogyny

This isn’t a one-off insult — it forms the basis of Islamic law:

Inheritance: Women get half the share of men (Qur’an 4:11).
Testimony: A woman’s witness counts as half a man’s (Qur’an 2:282).
Marriage/Divorce: Men can marry multiple wives, but women cannot marry multiple husbands. Men can divorce with a word, women must beg courts.

This is not divine equality. This is systemic gender discrimination, rooted in the worldview of a 7th-century Arabian warlord.

2. Religious Punishment for Biology

Calling women “deficient in religion” because they menstruate is theological nonsense.
God made them that way. To treat that design as a spiritual handicap is to blame the Creator or devalue His creation.

Would a just and holy God shame women for obeying His own biological laws?

3. A Prophet With Contempt for Women

Let’s remember:
This is the same Muhammad who:

Said women are the majority of hell’s inhabitants (Sahih Bukhari 1052),
Allowed marrying prepubescent girls (Qur’an 65:4),
Said women are a source of evil omens (Abu Dawud 3920),
Beat his wives when they annoyed him (Sahih Muslim 1472).

Is this the example of a just and compassionate prophet?

✝️ The Contrast: Jesus and Women

Jesus, in contrast:

Spoke directly to women in public (against cultural norms),
Praised their faith (Luke 7:50),
Defended their dignity (John 8:1–11),
Revealed His resurrection first to a woman (John 20:16–18),
Never belittled their intelligence or piety.

In the Gospels, women are equal in value, dignity, and purpose.
In the Hadith, they are half-intelligent, half-religious, and mostly in hell.

🚨 Final Verdict: Misogyny, Not Revelation

When Muhammad said women are “deficient in intelligence and religion,” he wasn’t revealing divine truth —
He was exposing his own bias, shaped by pagan tribal culture, male dominance, and power politics.

A true prophet uplifts the marginalized.
Muhammad entrenched inequality — and called it God’s will.

Thursday, September 25, 2025

Banu Qurayza

Massacre, Enslavement, and the Foundations of Power in Early Islam

Introduction: The Brutal Reality Behind Early Islam

Few events in Islamic history are as revealing — and as deliberately downplayed — as the massacre of the Banu Qurayza. Conventional narratives portray Islam’s early expansion as peaceful, rational, and spiritual. Schoolbooks, apologetics, and interfaith dialogues repeat this myth. Yet primary historical records—Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, Ibn Saʿd’s Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Sahih Muslim, and early chronicles of Medina—tell a starkly different story: Islam’s rise in Medina was engineered through coercion, massacre, and enslavement.

The Banu Qurayza episode is a case study in how Muhammad and his followers consolidated political and religious power through terror. It is not peripheral, it is central. The executions, the enslavement, and the institutionalized sexual exploitation of captives were not isolated incidents—they were divinely sanctioned, strategically applied, and foundational to the early Islamic state.

I. Medina in 627 CE: A City of Factions and Tension

A. Tribal and Political Context

Medina, then called Yathrib, was a city of tribal fragmentation and political instability. The Aws and Khazraj, dominant Arab tribes, had a long history of feuding. Within this mix were three Jewish tribes—Banu Qurayza, Banu Nadir, and Banu Qaynuqa—each controlling fortifications, agricultural resources, and local militias. These tribes were autonomous power centers and potential rivals to Muhammad’s authority.

The Quraysh of Mecca, threatened by Muhammad’s growing influence, allied with other tribes to besiege Medina in 627 CE. The Banu Qurayza were accused of betrayal and conspiring with the Quraysh, allegedly undermining Medina’s defenses and threatening Muhammad’s nascent state. This accusation, documented by Ibn Ishaq, Ibn Saʿd, and later chroniclers, set the stage for mass execution and enslavement.

B. The Siege of Medina and Its Aftermath

Muhammad’s forces employed the trench tactic—an unusual defensive strategy introduced by Persian converts—to hold off the Quraysh siege. When the Quraysh withdrew, Muhammad immediately turned on the Banu Qurayza. Ibn Ishaq describes the surrender of the tribe and the subsequent arbitration by Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, an ally of the Muslims. Sa’d decreed:

Execution of the men—between 600 and 900 according to Ibn Ishaq.
Enslavement of women and children, distributed among Muhammad’s followers as property.

This was not a legalistic footnote or an exceptional wartime atrocity. It was a deliberate, publicized strategy to consolidate control, terrorize opponents, and enforce obedience. Muhammad framed this as divinely sanctioned punishment, embedding coercion into Islamic praxis.

II. Massacre and Enslavement: Evidence and Primary Sources

A. Islamic Sources

Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah: Provides detailed accounts of the siege, surrender, and execution. The adult male population was systematically executed, and the women and children were handed out to Muhammad’s followers.
Ibn Saʿd, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir: Confirms the distribution of captives as property, not mercy.
Sahih Muslim: Codifies sexual exploitation, recording Muhammad’s permission for concubinage with enslaved women (“those whom your right hand possesses”).

These sources are contemporary enough to carry historical weight. The consistency across multiple primary texts makes it impossible to dismiss the massacre as myth or exaggeration.

B. Archaeological Evidence

Direct archaeological evidence of the massacre is limited. Excavations in Medina have not uncovered mass graves tied explicitly to the Banu Qurayza. However:

Fortifications and settlement remains confirm Ibn Ishaq’s description of fortified positions controlled by Jewish tribes.
Trench systems and defensive structures corroborate the military logistics of the siege.

While archaeology cannot capture every human atrocity, the structural evidence aligns with the historical accounts of a siege, conquest, and subsequent enforcement of authority.

C. Non-Muslim Chronicles

Non-Muslim contemporary sources are sparse. The limited presence of Jewish and Christian scribes in 7th-century Arabia means few external accounts exist. Later chroniclers, such as John of Nikiu and Coptic records, describe Arab conquest patterns in Egypt and the Levant, noting massive subjugation, executions, and forced tribute, consistent with the methods Muhammad deployed in Medina.

John of Nikiu: Describes heavy subjugation of conquered peoples under early Islamic rule.
Coptic records: Detail enforcement of tax (jizya) and restrictions, showing a pattern of coercion extending beyond Medina.

This triangulation supports the historical credibility of the Banu Qurayza massacre and the broader strategy of coercion.

III. Sexual Exploitation and Codification of Enslavement

A. Qur’anic and Hadith Sanction

Qur’an 4:24: Explicitly permits sexual relations with female captives.
Sahih Muslim 3432: Records Muhammad’s instruction regarding concubinage.

This was not incidental. It was codified into early Islamic law and normalized within the society he led. The treatment of Banu Qurayza women as concubines was a template for controlling populations in subsequent conquests.

B. Case Studies

Safiyya bint Huyayy: Taken as a concubine after the Khaybar conquest, illustrating the recurring pattern.
Dhimmi populations in Najran: Subjected to jizya, forced conversion, and occasional sexual subjugation, showing that coercive practices were systemic, not exceptional.

The Banu Qurayza case demonstrates that enslavement and sexual coercion were tools of political control, institutionalized under Muhammad’s authority.

IV. Military Coercion as Political Strategy

The Banu Qurayza massacre reveals a consistent pattern of governance:

Targeting potential rivals: Executing or enslaving males capable of resistance.
Psychological warfare: Public executions and distribution of captives served as a warning.
Integration with religious authority: Acts framed as divinely sanctioned, discouraging dissent.
Template for expansion: Later Rashidun and Umayyad campaigns mirrored this method—conquest, tribute, assimilation, and occasional enslavement.

The massacre was not a deviation from Muhammad’s teachings, but their practical application, setting the precedent for the Islamic state’s expansionist methods.

V. Tribal Warfare and Coercion in Context

Pre-Islamic Arabia was not devoid of brutality. Tribal wars often involved massacre and enslavement. Yet the scale, codification, and religious sanctioning under Muhammad distinguish this episode. The Banu Qurayza were executed en masse, women and children enslaved, and these practices were integrated into law, forming a template for empire-building.

Military logic: Eliminate threats to centralized authority.
Economic logic: Captives provided labor and wealth redistribution.
Social logic: Demonstrated power to neighboring tribes, ensuring compliance.

Archaeology and early chronicles indicate that this model was replicated in later conquests across Arabia, the Levant, and North Africa, reinforcing the strategic nature of coercion in early Islam.

VI. Lessons from the Banu Qurayza Case

Coercion as foundational: Islam’s early spread relied on force, not voluntary conversion.
Codification of coercion: Jizya, concubinage, and execution of dissidents were formalized as religiously sanctioned practices.
Power consolidation: The massacre secured Muhammad’s political dominance and intimidated rivals.
Imperial precedent: Subsequent caliphs, from Abu Bakr through the Umayyads, employed the same mechanisms at scale.

Ignoring the Banu Qurayza incident is intellectually dishonest. It is central to understanding Islam as a political and military enterprise, not merely a spiritual movement.

Conclusion: The Truth of Coercion in Early Islam

The Banu Qurayza massacre was mass execution, enslavement, and sexual exploitation sanctioned by Muhammad and embedded in Islamic law. Archaeological evidence, while indirect, aligns with historical accounts. Non-Muslim chronicles and tribal warfare norms confirm that coercion, not persuasion, drove compliance and expansion.

This event exposes a foundational truth: Islam’s early expansion was engineered through force and intimidation. The ethical and historical implications are unavoidable—coercion was the instrument through which religious and political authority were consolidated.

For anyone seeking a full understanding of early Islamic history, the Banu Qurayza case is non-negotiable evidence of the mechanisms that built the first Islamic state.

References

Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah, trans. A. Guillaume, pp. 461–464.
Ibn Saʿd, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Vol. 2, p. 93.
Sahih Muslim 3432.
Qur’an 4:24; 8:41; 9:29.
Patricia Crone, Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity, pp. 75–78.
Robert Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam.
John of Nikiu, Chronicle, ch. 111.
Al-Tabari, History of the Prophets and Kings, Vol. 10–17.

Disclaimer: This post critiques Islam as an ideology, doctrine, and historical system—not Muslims as individuals. Every human deserves respect; beliefs do not.

The Satanic Verses

Confirmation That Muhammad Was Deceived

We’ve already established that Muhammad feared he was possessed and attempted suicide. Now we move from fear to evidence — an incident recorded in early Islamic history where Muhammad openly delivered verses from Satan, thinking they came from Allah.

This is the logical next step in the unraveling of Muhammad’s claim to prophethood.

📜 The Satanic Verses Incident

According to the earliest biographies of Muhammad — Ibn Ishaq, al-Waqidi, al-Tabari, and others — the story goes like this:

Muhammad was under pressure. The Quraysh tribe resisted his message. Then one day, he recited Surah 53 (An-Najm) and included the following:

“Have you considered al-Lat and al-‘Uzza, and Manat, the third, the other? These are the exalted gharaniq (cranes), and their intercession is to be hoped for.”

These lines praised three pagan goddesses. The Quraysh were thrilled — they prostrated in unity with Muhammad.

But later, Muhammad retracted the verses and claimed:

“Satan made me say those words.”
Allah then allegedly “corrected” the revelation, abrogating the satanic lines and replacing them with condemnation of the false gods.

📚 Sources That Confirm the Story

✅ Ibn Ishaq (Earliest Biography of Muhammad)

“Satan cast on his tongue... words of praise for their idols.”
— Sirat Rasul Allah, Ibn Ishaq (translated by A. Guillaume, p. 165)

✅ Al-Tabari (Most Famous Qur'anic Commentator)

“The devil interjected two phrases on Muhammad’s tongue... and he recited them as part of the Qur'an.”
— Tarikh al-Tabari, Vol. VI, pp. 107–110

✅ Al-Qurtubi, al-Baydawi, and Others

Even later respected Islamic scholars affirmed it happened — they just try to reinterpret or downplay its significance.

🤯 Implications: A Prophet Who Recites Satan’s Words

1. Muhammad Could Not Tell the Difference Between Allah and Satan

Let’s state the obvious:

If a prophet cannot distinguish God’s voice from Satan’s, he is not a prophet.

This is not a misunderstanding. Muhammad literally put Satan’s words into the Qur'an, thinking they were divine revelation.

This directly contradicts the Qur’an’s own standard:

“If he (Muhammad) had made up about Us some false sayings, We would have seized him by the right hand and cut off his aorta.”
— Surah 69:44–46

But when he actually did speak falsely — nothing happened. No punishment. No divine retribution. Just a convenient excuse: “Satan tricked me.”

2. This Event Confirms Muhammad’s Fear of Demonic Deception Was Valid

This incident validates Muhammad’s earlier terror in the cave. He was right to fear being deceived.
The “Satanic Verses” were not just a hypothetical — they actually entered the Qur'an, even if only briefly.

The connection is terrifying:

In the cave: “Am I possessed?”
Later: “Satan made me speak false verses.”

That’s not a prophet being guided by God — that’s a man being played by an unseen spirit.

3. Muhammad Became His Own Qur'anic Warning

Ironically, the Qur'an itself warns against being influenced by Satan:

“Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before you, but when he desired, Satan threw in some suggestion.”
— Surah 22:52

This verse is widely interpreted by Muslim scholars as a post hoc justification for the Satanic Verses — in other words, “it happens to everyone.”

But that admission is catastrophic.

Islam is supposedly the final, perfect revelation, and yet its prophet was:

Temporarily under Satan’s influence
Delivered false scripture
Needed correction after the fact

What kind of final prophet is vulnerable to demonic tampering?

⚔️ Christian Apologetic Response: Muhammad Fulfills Biblical Warnings

The Bible clearly forewarns of men like Muhammad:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be accursed!”
— Galatians 1:8

“For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.”
— 2 Corinthians 11:13–14

This is exactly what happened:

An “angel” appears in a cave.
The recipient fears it’s a demon.
Later, he speaks Satan’s words as part of God’s revelation.
He retracts them only after being exposed.

🔚 Conclusion: Islam’s Prophet Was Deceived from Day One

Let’s summarize the full chain of events:

Event	Spiritual Source	Outcome
Muhammad’s first revelation	Fear and confusion	Thought he was possessed
Post-revelation despair	Mental anguish	Tried to kill himself
Later “revelations”	False verses	Recited Satanic scripture
Allah’s response	No punishment	Satan is excused

This is not the life of a prophet protected by God.
This is a man caught in a web of spiritual deception, whose fears of demonic influence were tragically justified.

💥 Final Challenge to Muslims

If you admit that Muhammad:

Feared demonic possession,
Delivered Satanic verses,
And failed to distinguish between Allah and Iblis…

Then how can you still believe he was “the best of mankind” and “the seal of the prophets”?

Any religion built on such a foundation is not divine — it is demonic deception masquerading as light.

Wednesday, September 24, 2025

Muhammad Thought He Was Possessed and Tried to Kill Himself

Islam’s Most Damning Revelation

Muslims claim that Muhammad was the final, infallible prophet of God — a man chosen to bring the seal of divine revelation to mankind. But according to Sahih Bukhari, the most trusted source of hadith in Sunni Islam, Muhammad initially believed he was possessed by a demon, and became so distraught that he attempted to commit suicide multiple times.

This devastating admission, found in Islam’s own most authentic sources, raises a terrifying possibility:

What if Muhammad was not visited by Gabriel… but by something darker?

📜 The Hadith That Muslims Wish Didn’t Exist

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Hadith 111:

“The Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while and the Prophet became so sad as we have heard that he intended several times to throw himself from the tops of high mountains and every time he went up the top of a mountain in order to throw himself down, Gabriel would appear before him and say, ‘O Muhammad! You are indeed Allah’s Messenger in truth,’ whereupon his heart would become quiet and he would calm down and return home…”

This hadith confirms two things:

Muhammad believed he was possessed or mentally disturbed.
He repeatedly tried to kill himself.

And this is not a weak narration — it comes from Sahih Bukhari, which Sunni Muslims consider second only to the Qur’an in authority.

💣 Why This Is Theological Dynamite

Let’s break down why this hadith destroys the credibility of Islam’s prophet from multiple angles:

1. Muhammad Believed His First Revelation Was Demonic

According to early biographers like Ibn Ishaq and Al-Tabari, Muhammad’s first reaction to the experience in the cave was sheer terror and confusion:

“I fear that something bad has happened to me.”
— Muhammad to Khadija (Sirat Ibn Ishaq)

In Islamic tradition, the pre-Islamic Arabs believed that poets and madmen were possessed by jinn. So when Muhammad experienced his first "revelation," he suspected he had been overtaken by an evil spirit, not visited by an angel.

Let that sink in:

The prophet of Islam was convinced he had encountered a demonic entity, not Gabriel.

2. The Prophet of Allah Tried to Commit Suicide — Repeatedly

The hadith says he attempted suicide “several times”. This is not an isolated emotional outburst — this was a repeated, deliberate, suicidal despair.

But this directly contradicts the Qur'an:

“And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allah is Most Merciful to you.”
— Surah 4:29

And yet Muhammad, the very man tasked with delivering this message, was trying to jump off cliffs.
What kind of prophet:

Tries to end his life before his mission even begins?
Needs repeated reassurance that he’s not delusional?
Is sent by a God who allows him to believe he’s possessed and suicidal?

3. Why Didn’t Gabriel Reassure Him Immediately?

If Muhammad was truly chosen by Allah, why did Gabriel delay comfort and confirmation? Why allow him to spiral into despair and near-death before saying, “You are indeed Allah’s Messenger”?

The gap in revelation — known as the fatrah — left Muhammad in existential torment.
A truly omniscient, compassionate God would have immediately confirmed His prophet’s calling.
Instead, we see:

Silence from heaven,
Suicidal thoughts,
Fear of demonic possession.

This is not divine clarity. This is spiritual confusion and chaos.

💀 The Deeper Problem: Muhammad May Have Been Deceived

This disturbing episode raises the most frightening question of all:

What if Muhammad really was visited by a deceptive spirit?

The Bible warns of exactly this:

“Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.”
— 2 Corinthians 11:14

Muhammad’s initial terror, suicidal despair, and confusion mirror the classic biblical signs of demonic deception:

Psychological torment
Isolation and fear
Resistance to divine truth
False revelations

Even Muhammad’s later experiences — seizures, foam at the mouth, hearing bells, and uncontrollable trembling — match descriptions of possession, not divine revelation.

🤯 Muslim Responses Are Weak and Inconsistent

When confronted with this hadith, Muslim apologists scramble:

Some say it’s not authentic — but it’s in Sahih Bukhari, their most sacred collection.
Others say Muhammad didn’t really try to kill himself — but the hadith clearly says he did “several times.”
Some blame his sadness on the pause in revelation — but this only makes it worse: a true prophet shouldn’t lose his mind just because God is briefly silent.

Every response fails to deal with the crushing implications:

The foundation of Islam begins with a man who thought he was possessed and tried to kill himself.

📉 What This Says About Muhammad’s Prophethood

Let’s be brutally honest. If any other religious founder — Jesus, Moses, Paul, or even Buddha — were reported to have:

Believed they were possessed,
Attempted suicide repeatedly, and
Required supernatural appearances just to calm down…

We would never take them seriously as a spiritual authority, much less a messenger of God.

Why should Muhammad be any different?

✝️ The Contrast With Jesus

Jesus began His ministry with confidence and clarity:

He never doubted His mission.
He was affirmed directly by the Father:

“This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” — Matthew 3:17

He never feared demonic possession.
He cast out demons, He didn’t receive their messages.

Where Muhammad had confusion, fear, and suicidal despair — Jesus had divine clarity, holiness, and power.

🧨 Final Verdict: The Prophet Who Almost Didn’t Make It

The origins of Islam are not divine — they are traumatic, disturbing, and deeply human.
The hadith of Muhammad’s suicidal despair and fear of possession isn’t a story of prophetic purity — it’s a spiritual warning sign.

Islam began with a man in a cave who:

Thought he was going insane,
Was afraid he had been demonically possessed,
And tried to throw himself off a mountain.

This isn’t a prophet of God.
This is a man in spiritual crisis, being visited by a spirit he himself couldn’t identify — a spirit that led billions into error.